Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of 1835th meeting held on 01.10.2025.

1. Action Taken Report in respect of Minutes of the 1835th meeting held on 01.10.2025 were discussed.

1. The North DMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the building plan proposal at its meetings held on October 24, 2024 and June 19, 2025; specific observations were given.
3. The Commission accepted the building plans proposal at conceptual stage at its meeting held on September 25, 2025; specific observations were given.
4. The building plans proposal 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 letter no. OL-23092527054 dated 03-10-2025. Based on the compliance, and the submission made, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The design proposal incorporates provisions for double-stack parking arrangements to meet the necessary parking requirements. The architect or proponent must ensure the proper implementation of these arrangements on-site, which will be examined during the proposal's completion stage. All parking provisions shall adhere to all the applicable norms/guidelines/regulations, etc.

b) The proposed 3D view shows the sculpture placed in the middle at the entrance. However, due to the high movement of students in this area, it is advisable to relocate the sculpture to a more suitable spot. 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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

c) 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.

d) 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.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the concept of the proposal at its meeting held on March 31, 2017.
3. The Commission approved the proposal for the layout and building plans with respect to the redevelopment of the GPRA colony at Nauroji Nagar at its meeting held on June 14, 2017.
4. The Commission accepted the proposal for NOC for Completion (Part – Towers B, C, D and E) at its meeting held on December 14, 2023, NOC for Completion (Part- Tower 1) on March 11, 2024, NOC for Completion (Part Tower - F (upto 7^th floors ) excluding two restaurant floors above)) on May 2, 2024 and NOC for Completion (Part-WTC Tower A) on July 25, 2024, NOC for Completion (Part -Tower G and H) on October 24, 2024 and NOC for Completion (Part- Towers J, K and L) on December 26, 2024.
5. The proposal for NOC for the completion (part – Retail Block, Restaurant Block, Switch yard, Guard Rooms at Nauroji Nagar, phase-8) received (online) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, etc., the proposal for NOC for Completion in respect of Phase-8 (part – Retail Block, Restaurant Block, Switch yard, Guard Rooms) is found to be accepted.  

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the redevelopment of GPRA Srinivaspuri at its meeting held on May 29, 2019.
3. The revised building plan proposal for (construction of 3112 nos. Type III Residential Units, Multilevel car parking block, community centre and CGHS dispensary) received (online) at the formal stage and a detailed discussion was held with the architect (online) on Cisco Webex meetings, during which clarifications were provided to the Commission’s queries. Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, and the discussion held the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission observed that the submitted revised site plan reflects significant changes from the layout previously approved by DUAC at its meeting on May 29, 2019. The revisions include retaining the existing boys’ and girls’ schools, removing the commercial block with parking proposed in its place, introducing Type III quarters instead of Type II at new locations, removing Type IV towers, and adding community and dispensary facilities. These constitute substantial alterations in zoning and building programs, thereby affecting the overall urban character and environmental aesthetics of the site.

b) Since the existing schools are being retained and may influence the overall design of the complex, it was suggested to provide uncut annotated photographs, from all sides, of these structures of both the girls’ and boys’ schools, to understand their impact on the visual and environmental aesthetics of the site.

c) The terrace of the proposed parking block can be seen from the upper floors of the residential towers. It is advisable to keep it aesthetically pleasing and well-maintained consistently to preserve the visual and environmental appeal of the complex. Proper treatment of the terrace shall be provided to ensure this.

d) Two bridges have been proposed to connect the proposed parking block with the Type-III residential blocks, but they have not been explained in detail, including their connections, plans, ingress, and egress etc. Since the proposal is at a formal stage, it needs to include comprehensive details such as plans and other relevant information for understanding of its functioning and connections. 

e) The MLCP shall include designated spaces for driver rest rooms, as well as provisions for toilets and drinking water at suitable location, to ensure the availability of basic facilities for the users.

f) Details of the Swachh Bharat toilet are incomplete in the submission i.e. missing plans, elevations, sections along with annotated 3d views showing details of materiality. As part of the formal submission, all drawings, 3D views, and relevant details must be provided for the Swachh Bharat toilet, including the surrounding context, to show its placement within the building complex.

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

h) 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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

i) 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.

j) 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.

4. Overall, the proposal received at the formal stage lacks clarity 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 NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission did not approve the proposal for addition and alterations at its meeting held on May 8, 2025; specific observations were given.
3. The building plan proposal for addition and alterations (addition two new building blocks, namely, staff quarter (G+2) floors and cultural centre (G+1) floors, along with modifying/treating the existing facades of the Consulate, Embassy, and Ambassador’s residence. Some changes, like changing doors/windows, etc., proposed in diplomatic villas) 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 letter no.: OL-30042524009 dated 14.05.2025 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 replies submitted, the submission made including drawings and photographs, and the discussion held, etc. the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The architect clarified that one of the 3D views depicting a horizontal member on the columnar structures proposed at the entrance is incorrect and has been replaced with the appropriate design in the current submission. The Commission noted the same.

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

c) 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.

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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) 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.

