BMC proposes felling 24 trees, transplanting another 15 for redevelopment project in Kanjur village

Congress group leader in the BMC and a member of the tree authority, Ashraf Azmi, has raised concerns over the proposal and sought detailed technical and documentary information on the tree-felling, transplantation and compensatory plantation plans

Mumbai: The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has proposed felling 24 trees and transplanting another 15 trees at Kanjur village as part of a redevelopment project on LBS Marg. To compensate for the loss, 707 trees will be planted using a combination of Miyawaki and traditional plantation methods on 5,181.93 sqm of land identified by the civic body, the proposal submitted to the BMC’s tree authority says.

BMC proposes felling 24 trees, transplanting another 15 for redevelopment project in Kanjur village

Congress group leader in the BMC and a member of the tree authority, Ashraf Azmi, has raised concerns over the proposal and sought detailed technical and documentary information on the tree-felling, transplantation and compensatory plantation plans.

“The proposal says 24 trees will be cut, 15 will be transplanted and 707 will be planted in compensation. I am asking BMC to demonstrate, with documents and on-site evidence, where those 707 trees will actually be planted, how the ages of the existing trees were determined, why every affected tree cannot be retained, how the 15 transplanted trees will be protected, and how the 59 retained trees will survive construction,” he told Hindustan Times.

The Congress leader clarified that his objection was not to the redevelopment project itself, but to whether sufficient evidence had been placed before the BMC’s tree authority to establish that the proposed tree loss was unavoidable and that the compensatory plantation would effectively protect the city’s tree cover.

The proposal calculates the compensatory requirement at 430 trees for the 24 trees proposed to be felled, and 277 trees for the 15 trees proposed for transplantation, taking the total to 707. Azmi has sought a complete tree-wise calculation showing how the figure was arrived at, the statutory basis for each calculation, and a geo-referenced plantation plan identifying the exact locations, species, spacing and land available for the trees.

“We need the map of the 707 trees, not merely the number 707 in a file,” he said.

Amzi has also questioned the assessment of the age of affected trees, as tree age has a bearing on the compensatory plantation requirement under the amended Maharashtra Tree Act.

For instance, the proposal records tree no. 78, a Peepal, as approximately 40 feet high, with a girth of 11 feet 6 inches and an estimated age of 40 years, while tree no. 79 is 40 feet high, with a girth of 13 feet and an estimated age of 45 years.

Azmi has sought details of the methodology used to determine the age of every affected tree, including who certified the estimates, the growth factors used and whether an independent assessment was carried out.

“I am not making an unverified claim about the actual age of these trees. I am demanding that the stated ages be independently verifiable because they have a direct bearing on the compensatory obligation,” he said.

The proposed transplantation of 15 trees is another concern. Azmi has sought details of the proposed destination of each tree, expert assessments establishing their transplantability, the methodology to be used, survival monitoring and the financial or security safeguards obtained from the developer. He has also sought clarity on the replacement obligation if any transplanted tree dies.

For the 59 trees that will be retained on site, Azmi has sought a tree-wise root-protection and excavation-impact plan, since another tree that was to be retained had fallen naturally, as per the proposal before the civic body.

“Trees should not be considered adequately protected merely because their trunks fall outside the construction footprint,” he said, seeking details about excavation depth, distance from each tree, root-protection zones, dewatering arrangements and construction-stage arboricultural supervision.

“This is not a demand to stop legitimate development. It is a demand that development comply transparently with the Tree Act, that every reasonable tree-saving alternative be examined, and that compensatory plantation be independently verified on the ground rather than accepted merely as a figure in a proposal,” he said.