Action Taken Report with respect to the minutes of the 1806th meeting held on 13.03.2025.

1. Action Taken Report regarding Minutes of 1806th meeting held on 13.03.2025 were discussed.

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.
3. The building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal is for building with Stilt + Ground + 3 floors. It appears to be a case of demolition and reconstruction from the photographs.

b) A discrepancy has been observed in the submission received at the formal stage. The placement of doors and windows on all floors, as depicted in the plans and elevations, does not match their representation in the 3D views. To ensure consistency, a revised submission with coordinated drawings and 3D views, reflecting the correct details, must be provided for a comprehensive review by the Commission.

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

d) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

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

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

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage has inconsistencies, and thereby, the Commission could not appreciate it judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal at its meeting on December 26, 2001 and accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting on August 24, 2018. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on July 24, 2020 and approved (formally) the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on May 11, 2023, with observations given.
3. The proposal for NOC for completion received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised, and a discussion was held with the architect who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission, including documentation, drawings, and photographs, and the discussion held, the proposal for the completion of NOC is accepted.

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.
3. The building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The submitted drawings do not include a north symbol; therefore to assess the building's orientation in relation to shading mechanisms, natural light, and ventilation was not possible. To facilitate a comprehensive review, it must be ensured that all drawings, including the site plan, clearly indicate the north symbol to provide information on the building's orientation.

b) The Mechanism for rainwater drainage at the terrace level and balconies is not understood. Appropriate details should be included in the drawings along with screening mechanisms of plumbing/rainwater pipes.

c) The structural arrangement is missing in the submission, especially at the stilt level. As a result, the parking and furniture arrangements are not clear and self-explanatory. To complete the submission, complete details of the structure, including the column arrangement, must be submitted in the drawings.

d) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

e) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

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

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

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete, and thereby, the Commission could not appreciate it judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The SDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal (formal) at its September 20, 2017 meeting. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal (formal) at its meeting held on July 23, 2018, where specific observations were made.
3. The Commission did not approve the revised layout and building plans proposals for Hospital Block 1 (B1), Hospital Block 6 (B7), Residential Block 1 (B8), Hospital Block 5 (B5), Hospital Block 4 (B4), MLCP Block (B6), and Hospital Block 7 (B9) at its meeting held on October 10, 2024, observations were given.
4. The revised layout and building plan proposal (for Hospital Block 1 (B1), Hospital Block 6 (B7), Residential Block 1 (B8), Hospital Block 5 (B5), Hospital Block 4 (B4), MLCP Block (B6), and Hospital Block 7 (B9)) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-07092455120 dated 16.10.2024 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on CISCO Webex meetings who gave a detailed presentation and provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission. Based on the submission, the presentation made, and the discussion held online, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double-stack parking arrangements to meet the applicable parking requirements. The architect or proponent to ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the proposal's completion stage. All parking arrangements adhere to relevant rules, regulations, and other applicable requirements.

b) 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.

c) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

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, DG set, DG exhaust pipes, 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 North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal (formal) for additions and alterations at its meetings held on December 02, 2021.
3. The ‘Haveli at 175, Katra Bariyan, Fatehpuri’ is a listed Grade-III heritage building at Serial No. 331 in the Gazette notification no. F. No. 13(43) MB/UD/2014/1602 dated July 29, 2016 issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
4. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal is for building with Ground + 3 floors.

b) The Commission noted that the MCD area (Grade III), the property listed at serial no. 331 is “175, Katra Bariyan, Fatehpuri,” as per the gazette notification dated July 29, 2016, issued by the Government of NCT of Delhi. However, the proposal submitted pertains to properties numbered 173 to 176.

c) It was observed that property no. “175, Katra Bariyan, Fatehpuri” has not been specifically demarcated in the properties 173 to 176 by the architect. This demarcation would enable the Commission to review the proposal judiciously.

d) The heritage-listed property boundary is not adequately represented in the existing internal and external photographs, particularly in the courtyard area. The absence of visual documentation limits the judicious review of the existing heritage elements in comparison to the proposed restoration design.

