Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1877th meeting held on 07.07.2026.

1. Action Taken Reports in respect of minutes of the 1877th meeting held on 07.07.2026 were discussed.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the building plans of the school campus of St. Xaviers School Education Society at Shahabad Daulatpur at its meeting held on September 29, 1995.  Subsequently, NOC for Completion of the St. Xaviers School for Xaviers Education Society was issued on July 29, 2015.
3. The building plans proposal for additions and alterations (additional school building block with connecting bridge comprising of ground + four floors) received (through email) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and photographs submitted etc, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the current proposal is part of a large campus comprising of the following existing development of site:

                 School building block: G+3, Hostel block: G+1, Residence block: G+1.

b) The proposal pertains to the additional school building block comprising of G + 4 building, along with a connecting bridge, within an existing campus. The Commission noted that when evaluating the case, it did not take into account the existing built construction at the site. This relates only to the current proposal.

c) The Commission observed that, as the proposal forms part of a large existing campus with substantial existing development, the submission does not adequately document the site in its entirety. It shall be ensured that comprehensive uncut site photographs of the entire complex are submitted, duly annotated to identify the existing buildings, main entrance, boundary wall, parking areas, playgrounds, superstructures, terrace areas, site portion where additional block is being planned to be constructed, surrounding site context, and other significant site features. Such documentation shall facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the overall architectural vocabulary and site context, thereby enabling an informed assessment of the proposal by the Commission.

d) The proposed building block forms part of a larger campus comprising several existing buildings and includes a proposed connecting corridor at the second-floor level linking the existing and proposed blocks. The Commission observed that the proposal cannot be assessed in isolation and shall be assessed in the context of the overall campus and its surrounding environment.

Accordingly, comprehensive 3D views of the proposed building block shall be superimposed at its proposed location within the existing campus, clearly depicting the adjoining building blocks (in actual) with in the campus , the proposed connecting corridor, internal circulation, surrounding road network, landscape features, and other relevant site elements, to understand proposed development with its existing context to facilitate a comprehensive assessment of its visual, and architectural impact.

e) It was observed from the second-floor plan that a connecting bridge has been proposed. However, the submission does not adequately depict the bridge in terms of the existing blocks it connects, its architectural design, material palette, specifications, and its visual integration with the overall development. It shall be ensured that the revised submission includes all the requisite plans, sections, annotated 3D views, and details of materials and finishes to clearly illustrate the proposed connecting bridge, its relationship with the existing buildings, and its integration with the overall architectural character of the site.

f) It was noted that the requisite parking requirement of 491 ECS has been shown as surface parking within the open areas of the school campus. Considering the nature of the development, where a significant number of parents and visitors are expected during school hours and special occasions, a dedicated visitor parking area shall be explored, preferably in the vicinity of the existing main entrance with access fork outside. Further, the proposal shall clearly indicate the location of bus parking bays, designated pick-up and drop-off areas, and the circulation pattern of school buses within the campus. A comprehensive circulation plan showing clearly demarcated parking areas, segregated pedestrian and vehicular movement, and designated pick-up/drop-off zones shall be submitted to ensure safe, efficient, and conflict-free movement within the campus.

The Commission suggested to explore the feasibility of accommodating the additional parking requirements within a basement beneath the proposed block, so as to minimise surface parking to improve ground water recharge and maximise the availability of open areas for landscaping, thereby improving the environmental quality and visual character of the campus. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

g) The school campus is already functional; therefore, the existing and proposed pedestrian and vehicular circulation within the site shall be clearly elucidated. As parking has been proposed across various parts of the campus, a comprehensive mobility and circulation plan shall be submitted, illustrating seamless and conflict-free pedestrian and vehicular movement from the site entry to the various building blocks including the proposed block. The plan shall clearly indicate the segregation of pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking areas, and designated pick-up and drop-off zones to facilitate a better understanding of the overall movement pattern within the campus.

