"Marty" writes:

wrote in message
...
Marty wrote:
Decision time. It's either a redwood deck or a concrete patio. Which
one
is less expensive in your part of the USA?

Concrete. But that's less expensive in terms of _my_ time and upkeep.


John
--
Remove the dead poet to e-mail, tho CC'd posts are unwelcome.
Mean People Suck - It takes two deviations to get cool.
Ask me about joining the NRA.

Well, between your opinions and my finding how out how extensive the rotting
is in the substructureof the existing deck, and seeing a friends patio, I'm
going to switch the existing, but massively damaged redwood deck to a
concrete patio with color and possibly texture.

I see everyone recommending concrete and I wonder why.
I just replaced a concrete patio with pavers.

The concrete was very old (maybe 30 years) and the sections
had settled so that they no longer lined up. I saw no way
to repair them other than rent a jackhammer and have the pieces
hauled away.

I would imagine that my pavers will need some adjustments
after 30 years too. However with pavers, someone can just
lift them up, level the sand bed and put them back.
I'd guess those pavers are good for at least a hundred years.