BOROUGH BY-LAWS.

Wairarapa Age, 18 March 1925, Page 7

BOROUGH BY-LAWS.

— -*> AL CF. AMENDMENTS. iTo the Editor.) Sir, — Some little time ago the Town Clerk informed me that the by-law amendments had been lost. I offered to give two or three nights to assist Councillor Temple to re-draft them, but did not receive even a polite *No thank you!’ May I point out to the chairman of the by-laws Committee that reinforced concrete is not permitted in a *Party Wall,’ if my amendment is rescinded, while apparently almost any other building material may be used, vide paragraph 105.

Paragraph 182 of the elaborate bylaw provides that the largest stone used in a concrete job should pass through a ring of a diameter of one quarter of an inch.- What is the opinion of Councillor Temple and th‘o two experts on that paragraph, unamended? Restore that paragraph to its original and no builder in the world would observe it, while the bylaw would become, a laughing stock. I showed the Council how pages 41 to 46, consisting of a host of unintelligible formulae, could be condensed into one sentence, easily understood.

Another deletion unanimously agreed to was the proviso that a person must go cap In hand to the Engineer for a permit to live in a home which has been erected under the supervision of the Engineer and Sanitary Inspector, to plans approved by them. So much for four of the alleged sixty amendments. ,

I have endeavoured to f>ring ordinary commonsense to bear on these vexed questions, but it is apparent that that is not wanted in our Council, where a number of members arc i weary of well-doing.’ To the Chairman of the By Laws Committee I wbuld say, ‘By all means rescind the amendments which you have never seen, but, for the sake of the ratepayers, don’t waste money on printing such immature rubbish as you will have left.’—l am, etc., J. W. ANDREWS.