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the proposal for the redevelopment of General Pool Residential Accommodation at Kasturba Nagar in its meeting held on January 28, 2020, along with specific observations. However, the revised Master Plan proposal was not accepted by the Commission in its meeting held on January 16, 2025. Subsequently, the proposal was also not approved at the formal stage in the meetings held on March 6, 2025, April 24, 2025, and June 5, 2025, with detailed observations.
3. The revised master plan with a division of the site into two zones Zone 1 and Zone 2 was approved at its meeting held on June 26, 2025 with specific observations.
4. The building plans proposal for NOC for the Completion (Part- for 15 nos. of Residential towers T-II-9 nos. T-III-6 nos.) received online at the completion stage, was scrutinized along with the documentation, drawings, photographs etc 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 submission made including drawings, documentations, and photographs, etc, and the discussion held, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the Master Plan for the redevelopment of the General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) at Kasturba Nagar was previously approved in its meeting held on January 28, 2020, with a total plot area of 213,715.36 sqm. A revised master plan reflecting a reduced site area of 208,604.93 sqm due to the exclusion of 5,110.43 sqm (for an existing temple and RBI staff quarters). The revised proposal also introduces a division of the site into two zones Zone 1 and Zone 2, and includes modifications, such as converting previously approved Type V and Type VI residential units to Type IV units in newly created zone-2. Further, the following additions for building proposals were also introduced including Anganwadi, Convenient Shops, Coaching Centre, Banquet Hall, Podium, Proposed Residential Building Type -IV.

b) The current submission for the NOC for the completion of 15 residential towers (Part- for 15 nos. of Towers T-II-9 nos. and T-III-6 nos.) has been made by overlaying it onto the outdated master plan, without considering the revised master plan approved by the Commission at its meeting held on June 26, 2025. It was recommended to overlay the current submission onto the revised master plan approved by the Commission at its meeting on June 26, 2025.

c) In recent years, the Commission has observed that some proposals submitted at the completion stage include significant alterations to the building façade, deviating from the originally approved design intent, approved at the formal stage. Such modifications, such as changes in façade design, materials, artwork on the façade undermine the aesthetic standards envisioned by the Commission and negatively affect the urban and environmental character of the development, which the Commission does not appreciate.

d) In continuation of the above, the submission includes site photographs showing artworks on the building façades that were not pre-approved by the Commission. As these façades face major city roads and the scale of the artwork is considerable, they significantly influence the urban and environmental aesthetics of the city. It shall further be ensured that any proposed artwork is submitted to the Commission for prior approval before execution.

e) Further, approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over the actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan, if any.

f) For a better understanding of the proposal, side photographs ‘Before (submitted 3d views at the time of DUAC formal approval) and After (current actual built construction)’ of the constructed building blocks to be provided.

5. Overall, the proposal received at NOC for the Completion (part) stage lacks clarity, is incomplete and is incomprehensible; therefore, the Commission could not appreciate the proposal judiciously. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations and furnish a pointwise incorporation and reply.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal at its meeting held on April 03, 2007, and subsequently accepted the NOC for Completion plans at its meeting held on January 05, 2011.
3. The Commission further approved the addition of three floors (16th, 17th & 18th) at its meeting held on June 03, 2021.
4. The proposal for NOC for the completion (Part- 16th, 17th & 18^th Floors) received (online) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, photographs, etc, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that the proposal relates to part completion of the 16th, 17th, and 18th floors, which the Commission formally approved at its meeting on June 03, 2021. However, a discrepancy was observed in the submission when comparing the formal approval with the proposal under review for part completion. It was found that nearly the same submission has been reused, including photographs, project report, etc, which was also submitted during the formal approval process for those floors. Notably, the same photographs of the built-up façade have been reused even after more than four years. Updated, unaltered, annotated site photographs should be provided with appropriate demarcations of the areas for which partial completion is required, along with a key plan indicating the location and orientation of each picture to clarify the areas shown.

b) Photographs of the terrace have not been provided. As the submission is at the completion stage, it is required to include photographs of all areas, including the terrace, along with details of the installed solar panels and other services located at the terrace level.

c) Further, approval received from DUAC (at the formal stage) shall be superimposed on the plans/elevations/sections etc., over the actual built structure on the site, existing & proposed changes done in the design from the approval (by DUAC), to understand the extents of deviations made internally as well as external changes made with respect to the sanctioned plan, if any.

d) For a better understanding of the proposal, all sides photographs ie. ‘Before (submitted 3d views at the time of DUAC formal approval) and After (current actual built construction)’ of the constructed building blocks to be provided.

5. Overall, an incomplete submission supported by incomplete documentation and with discrepancies has been received at the Completion stage for the consideration of the Commission. The architect is advised to adhere to all the above observations provided by the Commission and furnish a point-wise incorporation & reply.

