The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has proposed removing 24 trees and transplanting another 15 at Kanjur village as part of a redevelopment project along LBS Marg. The plan also includes planting 707 trees as compensation on 5,181.93 sq m of land using Miyawaki and conventional plantation methods.
The proposal has raised questions from Ashraf Azmi, Congress group leader in the BMC and a member of the civic Tree Authority, who has sought detailed technical records and documentation concerning the proposed tree removal, transplantation and compensatory plantation.
“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 compensatory calculation provides for 430 trees against the 24 proposed removals and 277 against the 15 trees proposed for transplantation. Azmi has asked for a tree-wise calculation, the legal basis for the numbers and a geo-referenced plantation plan showing locations, species, spacing and available land.
“We need the map of the 707 trees, not merely the number 707 in a file,” he said.
He has also questioned how the ages of affected trees were established, noting that age influences compensatory requirements under the amended Maharashtra Tree Act.
“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.
Azmi has sought details about where each of the 15 trees will be transplanted, expert assessments of their suitability, protection measures and monitoring after transplantation.
For the 59 trees proposed to remain, he wants a tree-specific plan covering root protection and excavation impacts.
“Trees should not be considered adequately protected merely because their trunks fall outside the construction footprint,” he said.
“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.
Source: Hindustan Times
