Too many in Charlotte are removing trees to build McMansions

Charlotte trees

Regarding the “Losing our trees” series (Jan. 16):

I recently sold my home of 35 years in the Chantilly neighborhood to a married millennial couple with a young child. The giant willow oak in the backyard — over 5-feet in girth and 100 feet tall — was a magnificent contributor to the appeal of the house and the neighborhood. I had assiduously maintained it over the years to insure its health and beauty.

Yet, the new owners first act upon moving in was to cut it down. They were afraid it would fall on their child and they didn’t want the maintenance costs and work.

I saw the same thing happen repeatedly when the original small bungalows in my neighborhood were torn down and replaced with “McMansions” whose owners cleared the lot so they could put up huge, out-of-character new homes.

It’s past time for Charlotte’s tree regulations to be updated and enforced to make new owners and builders think twice before removing beautiful old-growth trees. What a shame these people can’’t see the benefits trees provide.

Eric Filios, Charlotte

Builders and trees

Regarding “Builder perspective: Let’s be realistic about tree preservation in Charlotte,” (Jan. 16):

Builders in Charlotte care nothing for aesthetics and our prized tree canopy. All they care about is squishing as many units as they can in a small space, then leaving, and the trees be damned.

Neighborhoods with trees have lower rates of crime, are cooler, and have higher property values. It is time to get serious about preserving our trees, even if it is at the expense of builder profits.

Timothy Shinn, Charlotte

The filibuster

The Editorial Board’s Jan. 15 editorial advocating for a carve-out on voting legislation without the filibuster parrots the talking points of progressive politicians. Americans who know they only have to be able to walk to their mailboxes realize how easy it is to vote, and they understand that talk of a threat to our democracy is a bunch of hooey. Notwithstanding this point, a carve-out would be the first move on a slippery legislative slope that each party would use against the other when it’s in control.

Tim Eichenbrenner, Charlotte

Republican agenda

I know full well that it’s “all just politics,” but the current Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate are working to erode our democracy. They are led by the 45th president of the United States.

Voltaire, the French Philosopher, historian and enlightenment writer is quoted as saying: “Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

Jeff Kanner, Tega Cay

GOP and Trump

The former president is continuing his Big Lie that the election was stolen from him. It’s a claim he has been very unsuccessful in proving, losing all of his recounts, audits and reviews and winning only one court case out of 65 or so.

Some of his funders have asked for their money back feeling they were misled. Sadly, so were the folks who felt emboldened to storm the Capitol to overturn the election. More than a few will go to jail, rightfully so.

It is past time for Republican leaders to follow the political courage of folks like U.S. Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and tell the former president to “man-up, you lost.”

The Republican Party needs to right this ship and stop listening to Trump and his sycophants.

Keith Wilson, Charlotte

Nuclear weapons

On Jan. 3 the leading nuclear weapon states — the U.S, Russia, China, France and the U.K (collectively know as the P5) — issued a joint statement reaffirming President Reagan’s and Mikhail Gorbachev’s dictum that “a nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.”

This is a new and positive development, but somehow hypocritical as all these nations are upgrading their weapon systems.

As we celebrate on Jan. 22 the first anniversary of the ratification of the UN treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons, President Biden would do well to fulfill his campaign promise to make U.S. defense less dependent on them. The first step would be to join the other P5 nations with a “No First Use Policy.” That is a beginning that is sorely needed.

Bert Crain, Hickory