h) It was observed from the submitted floor plans that several spaces, including the classroom on the second floor, corridors, toilets attached to the staff room, coordinator room, studios, store room, pantry, and other ancillary areas, do not appear to receive adequate natural light and ventilation. The layout shall be suitably reviewed and corrected to ensure that all these spaces are provided with adequate natural light and ventilation (in terms of points no. 5 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

i) It was observed that no provision for a universal accessible toilet has been envisaged in the proposal. The proposal shall be revised to incorporate universal toilets and ensure that all areas of the proposed school are designed to be barrier-free and universally accessible in accordance with the applicable norms, regulations, and accessibility guidelines.

j) The elevations, sections, and detailed façade (skin) sections clearly depict the architectural elements, sun-shading features, material specifications, and construction details, so as to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the proposed architectural design and façade treatment.

k) It was observed that the proposed multipurpose hall has not been provided with universal accessibility ramps. Further, the seating/capacity and functional use of the hall have not been adequately explained. The proposal shall be revised to incorporate barrier-free access and submit the requisite details to facilitate a better understanding of the multipurpose hall optimal utilisation and functioning.

l) The Commission further observed that toilets have been proposed directly above the multipurpose hall on the first floor. In this regard, a detailed sectional drawing through the multipurpose hall shall be submitted, clearly illustrating the plumbing and service arrangements, floor-to-floor relationship, and the spatial interface between the hall and the adjoining spaces.

The Commission observed that the nomenclature of certain toilets has not been indicated or is incomplete in the submitted drawings. The same shall be reviewed and corrected, with the intended user nomenclature (Male/Female/Universal, as applicable) clearly indicated throughout the proposal.

m) The Commission observed that the landing provided at the main entrance of the proposed building block is inadequate in width to safely accommodate the anticipated movement of a large number of students. The existing arrangement may lead to congestion and pose safety risks during peak hours. The entrance landing shall, therefore, be suitably widened and redesigned, incorporating universal accessibility features in accordance with the applicable norms, to ensure safe, barrier-free, and efficient pedestrian movement.

n) It was observed that the pump rooms and underground water tank have been shown in close proximity to the proposed school building without clearly indicating whether these are existing or proposed. Their location adjacent to the building is likely to adversely affect the functioning of the school, besides creating visual intrusion and potentially obstructing natural light and ventilation to the classrooms. The proposal shall be reviewed, and these services shall be relocated to a more appropriate location. The revised proposal shall clearly indicate their status (existing/proposed) and be supported with the necessary drawings, photographic details, and any other information.

o) It was observed that the submission (formal) does not include the structural arrangement, including the column layout. It shall be ensured that the complete structural arrangement is incorporated in the plans, as it may have a bearing on the internal planning, functionality, and façade design of the building, thereby facilitating a comprehensive assessment of the proposal.

p) It is understood that most of the classrooms may not be air-conditioned, but can preplan for potential additions in future including the administrative areas, principal rooms etc. which could be using separate air-conditioning units. Air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade. To avoid the same, the provision shall be made in the design to accommodate the outdoor units, at this stage, so as not to impact the aesthetics. A scheme needs to be submitted to show the placement, screening and material of screening for the same in plans/elevations and 3d views.

q) It was observed that the submitted drawings do not indicate the plumbing shafts for the proposed toilets. The revised submission shall include suitably designed plumbing shafts to accommodate building services in an integrated manner, ensuring that service pipes remain concealed and do not detract from the overall façade treatment and architectural aesthetics of the building.

r) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, 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.

s) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

t) The installation of clear-story solar panels on a well-designed structural frame, integrated with the building design, is suggested to ensure the effective utilisation of the space beneath, subject to feasibility as per building byelaws. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and improves aesthetics. The sustainability features shall be as per Point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage lacks clarity, has discrepancies, and needs improvement. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The South-DMC forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on July 02, 1981. The Commission approved the building plan proposal for additions and alterations, comprising the construction of the Golden Jubilee Block (Block A) and the Canteen & Classroom Block (Block B), at its meeting held on March 09, 2023 specific observations were given.
3. No previous record of NOC for Completion taken has been found in the available record of the Commission.
4. The proposal for NOC for Completion received (through email) at the Completion stage was scrutinized. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations and photographs submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the proposal has been submitted for the NOC for Completion within an existing school campus comprising several built-up structures. However, the scope of the present submission is not clearly identifiable as either Part Completion or Full Completion. While the handwritten Performa 'A' submitted by the architect indicates that the proposal is for Full Completion, the accompanying submission includes only cropped site photographs and drawings depicting a single building block, without appropriate markings, labels, or nomenclature. The submission is, therefore, unclear, incomplete, and not self-explanatory. The revised submission shall clearly identify the scope of the proposal by indicating the building(s)/portion(s) for which NOC for Completion is sought, substantiated by the requisite drawings, photographs, and other relevant documentation.

b) Further, the previous approval (formal) given by the Commission vide Letter No. OL-03032355022 dated 14.03.2023 pertained to the Golden Jubilee Block, Canteen, and Classroom Block with some conditions which are as under:

“……. All requisite car parking norms should adhere to the applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc. The architect/proponent must ensure its compliance at the site and the same shall be examined at the time of receiving the proposal at the completion stage…..”

The Commission observed that no point-wise reply, along with the requisite compliances to its earlier observations, has been furnished in the present submission. The submission shall be reviewed and revised accordingly, and a comprehensive compliance report, supported by substantiated site photographs, relevant drawings, and all necessary documentation, shall be submitted while resubmitting the proposal at NOC for Completion.

c) It was observed that the submitted site photographs do not adequately depict the existing site conditions, as cropped photographs have been provided. Further, construction materials, scaffolding, and other temporary site elements are visible in some of the photographs. The revised submission shall include uncut site photographs from all sides of the building for which NOC for Completion is sought, including the terrace and basement, to facilitate a comprehensive review by the Commission.

In the interest of user safety and to ensure safe occupancy of the premises, all building and site development works, including roads, landscaping, and other associated external works, shall be completed in all respect prior to consideration of the proposal by the Commission.

d) It was observed from the submitted superimposed drawings that significant deviations exist between the approved drawings and the as built construction. These deviations have also resulted in corresponding changes to the building elevation and façade treatment, which shall be clearly identified and reflected in the revised submission.

The revised submission shall include superimposed plans, elevations, sections, and other relevant drawings, wherein the drawings approved by the Commission at the Formal Stage are overlaid with the as-built construction. All deviations from the approved proposal, both internal and external, shall be distinctly indicated in a separate colour to clearly illustrate the extent of changes carried out with respect to the approved drawings.

Further, all submitted drawings shall include clear legends identifying the approved, as-built, and revised components, as applicable, to facilitate a comprehensive and self-explanatory assessment by the Commission.

e) For a comprehensive understanding and effective review of the proposal, comparative drawings, photographs showing the 'Before' (DUAC-approved scheme) and 'After' (actual constructed condition) of the relevant building blocks/areas shall be submitted. The photographs shall clearly illustrate the approved proposal vis-à-vis the works executed at site.

5. Overall, the proposal submitted at the completion stage lacks clarity, and requires further improvement. The architect is advised to comply with all the above observations, as well as the observations communicated earlier by the Commission vide Letter No. OL-03032355022 dated 14.03.2023 and submit a point-by-point compliance report indicating the incorporation of each observation.

