Mi chiedo se ci sia una ragione di stabilità per questo, come ad esempio che il terreno potrebbe dilavarsi più facilmente durante le piogge o qualcosa del genere. Questa pietra del bordo è rialzata di circa 6-9 cm al centro di un passaggio pedonale, non c’è un cancello o una strada e mi chiedevo se si fosse sistemata male quando è stata inserita o se questo abbia qualche motivo normativo come “ogni 15 m dobbiamo posizionarli per stabilità, leggermente rialzati”
Oppure semplicemente non è installato bene😅
Perché il suo unico scopo sembra essere quello di farmi lo sgambetto quando torno a casa dalla passeggiata serale
https://i.redd.it/v5c901m40vvf1.jpeg
di Mesapholis
4 commenti
Path probably didn’t exist before and was put there later and wasn’t done correctly so it sunk a bit?
Could be that it has a (concrete) foundation (maybe just near the post with the metal thingie – maybe it’s even not “concreted in”, but just laying on top of the foundation of the post/metal thingie), while the “walking plates” have not foundation (either just set directly on the soil or maybe with some fine gravel underneath) and over time might have settler deeper into the soil.
Why it’s there: No idea. Are you sure both sides are your / the same parcel? Or maybe it is now one parcel and was multiple parcels before? Or previously one side was not grass, but filled with gravel, square plates, etc.?
Soil gets compacted over time. It could be that everything but the partition stone has receeded and the pavers need lifting and resetting. Or maybe it’s always been a tripping hazard all along: the mismatched pavers used to fill in against the stone don’t make it look like a professional job.
Might be on the property line to demark both sides.
Might be from a former allotment garden