e) The submitted drawings do not include a north symbol; therefore to assess the building's orientation in relation to shading mechanisms, natural light, and ventilation was not possible. It shall be ensured that all drawings, including the site plan, carry the north symbol to provide information on the orientation of the proposed building.

f) The orientation of the solar panels as portrayed in the 3D views does not seem to be correct. To ensure their proper functioning, the direction of the solar panels shall be as per the orientation of the building. The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

g) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

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

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

5. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete and lacks clarity, and thereby the Commission could not appreciate the proposal judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans at its meeting held on November 22, 2005, and accepted the NOC for Completion at its meeting on October 18, 2017.
3. The Commission took note of the e-mail sent by the proposal's architect vide their email dated 24.03.2025 indicating that:

“…….. With reference to the subject cited above, it is to mention that we have Re-applied for the completion / occupancy application vide MCD   Request ID – 10107035. Due to MCD online application system, this application has been forwarded to DUAC through default process. We did not intended to seek approval again from DUAC for New Girls Hostel –Himadri

As the Completion plans of New Girls Hostel –Himadri has already been approved by DUAC and NOC given by vide no. 58(12)-2017-DUAC/1698 dated 02.11(Nov.).2017, hence it is humbly requested to you that not to consider this application in the next agenda meeting.  

Copy of NOC letter is attached for ready reference………”

4. In view of the above, it is returned without consideration of the Commission.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal in respect of Hansraj College at its meeting held on July 29, 2009, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission accepted the concept of the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on December 28, 2023, but did not approve it at the formal stage on January 23, 2025; specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plan proposal for additions/alterations [{(addition of 3rd floors over the existing college main building (G+2 Floors), Science Block (G+2 Floors), Zoology and botany dept. building (G+2 Floors), Library Block (G+2 Floors)}, {addition of 2nd and 3rd Floors over the existing Canteen building (G+1 Floors), addition of Girls’ hostel (B+G+5 Floors), demolition and reconstruction of Boys’ Hostel(B+G+5)}]  received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-17012523149 dated 29.01.2025. Based on the revised submission made, 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 submission made and the discussion held online, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) 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) The submitted drawings and 3D views are unclear and of low quality, making the submission incomprehensive. Clear and high-quality drawings and 3D views must be provided for better visibility. Additionally, 3D views of the internal courtyard are missing. Detailed and labelled 3D views from all angles, including the internal courtyard and terrace, should be submitted. These views should also include details of materiality to ensure a complete and self-explanatory submission.

c) The drawings depict an open-to-sky courtyard, but the necessary details are missing from the submission. The layout plans should include appropriate details, such as floor pattern, materiality, landscaping information, specifying plant species, their quantities, locations, and their integration with the built structure.

d) Since the boys' and girls' hostel buildings are newly constructed, the architect is advised to enhance the elevation by incorporating architectural elements that make the façade more visually appealing while maintaining the existing character of the complex. Features such as chajjas, well-defined entrance porches, and other design elements should be included to improve the overall appearance of the proposed buildings.

e) It was observed from the submitted elevation that the ventilators at the basement level do not match the windows at the upper levels, thus making the façade look cluttered and incoherent. To ensure harmony in design, the openings, i.e., windows and ventilators are suggested to be aligned.

f) The vertical white plaster line in the elevation appears to end abruptly, thus giving an incomplete appearance to the façade. It is suggested that the plaster be terminated in such a manner so that it blends with other architectural elements on the façade. To explain the details of the treatments on the façade, detailed skin sections of all buildings are to be provided, along with details of materiality.

g) To improve the architectural character of the proposed girls' hostel building, it is suggested to add a projection at the entrance to protect it from harsh weather conditions. Also, the terrace of the projection should be converted to a balcony that can be accessed from the first floor while ensuring mechanisms for maintenance and rainwater drainage.

h) As the building serves as hostel accommodation, common areas on each floor are suggested to include provisions for a pantry, washing, and drying clothes for user convenience. If drying clothes is proposed on the balcony, appropriate screening mechanisms should be incorporated and clearly depicted in the respective drawings to provide a comprehensive understanding of the design scheme.

