Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1623^rd meeting held on 11.11.2021.

Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1623^rd meeting held on 11.11.2021 was discussed.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the South DMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meeting held on October 27, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised building plan proposal received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-23102155052 dated 02.11.2021 and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx meetings (online) who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission on various aspects related to the proposal submitted.  Based on the response received, revised submission and a detailed discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with: 

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

b. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the DIAL (online) for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the master plan of the hospitality district at IGI airport at its meeting held on March 09, 2011, and the revised conceptual master plan was accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on October 18, 2017, specific observations were given. The proposal for Pedestrian Street and sunken Plaza at Hospitality District, Aerocity, IGI Airport was approved in the meeting of the Commission held on July 23, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The proposal for NOC for completion (part) received (online) at the completion stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The proposal is for NOC for completion (part), but observations/recommendations of the sanctioning authority while forwarding the matter to DUAC for its consideration in the Performa Part-C of the Completion stage are missing in the submission. The Commission considers the proposals based on the certification related to building bye-laws, completion etc. furnished by the concerned local body. In absence of which the proposal could not be examined by the Commission and returned to the concerned local body for compliances.

b. The proposal has been submitted at the completion stage (part) but the submission has been made in an unorganised manner. The Commission observed that the proposal being at the completion stage should be easy to comprehend and self-explanatory. Also, the photographs of the actual built construction for which NOC is required have been submitted without proper labelling/delineation, making it difficult to comprehend that proposal from the right perspective. An appropriate number of photographs of the completed superstructure (for which NOC for completion is required) shall be provided with proper markings/ labelling/delineation in the layout plan, photographs of the actual built construction. Uncut/clear photographs from all sides to substantiate an actual work executed at the site.

c. The proposal being at the Completion stage need to provide an actual Artwork executed at the site. The same shall be provided with an appropriate number of photographs of actual work of public art executed at the site.

4. The architect was advised to adhere to the above observations and revise the proposal for NOC for completion and furnish a pointwise incorporation & reply.

1. The proposal was forwarded by the NDMC (online) for consideration by the Commission.

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

a. The air-conditioners could be an eye-sore to the building façade. To avoid the same, the provision shall be made in the design to screen all the outdoor air-conditioning units so as not to mar the aesthetics.

b. The entire proposal shall adhere to all the applicable statutory provisions, and norms/regulations of the prevailing Lutyens Bungalow Zone (LBZ) guidelines.

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

d. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Proposal for Walkability Plan for ITO Junction. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The proposal for Walkability Plan for ITO Junction received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised and a detailed discussion was held with the architect on Cisco WebEx Meetings who provided clarifications to the queries of the Commission on various aspects related to Streetscaping, landscaping, long terms maintenance issues, operations & maintenance, beautification, graphics, location of signages, unauthorised access of two-wheelers on pedestrian pathways, materiality, protection against adverse weather conditions, location of various utilities, skywalk, the multiplicity of agencies involved etc. However, based on the detailed discussion held and the scheme submitted the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The Commission observed that the submitted proposal is more an engineering solution with minimal/no mention of design and related details, thus lacking enough clarity to be appreciated by the Commission. The proposal for walkability should be considered as a large-scale intervention in the city fabric, and its aesthetic and environmental impact shall be explored and detailed at the conceptual stage itself so that it follows the principles envisaged and demonstrates the conceptualised design incorporating all the essential elements which would make walkability a pleasant experience for the users.

b. Since the project involves multiple agencies and stakeholders, it is advisable to prepare a detailed model stretch for the Commission’s approval which incorporates details of the design elements in a streetscape (including street furniture, landscape elements, public art, public toilets, signages/hoardings, dustbins, kiosks, benches/pause points for sitting/waiting, bus shelters, utilities like street light poles, manholes, traffic signals, transformers etc.) This process would ensure that the multiple implementing agencies build the stretch as per the pre-approved/demarcated spaces to maximise the efficiency of the stretch.

