CORRESPONDENCE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 282, 11 November 1884, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinion expressed by our correspondents.) TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I quite agree with Councillor Graham in opposing so premature a bye-law as that which would compel buildings to be built in brick or more expensive materia! in a small village like Gisborne, but I cannot pass unchallenged the estimate of costs supplied to him by Gi borne builders and architects, whose experience in brick-work must be very limited when they aver that a building having three walls built in brick would cost three limes ns much as a building wholly built of wood, as this statement if not contradicted might deter persons willing to build in brick from doing so. I will state what the facts in this case arc. A building having three outer walls in brick would just cost thirty per cent, more than a building wholly built in wood. Or, say a building that would cost £5OO if built in wood, would cost £650 with three brick walls, plastered both sides; and if certain buildings have proved leaky under similar treatment, it was not the fault of the bricks or concrete, but that of the architect. Gisborne, Nov. Compo. Bill.