Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PINUS INSIGNIS TIMBER

Sir, —It is difficult to imagine that the Wellington Building Society’s banning of Pinus insignis and the State Advances Corporation’s reluctance to admit the value of this timber is due simply to prejudice. Perhaps they consider that a permanent dwelling with a guaranteed duration of 70 years is a poor investment for their clients’ life savings. Imagine the housing problem in Christchurch today if our forebears had held such a conception of permanence. Your article m today’s issue stresses two important factors in the selection of Pinus insignis for building purposes; i.e., grading and treatment. (The expert opinion on durability is dependent on these measures.) Can you tell me if Government specifications cover these points, and if any inspection system is in force to ensure that such standards are maintained.—Yours, etc., LYNFORD HALL. October 18, 1955.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19551021.2.14.1

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27795, 21 October 1955, Page 3

Word Count
139

PINUS INSIGNIS TIMBER Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27795, 21 October 1955, Page 3

PINUS INSIGNIS TIMBER Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27795, 21 October 1955, Page 3