c. Since the proposal involves a long stretch (approx. 10km) along with various neighbouring contexts (including landmark buildings like Vikas Minar, Delhi Police Headquarter etc.) the Commission opines that the proposals of this scale should not be studied in isolation i.e. it shall be reviewed in conjunction with the surrounding facilities. The 3D views shall be superimposed with the existing context of the surroundings, for a better understanding of the proposal in the existing environment to make it clearer.

d. The project does not mention details including materials, form/shape of structures, design of street elements etc. thus leaving ambiguities for the future. These need to be incorporated in the design to ensure the urban aesthetics are maintained.

e. The stretch would be used by multiple pedestrian users coming from different public transport modes including metro, ring rail etc. thus the connections to these modes shall be such that it encourages walking, thus shortest possible routes to connect to these modes shall be explored to maximise the efficiency of the stretch. Also, the stretch shall have relief points to protect the users in case of adverse weather conditions.

f. Since the proposal is for improving walkability in the city, it shall be visualised and designed keeping in mind the primary user i.e. pedestrian and their experiences. To ensure the experience is safe and secure, seamless connections with the essential services/ facilities like appropriate pause points with shaded seating, benches of appropriate material, tactile paving to guide the disabled, ramps to make crossings convenient etc. and other such principles shall be duly incorporated in the proposal at concept stage to ensure uninterrupted and seamless connections.

g. As the proposal suggests the creation of long skywalks, the spaces under these structures shall be such designed that they do not become dumping grounds or be encroached so as not to spoil the overall urban and visual aesthetics of the area.  Also, these spaces may be used for landscaping, rainwater harvesting, and utilities that can be accommodated and are required for the surrounding areas.

h. The proposed overhead structures (including FOB’s, skywalks etc.) need to be detailed i.e. entry/exit points, connections to adjoining areas, form and shape, the material used for the overhead covering, railing details, street furniture (If any proposed), solar panels on rooftop etc. and other such details to be provided in 3d views with proper annotations to clearly explain the scheme.

i. Since the proposal suggests a large expanse of overhead structures, it is suggested to explore the possibility of installing solar panels on the roof of the coverings so as to harness solar power.

j. The details as to how the incorporation of the solar photovoltaic panels into the design would help in reducing the carbon footprint of the site, and how much electricity could be generated via the design improvisations which could be fed directly into the grid shall be indicated in the revised scheme.

k. The Commission opines that such proposals have the potential to display work of public art imparting character, identity, culture, traditions, and the spirit of the city.

3. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission in the formal proposal to be subsequently submitted thereafter and furnish a pointwise incorporation & reply.

Layout and Building plans proposal in respect of Extension at Madhyanchal Bhawan, Plot No.12, IHC Pocket, Vasant Kunj. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the layout and building plan proposal at its meeting held on June 19, 2004. NOC for completion plan proposal was accepted in the meeting of the Commission held on March 09, 2011. The Commission did not approve the layout and building plan proposal for an extension at Madhyanchal Bhawan at its meeting held on October 07, 2021, specific observations were given.

3. The revised layout and building plan proposal for an extension at Madhyanchal Bhawan received (online) at the conceptual stage were scrutinised along with the replies submitted by the architect in response to the observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC observation letter no: OL-30092155046 dated 13.10.2021. Based on the response received, the revised submission made the following observations are to be complied with: 

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

b. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

Building plans proposal in respect of additions/alterations of Primary School at Pocket C, Vasant Kunj. (Conceptual stage)

​​​​​1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the building plan proposal at its meeting held on May 02, 2000, and the NOC for completion was accepted in the meeting held on October 30, 2019.