1. The North-DMC forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal (for Commercial cum Residential building) received at formal stage at its meetings held on June 4, 2026 and June 25, 2026; specific observations were given.
3. The building plans proposal for Commercial cum residential building (comprising of ground + three floors) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted to the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no: OL-23062623024 dated 30-06-2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted etc, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) It shall be ensured that the materials proposed for the façade are durable, low-maintenance, and preferably of a permanent nature.

b) The provisions for road widening shall be addressed by the concerned local body in accordance with prevailing applicable Building Byelaws, and applicable statutory provisions.

c) It shall be ensured that all projections are contained entirely within the plot boundaries and comply with the applicable Building Bye-Laws and statutory provisions.

d) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, drying of clothes 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 DDA forwarded (through email) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the layout and building plans proposal (hospital block-A-3B+G+7; Nurse hostel: B+G+6; Dormitory: B+G+5; Mortuary: B+G+1; Dr Residence: B+G+6, and Guest house) at its meeting held on November 18, 2009.
3. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal (hospital- B + G + 8 floors) at its meeting held on March 31, 2017. The Commission approved the building, plans proposal for additions/alterations for addition of two floors (9th & 10th floor over existing hospital building B+G+8 floors), proposed new Hospital Block (3B + G +1 floor) and Utility Block (3B+G floor) at its meeting held on December 15, 2022 specific observations were given.
4. The Commission accepted the NOC for Completion (part-Block A) at its meeting held on March 21, 2024. The Commission did not accept the NOC for Completion (Part Block-B comprising of 3B+G+1) received at Completion stage at its meeting held on June 18, 2026; specific observations were given.
5. The proposal for NOC for Completion (Part-Block B comprising of 3B+G+1 floors) received (through email) at the Completion stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-18032448030 dated 25.06.2026. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs and replies submitted, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that while reviewing the proposal in its meeting held on June 18, 2026, detailed and specific observations were made and communicated vide DUAC Observation Letter No. 18032448030 dated 25.06.2026, especially observation No. 5(c), pertaining to the completion of works at the site, has not been complied with. The same observation is reiterated as under:

“…. c) In addition to the above, it was noted that the submitted site plan includes the remark:

“Civil structure is built on site till date. Façade and external work is still to be done as per revised scheme.

This indicates that the external development works are yet to be completed in accordance with the proposal. Further, the submitted site photographs suggest that several works remain under progress, including scaffolding, road development, construction of ancillary structures, façade finishing/plastering, and installation of glazing for doors and windows. In the interest of user safety and to ensure safe occupancy of the premises, all building and site development works, including roads, landscaping, and other associated external works, shall be completed in all respect prior to consideration of the proposal by the Commission…”

b) The Commission observed from the updated site photographs submitted by the architect that construction activities in Block-B are still in progress. It is, therefore, reiterated that, in the interest of user safety and to ensure the safe occupancy of the premises, all building and site development works, including roads, landscaping, and all other associated external development works, shall be completed in all respects prior to the proposal being considered by the Commission.

c) The Commission observed that it had given NOC for Completion for Part Completion (Block-A) at its meeting held on March 21, 2024. The present proposal pertains to Part Completion (Block-B); however, the submission does not clearly establish the overall parking requirement of the project, the parking provided and achieved under Part Completion (Block-A), and the balance parking proposed to meet the requirements under Part Completion (Block-B).

d) Further, although the submitted Basement B-2 plan indicates the provision of double-stack parking, the same has not been substantiated with adequate photographic evidence. Accordingly, comprehensive photographs of the basement parking areas, including Basement B-2, from multiple points shall be submitted to verify the actual installation and availability of the proposed parking facilities for consideration by the Commission.

6. Overall, in view of the non-compliance with the Commission's previous observations and the fact that building and site development works are still in progress, the current submission at the Part Completion stage is not considered appropriate for the issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for Completion. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above and furnish a point-by-point incorporation and response.

