Block paved path

[GMM]

I'm under orders to re-lay a block paved path. This was originally laid (clearly many years ago) directly to soil using old blue bricks and, IMO, has done quite well, considering.

For a block paved driveway, the base layer and screed are quite substantial. Rightly so, if you're going to be driving cars over it. For a path that only takes foot traffic, and not much of that either, this seems overkill, especially when considering all the soil that needs to be relocated, and materials carried in, so I'm wondering how much I can reasonably cut this down.

Paving expert essentially says 100mm of MOT then 50mm of sand screed. Has anyone cut this down for a path, with good or bad results, or is there something magic about this formula?

[Tim Watts]

I think I'd go for 2" MOT and 1" sand.

Sand itself is more than enough to support a pedestrian path but it is prone to insects tunnelling through it. I suspect they give up when faced with a layer of compacted limestone which then stops them getting to the sand. Only a theory mind - but the bit about tunnelling through sand is right as you only have to lift a paving slab laid on sand to see who's living underneath.

[GMM]

In my experience, you don't even have to lift a paving block to see that, as there are always little piles of sand at block joints, where the ants go in and out. I kinda think they'll get in whatever happens, in the absence of something toxic in the sand.....

Now there's a idea....;-)

[Nightjar]

My block paving was laid, by experts, a la paving expert. 20 years later, tree roots have disturbed enough of it for it to need relaying.

[Jacko]

We did that for many year with white ants but that got stomped on because it was so persistent.