i) The Commission understands that the proposal has been designed without considering the hostel building's air-conditioning requirements. However, future additions may necessitate air-conditioning installations, which could negatively impact the building’s façade. To prevent this, provisions should be incorporated at this stage to accommodate outdoor units without compromising aesthetics. A detailed scheme illustrating their placement, screening, and materials should be submitted through plans, elevations, and 3D views.

j) The pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the site is not shown. To better understand the movement pattern within the site, a combined mobility plan showing seamless, conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement plans from outside the various buildings is to be submitted. It shall be indicated clearly with a clear segregation of pedestrian and vehicular movement.

k) If the entry to the basement ramps needs to be covered in the future, it is recommended that the design and relevant details be provided at this stage to ensure their proper integration into the overall design scheme. The submission does not include the details of the ramp entry or the mechanisms for covering the ramp. These details should be included in the revised submission.

l) During the online discussion with the Commission, the architect clarified that retrofitting for the structural strength of the columns has already begun in certain areas where additional floors are being added to the existing structure. However, the details of this work were not included in the submission. Updated structural stability and retrofitting information should be provided, including site photographs and relevant details in the project report. Additionally, as a new structure is being added to an existing building, the proposed structure must be designed to withstand natural disasters such as earthquakes, strong winds, and other adverse conditions to ensure the safety of its occupants.

m) The details of the Swachh Bharat toilet are not clear and self-explanatory. To ensure a complete submission at the formal stage, high-resolution 3D views along with drawings, including plans, elevations, and sections, must be submitted.

n) Further, the provision of additional parking for the increase in FAR is unclear. The same is to be marked clearly in the respective layout plans, showing the bifurcation of the existing parking with the proposed parking, their location, and the number. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

o) The proposed wall mural on the artwork is to be removed, and instead of the work of art in the form of outdoor sculptures, paintings in the entrance lobby/foyer are to be proposed and visible at the eye level. 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, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

p) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

q) 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.

r) All service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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

5. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete, incomprehensible, and lacks clarity, so the Commission could not appreciate it judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The layout and building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The proposal is for building with two basement + Stilt + 11 floors.

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

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, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

d) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

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

f) All DG set, water tanks, rainwater pipes, plumbing pipes, service equipment, outdoor air-conditioner units, solar panels, etc., should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of points 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 CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the proposal for Tripura Guest House at its meeting on September 25, 2009, and accepted NOC for Completion at its meeting on October 17, 2002. The Commission also approved the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting on December 12, 2017.
3. The building plan proposal for additions of Block D received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised. the following observations are to be complied with:

a) All requisite parking provisions shall be as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines, etc.

b) 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, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

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 DG set, service equipment, plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, water tanks, DG sets, DG exhaust pipes, 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. he DDA 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 building plans proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The submitted drawings show peripheral greens, whereas the 3D views do not show the presence of any greens in the complex, thus showing a mismatch. Co-ordinated and updated drawings and 3D views should be submitted to ensure coherence in the submission.

b) The location of the air and nitrogen dual tyre inflator is not appropriate, i.e., it is located at the egress and too close to the Fast-charging EV station. Since EV charging takes some time, it would create a line of vehicles, thus causing inconvenience at the egress. The location of the Fast-charging EV station or the air and nitrogen dual tyre inflator should be shifted elsewhere to ensure conflict-free movement and easy egress.

c) The Details of the wall at the egress, i.e., next to the air inflator and EV charging station, are not clear; the same shall be given along with details of signage.

d) 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, ensure to be installed in terms of the point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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

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

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete and lacks clarity, so the Commission could not appreciate it judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The DDA forwarded the proposal (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal during its January 12, 1996 meeting. It also approved building plans for Community Hall and a security guard at its March 03, 1999, meeting and subsequently accepted the NOC for Completion at its December 18, 2002, meeting.
3. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations (extension of bedrooms, living and dining room, addition of study, toilet, balconies) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the case for additions and alterations does not account for or include the existing construction on the site about the proposed modifications only.

