The South India Flower Association on Thursday clarified that the proposed cut-flower market at GKVK has no connection with the relocation of KR Market, countering reports that nearly 900 trees would be felled for the project.
Association denies tree-felling claims
Association president T M Aravind said the new facility would focus on national and international trade. “The site is highly suitable. Only small saplings, if required, will be relocated. Reports of 900 trees being cut are false,” he said.
The cut-flower market will be built on five acres of leased land at GKVK as part of a ₹100-crore government project, with ₹25 crore already released. Aravind highlighted that demand from neighbouring flower-growing hubs such as Doddaballapur, Hosakote, Chikkaballapur and Kolar made GKVK an ideal location, particularly given its road, rail, and air connectivity.
A market on global lines
According to the association, the project is modelled on international flower markets with support from the state government, horticulture department, agricultural university and the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC). Aravind stressed that the facility was not intended as a substitute for Bengaluru’s iconic KR Market.
Opposition from loose flower traders
However, not all traders are convinced. Divakar, president of the Loose Flower Merchants’ Association, criticised the plan, calling GKVK “too cut off” from Bengaluru city. He argued that KR Market’s central location and legacy of over a century made it irreplaceable.
“We sell loose flowers like Chrysanthemums and Jasmine, not cut flowers. They are mistaking street vendors outside the flower market for our association members,” he said. Divakar also claimed that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) had ordered the cut-flower market to shift from KR Market to GKVK. He warned the project could fail if moved into a residential area without proper surveys and consultations.
A divided industry
While the South India Flower Association sees the GKVK project as a step towards modernising and internationalising the flower trade, sections of local traders remain wary of its feasibility. The difference of opinion underscores the challenge of balancing heritage markets with new infrastructure aimed at global trade.
Conclusion
The cut-flower market at GKVK is being positioned as a specialised hub for export-oriented trade, not a replacement for KR Market. With state support and significant funding, the project is set to go ahead, though opposition from loose flower traders may pose hurdles to smooth implementation.