1. The CPWD forwarded (through OPAAS) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal of (Common Central Secretariat 8 & 9 at 23-B & 23-C-2 Maulana Azad Road) at its meeting held on October 9, 2025; specific observations were given.
3. The revised building plans proposal for Common Central Secretariat 8 & 9 (one basement + G + 7 floors with a height of 36.90 mt) received (through OPAAS) at the formal stage was scrutinised. Based on the submission submitted, including security requirements, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the architect in its report has indicated the reasons for the revised submission as under:

i) Additional office spaces created in intermediate terrace areas.

ii) Additional connecting wings with office spaces proposed on 2^nd and 6th floors.

iii) Modifications in corner conferences at 2nd,4th and 6th floors.

iv) Budget press added in the ground floor of Kartavya Bhawan 9.

v) Electric substation shifted from Kartavya Bhawan 9 to Kartavya Bhawan 8.

vi) Internal office layout changed.

vii) Addition of physical partition in basement as per NBCS-2026.

b) All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, 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.

d) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

e) The installation of clear-story solar panels on a well-designed structural frame, integrated with the building design, is suggested to ensure the effective utilisation of the space beneath, subject to feasibility as per building bye-laws. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and improves aesthetics. The sustainability features shall be as per Point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Revised Building Plans Proposal in respect of Group Housing at 7 Court Road, Civil Lines Delhi. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (through OPAAS) for consideration by the Commission.
2. A request was received from the architect for not to consider the proposal.

Demolition (partial) reconstruction of quarters into proposed guest house in Meghalaya house at Plot no. 9, Dr. A.P.J Abdul Kalam Road. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the Architect (through OPAAS) for consideration by the Commission.
2. Earlier, the proposal was received in the Commission for additions and alterations from NDMC on December 24, 1985. However, it could not be considered because of incomplete materials as per Commission’s guidelines.
3. The Commission did not approve the building plans proposal for partial demolition and reconstruction received at the formal stage at its meeting held on April 23, 2026; specific observations were given.
4. Now the building plans proposal for demolition (partial) and reconstruction received (through OPAAS) at conceptual stage was scrutinized along with the previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-17042624008 dated 04.05.2026.  Based on the submission made, including drawings, photographs and replies submitted, etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The property falls within the jurisdiction of the prevailing LBZ Guidelines. The Architect shall ensure that the proposal complies with all applicable provisions, norms, and regulations stipulated therein.

b) It was observed that the proposed entrance canopy is disproportionately high in relation to the building block. The height of the canopy shall be suitably reduced to achieve appropriate architectural proportions and ensure that it does not visually dominate the building.

The Commission further observed inconsistencies in the colour scheme of the front porch, façade, and related architectural elements across the submitted drawings. The proposal shall be reviewed to ensure a consistent colour palette and uniform architectural vocabulary, thereby maintaining visual harmony and the overall aesthetic character of the building.

c) The jaali detail at the top of Block D2 shall be revised to match the jaali design of the other blocks to ensure architectural harmony and visual coherence.

d) The design proposal also incorporates provisions for double stack parking arrangements (stilt level) to meet the necessary parking requirements, which shall be examined during the proposal's completion stage. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc. (in terms of points no. 18 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval)), as available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) It shall be ensured that the building is equipped with a lift providing access to the upper floors, in compliance with the principles of universal accessibility.

f) All plumbing pipes, rainwater pipes, service equipment, DG Set, DG exhaust pipes, water tanks, air-conditioning units, solar panels, drying of clothes 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.

g) The Work of public art of suitable scale, size and material, imparting character and identity to the complex shall ensure to be installed in terms of point nos. 14 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) and Memorandum dated October 07, 2025 available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in. Any deviations in the artwork from the approved design must be submitted to the Commission for prior approval before the commencement of construction, to ensure compliance and facilitate final approval upon project completion.

h) The installation of clear-story solar panels on a well-designed structural frame, integrated with the building design, is suggested to ensure the effective utilisation of the space beneath, subject to feasibility as per building bye-laws. This placement also facilitates easy maintenance, reduces heat load through increased shading, and improves aesthetics. The sustainability features shall be as per Point 7 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval), available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

5. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and provide a point-by-point incorporation and response in the next submission (formal stage).

Found conceptually suitable (not limited to these observations).
The conceptual suitability is only with reference to the mandate of the Commission. However, it would be reassessed at the formal stage based on the 20-point criteria as available on the DUAC website.  It would not be a substitute for formal approval of the proposal referred through the concerned local body in terms of section 12 of the DUAC Act, 1973.