b) The Commission observed that the proposal lacks clarity, as the 3D views do not effectively illustrate the proposed additions and alterations. Revised 3D views should be submitted, marking these modifications and providing details on materiality. To better understand the context, the 3D views should be superimposed onto the existing site, clearly distinguishing the current structure from the proposed changes to ensure a comprehensive description of the design scheme.

c) The proposal also includes balcony extensions and appropriate provisions for drying clothes and accommodating outdoor air conditioners, and their screening mechanisms must be planned and submitted for review.

d) The addition of toilets has been proposed without adequate consideration for plumbing arrangements. Properly designed plumbing shafts should be incorporated to ensure that pipes remain concealed and do not compromise the overall aesthetics of the building. Similarly, the submission lacks clarity regarding rainwater discharge provisions, including screening rainwater pipes. Detailed plans illustrating the placement of rainwater pipes within designated shafts in all proposed balconies and appropriate screening mechanisms should be provided to ensure they remain hidden and do not negatively impact the building's visual appeal.

e) Further, the provision of additional parking for the increase in FAR is unclear. The same is to be marked clearly in the respective layout plans, showing the bifurcation of the existing parking with the proposed parking, their location, and the number. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations.

f) Since new areas are to be added to existing construction, the proposed structure shall be resistant to natural calamities like earthquakes, strong wind conditions, etc., to ensure the safety of the users.

g) The solar panels shall be integrated into the design at an appropriate clear height, ensuring that the space beneath can be effectively utilised for shading purposes.

h) 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.

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

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage is incomplete, incomprehensible and lacks clarity; and thereby the Commission could not appreciate the proposal judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission earlier approved the building plan proposal at its meeting on January 19, 2011. The proposal for additions/alterations was approved at the meeting on October 29, 2014, and the NOC for completion was accepted at the meeting on July 05, 2017.
3. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for additions/alterations at its meeting held on November 20, 2020, and specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for the NOC for completion (pertaining to the additions/alterations approved in the meeting held on November 20, 2020), submitted (online) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. Based on the submitted documentation, including drawings and photographs, the proposal for the NOC for completion (part-for additions/alterations approved in the meeting held on November 20, 2020) is accepted.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting on March 24, 1979, and accepted the NOC for completion at its meeting on July 05, 1991; specific observations were made.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for additions and alterations at its meeting held on November 07, 2024 and January 16, 2025 respectively; specific observations were made.
4. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations (addition of second floor in Block-C and addition of new lift) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, along with the replies submitted in response to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-08012524001 dated 23.01.2025. Based on 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 or cover the existing construction at the site. This concerns the proposal for additions/alterations only.

b) Since a new structure is added to an existing construction, the proposed structure shall be resistant to natural calamities like earthquakes, strong wind conditions, etc., to ensure the safety of the users.

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

d) 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.

e) 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.

f) 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.3, Maharaja Lal Lane, Civil Lines. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (online) for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal was deferred.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The proposal for the Installation of Statue received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

a) To enhance the statue's aesthetics, the surrounding areas should be properly developed. This includes repairing broken pavements and kerbs, ensuring regular maintenance and upkeep, implementing proper landscaping, and incorporating appropriate lighting for a well-integrated and visually appealing environment.

b) Furthermore, suitable lighting mechanisms should be incorporated to ensure the statue remains clearly visible at night. The lighting design should be carefully planned to enhance visibility while preventing light pollution.

The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The ‘Tomb of Sayyid Abid at Delhi Golf Club’ is listed as a Grade-I heritage building at Serial No. 33 in the Gazette notification no. F. No. 4/2/2009/UD/I 6565 dated October 1, 2009, issued by the Department of Urban Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
3. The proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observation is to be complied with:

a) The proposal is for practice driving range in double storey structure and 2 nos. PDR huts.

b) Provision for screening of air-conditioning units along with other services, including drainage pipes, is to be ensured with appropriate screening mechanisms.

c) The provision of drainage shall be through gutter and pipes along the wall to ensure the water does not directly fall onto the ground from a height and thus avoid spillover.

d) 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.

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.

The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.

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 building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised; the following observations are to be complied with:

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

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

The Commission decided to take action in the matter without awaiting the confirmation of the minutes of the meeting.