1. The DDA forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. No previous record of approvals(formal/completion) taken from the Commission has been found in the Commission's available record.
3. The proposal was withdrawn by the architect vide their email request dated 15.10.2025.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2.  No previous record of approvals(formal/completion) taken from the Commission has been found in the Commission's available record.
3. The building plan proposal for addition and alterations (proposed Block I (residence-ground + first floor)) received (online) at the formal 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 submission made, including drawings and photographs, and discussion held etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

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

b) 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.

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.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the proposal for redevelopment of the GPRA colony, Sarojini Nagar, at its meeting held on January 17, 2020.
3. The Commission did not approve the proposal for (Commercial-D-package-A & B at the redevelopment of Sarojini Nagar) at its meeting held on September 25, 2025; specific observations were given.
4. The revised building plans proposal for (Commercial-D-package-A & B) at the redevelopment of Sarojini Nagar) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised along with previous observations of the Commission communicated vide DUAC letter no. OL-17092524021 dated 03-10-2025, and a letter no: NBCC/SBG Redev II/2025/1151 dated 15.10.2025 from CGM (Engg)/SBG Head (Redev II). Based on the submission made, including drawings and photographs, replies submitted, and letter from NBCC etc., the following observations are to be complied with:

a) The Commission noted that in one of its replies to its previous observations, communicated vide DUAC observation letter no. OL-17092524021 dated 03-10-2025, the architect has replied that:

“……The previous design proposal approved by the commission at its meeting held on 23.01.2020, which was based on allocating commercial spaces/ retail shops on individual floors with emphasis on greater office efficiency by reducing the common areas/ circulation spaces. However, considering the current market situation in the Delhi to invite a lot of International Organisation into the market and such similar specific requirements, NBCC suggested to revise the design completely and instead of individual floor plate design, individual towers-based design should be preferred. The revised design proposal is following the same principle. The design is more energy- efficient as it allows greater penetration of natural light, thereby reducing reliance on artificial lighting and lowering the overall energy consumption. The layout not only enhances the building’s market potential, but also fosters a stronger sense of belonging among occupants. Furthermore, the streamlined design ensures easier maintenance and long-term operational efficiency, aligning with sustainable building principles…”

The architect’s response to observation is not accepted by the Commission; however, the clarifications communicated by the NBCC vide their letter no: NBCC/SBG Redev II/2025/1151 dated 15.10.2025 from CGM (Engg)/SBG Head (Redev II) are accepted.

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

c) 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.

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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

e) 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.

1. The NDMC forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The Commission approved the building plans proposal for demolition and reconstruction at its meeting held on January 02, 2020, but did not approve the revised proposal at its meeting held on December 26, 2024, and February 27, 2025, specific observations were given.
3. The Commission approved the revised building plans proposal for residential building, 83, Golf links at its meeting held on March 13, 2025, specific observations were given.
4. The proposal for NOC for the completion of the Residential building (Ground + 02 floors) received (online) at the completion stage, was scrutinised. Based on the submission made, including drawings, documentations, photographs, etc., the proposal for NOC for Completion is accepted.

1. The CPWD forwarded (online) the proposal for consideration by the Commission.
2. The building plans proposal for Common Central Secretariat 4 & 5 (one basement + G + 7 floors with a height of 36.90 m) received (online) at the formal stage was scrutinised, the following observations are to be complied with:

a) Considering the scale of office projects and its context, the Commission pointed out that many small courtyards within the complex lead to the loss of large usable public spaces and long-term maintenance problems. The Commission advises against fragmenting public space into small courtyards and suggests two alternative approaches to ensure a sense of stature, size, volume and openness, while also ensuring ample light in courtyards.

b) Option 1: The number of courtyards should be reduced from four to two for each block. Further, the width of certain wings can be increased appropriately on both sides of corridors to provide a greater footprint, thereby ensuring that floor space remains same. These measures would allow enhanced light and better ventilation at lower levels, while also creating greater scope for landscaped public spaces, thereby facilitating better integration of the built form with the open fabric and enhancing the quality of the spaces at the lower level. The high-priority parking can still be accommodated on the ground floor while the rest of the parking can be accommodated in the basement level, which is well connected to all floors with the possibility of adding a second basement.

c) Option 2: The horizontal arms on the lower two floors on either side of the central corridor should be converted into voids to create expansive double-height colonnaded spaces. This design change would improve natural light penetration and ventilation at the lower levels, while also enhancing the sense of openness and spatial quality. The colonnades would accentuate the character and formality of the building, ensuring the lower floors remain visually more open, and main floors less prone to accumulation of unnecessary objects, functionally efficient, well-connected with public areas and brighter.

d) It is advised to convert the terraces on the upper floors into usable spaces to compensate for the loss of floorspace (if any) caused by the reduced footprint on the lower floors.

e) The offset on both sides of the projecting building block reduces the overall formality of the building. It is recommended to remove unnecessary offsets and maintain the building profile as a simpler rectangle, thereby preserving the façade's symmetry and formality.

f) The current proposal includes one level of basement parking. It is recommended to provide two levels of basement parking to meet existing and future parking needs. All parking arrangements must comply with all applicable norms, guidelines, and regulations.

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) available on the DUAC website at www.duac.org.in.

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.

i) 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.

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