Action Taken Report with respect to the minutes of the 1787th meeting held on 14.11.2024.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1787th meeting held on 14.11.2024 were discussed.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout plan for the National Centre for Disease Control at its meeting held on October 12, 2011, and the building plans were approved at its meeting on November 27, 2012, and specific observations were given.
3. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion (for PG Hostel Block) at its meeting on October 27, 2022; observations were made.
4. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation letter no: OL-20102249013 dated 31.10.2022. Based on the earlier observations and submission made, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) The submission was earlier received at the Completion stage in its meeting dated 27.10.2022, where it was not accepted, and the following observation was given:

“…..The proposal has been submitted for NOC for Completion, but with incomplete documentation. The site plan, parking plan, landscape plan, sections etc. have been found missing in the submission….”

Once again, after two years, an incomplete submission has been received. The documents, including updated site photographs, including terrace and basement photographs, actual works of art executed at the site, superimposed drawings (showing deviation from proposed, if any), completion drawings, etc., are missing.

5. Overall, the current submission, reviewed earlier, still has discrepancies and lacks clarity, and the previous observations remain non-compliant. The architect is advised to ensure complete documentation and adhere to all the above observations, and those communicated through DUAC observation letters no: OL-20102249013, dated 31.10.2022, and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not accept the concept of the building plans proposal for studio apartments and staff quarters at its meetings held on July 11, 2019, September 18, 2019, and March 04, 2020, respectively, and did not approve (formal) the building plans proposal at its January 08, 2021, August 22, 2024, and October 17, 2024 meetings, respectively. 
3. The building plans proposal for Staff quarters and Studio Apartments for National Law University received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-19082455114, F. No. 55(114)/2024-DUAC dated 23.10.2024 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on CISCO Webex meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the discussion held online and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that while considering the case at its meeting held on October 17, 2024, very specific observations were communicated to the architect via letter no. 19082455114, F. No. 55(114)/2024-DUAC dated 23.10.2024 which remain non-compliant in the current submission.

b) Two options were provided to the Commission. It is suggested that the sloping sill (as proposed in Option 1) be straightened to ensure proper water drainage during events, including rainfall, to avoid dust accumulation, etc. Also, the straightened surface shall then be treated accordingly, i.e., it is suggested that it be painted in a darker shade so that it does not leave trail marks post-rainfall to maintain urban aesthetics.

b) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc.

c) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. Overall, the current submission remains non-compliant with its previous observations communicated through DUAC observation letters no: OL-19082455114, F. No. 55(114)/2024-DUAC dated 23.10.2024. The architect is advised to adhere to all the previous and current observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The proposal received online at the formal stage was scrutinised, and the following observation is to be complied with:

a) It has been observed that the proposal is at the formal stage, and the architect has provided identical credentials (including email ID and mobile number) for both the owner and architect in the submitted proforma details. Based on the declaration made to the statutory body, the architect and owner might be the same person. If this is not accurate, the details should be corrected. As the submission is formal, it is imperative to ensure that all documentation is truthful, accurate, and complete.

4. The Commission decided not to review the proposal during its meeting due to the absence of accurate and truthful information at the formal stage. The architect is therefore advised to provide complete and correct information to facilitate the proposal's consideration.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meetings held on June 13, 2024 and September 12, 2024, respectively; specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (from ground to second and addition of a third floor) received online at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the Architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No.: 55(97)/2024-DUAC, OL-05062455097 dated September 19, 2024. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations it did not consider and cover the existing construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc.

c) The Sustainability features shall be as per point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, etc., should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of points nos. 10, 11, and 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (Formal) at its meeting held on October 24, 2024, specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal received online at the formal stage for additions and alterations (Proposed first to third floors over the existing basement and ground floor) was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the Architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No.: 23(143)/2024-DUAC, OL-21102423143 dated October 30, 2024. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the proposal is for additions/alterations, but no previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the Commission's available record.

b) The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations, it did not consider and cover the existing built construction at the site.

c) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc.

d) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The layout and buildings plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with: 

a) To ensure uniformity and harmony along both sides of Central Vista, details of the boundary wall to be kept same (including CCS 1,2 and 3).

b) As seen in the submitted 3D views, the surface of visitors parking is proposed to be treated with hard pavers. Instead, grass pavers shall be used for prevention of urban flooding and encourage ground recharge.

c) Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex, at an appropriate level which is also visible from outside, shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels etc. should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

3. While terracotta and Corten steel exterior finish is acceptable, broadly matching the colour scheme of the exterior of the Central Vista complex, the Commission would strongly recommend retaining a beige and red sandstone exterior as typical in the complex.  The timeless nature of sandstone from a use and availability perspective in the Commission’s considered opinion should future proof the once-in-a-century project better than industrial products, that have greater risks to continued availability over longer periods of time for repair and replacements.  Maintaining an even more similar exterior finish would also enhance the harmony of the complex with yet another unifying element, improving the timelessness.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan at its meeting on February 15, 2017; specific observations were given.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised, and a discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Webex meetings, during which clarifications were provided to the Commission's queries. Based on the discussion held (online), the drawings, documentation, and photographs submitted, the proposal for NOC for Completion is found to be accepted.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal during its meeting on April 21, 1995, and subsequently accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting on January 12, 2006.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on November 14, 2024; observations were given.
4. The revised building plans proposal for additions and alterations (extension of living rooms, bedrooms, addition and extension of balconies) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No.: 22(104)/2024-DUAC, OL-12112422104 dated November 19, 2024. Based on the replies submitted and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal for addition/alteration (extension of living rooms, bedrooms, addition and extension of balconies) for the group housing complex has been received. The Commission observed that while considering the case for additions/alterations, it did not consider or cover the existing construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations etc. and shall remain unobstructed for fire tender movement.

c) The added structure shall be designed to withstand weather effects and impacts from calamities like earthquakes, etc., as it is an additional structure added to the existing superstructure. It shall be ensured that it is braced firmly to the building and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

d) The Sustainability features shall be as per point no. 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, etc., should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of point nos. 10, 11 & 12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Building plans proposal in respect of Residential building at Plot no. 16A/1,2,3, Sri Ram Road, Civil Lines. (Conceptual Stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approval (Formal/Completion) taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
3. The building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised, and the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It has been observed that the proposal is at the conceptual stage, and the architect has provided identical credentials (including email ID and mobile number) for both the owner and architect in the submitted proforma details. Based on the declaration made to the statutory body, it appears the architect and owner might be the same person. If this is not accurate, the details should be corrected. As the submission is at the conceptual stage, it is imperative to ensure that all documentation is truthful, accurate, and complete.

b) As the submission is at the conceptual stage, it is required to provide accurate and comprehensive documentation, with the requirements outlined in the checklist for conceptual proposals (accessible on the OPAAS login page under "Steps to Submit Proposals for Conceptual Proposals"). This will ensure the Commission's proper consideration of the proposal.

4. Due to a lack of truthful information at the Conceptual stage (as per the checklist available on the DUAC website), the Commission did not consider the proposal. Thus, the architect is advised to provide complete and truthful information to ensure consideration of the proposal.