I've been getting conflicting info about my kitchen situation and could use some advice. The home I just purchased has original encaustic tile, which as most know is concrete. It is sitting on a mortar bed, which in all is about 1" thick with the tile, if not more. We had intended to try and keep this tile, since it's nearly 100 years old, however, during demolition of the kitchen it suffered some more damage, and then I also found out it was going to cost me over $2000 to make up replacement tiles for an area in the kitchen which didn't have tile on it already (a porch had been enclosed many years ago and the prior owner just left that part "bare" and put vinyl tile over - never even bother to make the two floors even). FYI - I've already priced new encaustic type tiles, way too much money. I had hoped to keep a similar look but it would cost me around $5000 for the floor *gulps* Anyway, now we need to find an alternative to cover up the whole floor. I can't afford to take out the concrete. That, will cost me a small fortune between taking it out and creating an entire new subfloor. I do know that the easiest solution is to just put down ceramic tile over the whole thing (my contractor is going to even out the two floor areas). However, I'm wondering about floating another type of floor system over this instead. The rest of the first floor is original pine flooring. I found a reclaimed pine floor product, which could be floated - "Bordeaux" http://www.ecobydesign.com/shop/wood/bordeaux.html Does not match the planks of the rest of the house, however, since the kitchen is not seen from the living room or dining room, only the hallway but there is a small vestibule area between the hall and kitchen), I'm thinking this could be a interesting choice. I'd certainly prefer a wood floor over ceramic, would be so much more comfortable and more appropriate to the house (Craftman, 1915). Any thoughts on this, or any other type of wood or other floor system which might be possible? Thanks!

Thank you all so much for your input. In all my research, and talking with some general contractors in Chicago, they told me absolute no-no and that it is incredibly unprofessional - they have never seen it done especially in mid and high rise cement construction buildings in downtown Chicago that have concrete floors. They explained that the red oak 2 1/4" solid wood floor is not secured to the concrete and that there is expansion/contraction/movement making it an unsuitable subfloor/ surface to directly lay tile down on top of because tile requires a stable surface. I can literally hear squeaking sounds like the floor is moving, because I hear squeaks when I walk on my own red oak original developer installed floor. My neighbor doesn't understand any of this or what the potential issues/implications are for us both and asked me to try and explain it to him. How would you explain this situation to them? Won't their tiles/grout crack and break and they will lose their floor? Should we both be worried about any structural/weight/load issues? @glennsfc, can you please help me understand using Schluter Ditra over securely fastened hardwood and why you suspect this was not done? Thanks and so appreciative!

I hear ya Joe, and i struggle with that all the time. Thing is youre name is on it last. Sure the homeowner says youre off the hook, you educate them and they realize its a Temp fix and its not meeting any standards but here is where you lose me. say months down the road its still failing, maybe worse so now as it harbors all the mess and muck below the patch. And you dont get the call to replace it for whatever reason (im sure you will but hear me out). Now lets say the homeowner is feilding quotes to get a proper shower built and shares with the other potential hire that they attempted a patch repair... well they didnt attempt it themselves JC did the work for them but they fail to tell the other potential hires the handshake deal you and them had and they fail to mention they knew it wasnt the right way to go. Now youre well deserved hard earned respect and name are dragged around by who knows what competitors in youre market ......and all we have Joe is our name, thus I dont touch it for a few quick bucks and many times i go hungry as i pass on work.....if they cant rebuild and do it right......word travels and the finer points of the deal you and said homewoner had may not travel with it........My point in long form! - best

@Angela - The OP's first paragraph stated marble over a concrete slab. " I really think you should remove the old tile." Why? If it's set properly It should last the lifetime of the structure. Bonding to it is not a issue. You'd need to remove the underlayment/top layer of subfloor to even the floor anyway after you rip out tile. If this was wood framed how could you determine that without knowing what underlayment was used and condition after rip out? Plywood, mud bed, CBU's, uncoupler, antifracture membrane etc. The OP is trying to gain height. Most likely you can leave the underlayment in and apply a self leveling underlayment on the top to achieve desired height.