3. The building plan proposal for additions/alterations (addition of 3^rd floor for classrooms & hall, storage & services along with mechanical car lift in the basement, staircase & lift lobby on all floors, demolition of a classroom on ground + 3 floors above) received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The building plan proposal is for the additions/alterations to the existing building. It is suggested that the new construction should be in harmony with the old building in terms of the elevation/façade/material/specifications etc. so as not to mar the aesthetics.

b. The parking plan needs to be detailed, i.e. it needs to mark the location of no. of cars, car movement pattern, etc. in the basement. Existing parking and the parking from additional FAR (proposed) are to be shown clearly on the layout plan with the bifurcation of two. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations etc.

c. The structural arrangement of the building is not shown in the submission. The structural arrangement in the basement may impact the vehicular movement and the parking arrangements needs to be revised in the submission with structural arrangements.

d. The proposal has been submitted for the addition of the third floor on an old construction. The added structure shall be such designed that it withstands weather effects, impacts from calamities like earthquakes etc. and does not impact the safety of the superstructure.

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

f. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission in the formal proposal to be subsequently submitted thereafter and furnish a pointwise incorporation & reply.

Building plans proposal in respect of Pucca School at Qutabpur, Sainik Vihar. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. It is understood that most of the classrooms may not be air-conditioned, but we 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 mar 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.

b. The requisite parking provisions have been addressed through puzzle parking in the stilt. Considering 0.5 FAR is yet to be consumed, provisions for future parking, operation & maintenance shall be addressed at this stage itself. Also, the Commission opines that an alternative option for a basement can also be explored. The NOC for Completion can be considered once the proposed puzzle parking construction show significant momentum when the rest of the building construction is complete, partial completion may be applied for.

c. The primary use of the building is school, the building has been designed in such a manner that it has very less area left for the playground. Also, the site seems to be vehicle oriented (being peripheral road all around the building block) rather than pedestrian (students) friendly. Also, it has been observed that the students have to cross the vehicular road to access the playground which is a conflict, considering their safety and security. Therefore, the road network needs to be minimised and wherever possible shall be converted to a green surface.

d. Universal accessibility shall be ensured throughout the school campus including internal areas as per applicable norms/regulations/guidelines etc.

e. The design of the gate and the boundary wall would have a bearing on the overall aesthetics of the complex, the same is missing in the submission. The gate and the boundary wall details, including plans/elevations/sections/3D views, as appropriate shall be provided.

f. The elements of sustainability are missing in the design scheme. These shall be identified and marked on the plans.  Roof-top utilities are not shown in the plan/ 3D views and thus require to be shown on the relevant drawings. The screening for the same shall also be mentioned and marked clearly in the plans/3D views.

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

h. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

3. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission in the formal proposal to be subsequently submitted thereafter and furnish a pointwise incorporation & reply.

Revised Layout and Building plans proposal in respect of Residential Group Housing at Plot no. 1, Canal Road, Vijay Nagar. (Conceptual stage)

1. The proposal was forwarded directly by the architect (online) at the conceptual stage for consideration by the Commission.

2. The Commission approved the layout plan of the proposal at its meeting held on July 15, 2015. Further, the layout and the building plans were approved in the meetings held on November 22, 2017, and July 23, 2018, respectively with specific observations.

3. The revised layout and the building plan proposal received (online) at the conceptual stage was scrutinised and the following observations are to be complied with:

a. The 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 mar the aesthetics.

b. The balconies need to be screened appropriately along with the provision of screening of drying clothes. Innovative architectural features and materials shall screen dish antennas in the balconies.   .

c. Access to the EWS rooms have been planned through the drawing-room on all the 3BHK+EWS units given on the 5^th, 6^th, 7^th to 19^th floor & 21^st floors which is not accepted by the Commission. EWS rooms in 3BHK+EWS units should have an independent entry.

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

e. All service equipment should be camouflaged appropriately (in terms of the point nos. 10, 11 &12 of the CPAA (Criterion for Project Assessment and Approval) are available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

4. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations given by the Commission in the formal proposal to be subsequently submitted thereafter and furnish a pointwise incorporation & reply.