Your post is a little confusing. Is your patio concrete or aggregate(gravel)? If gravel it would allow the water to drain to the soil and be no problem, if concrete it will surely stain it. The only solution I see is to place a plastic or rubber mat under it, and slightly raise the container so it will drain. The water on the mat will evaporate. Calistoga Al

Back to the original question about changing from ply to cement board... Was the "contractor" originally planning on tiling directly over plywood? If so, thats not typically an approved method. He would need either some sort of backerboard like durock or something like Ditra. I'm pretty sure this guy is taking you to the cleaners. As for the Nuheat mat, if you're talking about just installation, I would think that is quite pricey. All he would have to do is put down a thin layer of thinset and put the mat down in it. Possibly put a layer of SLC over top of it if he's not using Ditra. He would also have to connect the electrical which depending on the state of your house could be pricey since they should be on their own circuit. I'd keep an eye on this guy given the information you've provided. Dan

We are planning to eventually build out a deck around the other side of the house, but that won't happen for a while (there is a fire escape in the way. It's an old house, and that's a whole other story...). The lot is only ~50-55' wide at that point (pretty densely packed mostly single-family houses), so I think having too large (especially too wide) of a deck would be weird. The half patio/half deck gives a compromise of more useable space without having the deck as the whole outdoor space and running the width of the yard. Rereading your comment, though, are you suggesting to replace the stoop entirely and build the patio up to the stoop stairs? The two-stage plan would give us house-level decking and ground-level patio.

"I think it is unkind and unhelpful to poke fun at someone ..." Yes, while it wouldn't necessarily be, it could be unkind to poke fun at someone. But that wasn't what I was doing. There is a difference between adding levity to the discussion, and saying something actually mean and hurtful. As Wendy points out, sometimes the written word does not come across as the humor it was intended to be. But I was pretty sure it would here because the circumstance -- baking food to counteract carpet wear -- was so obviously ludicrous that no rational person would believe there to be any link whatsoever between the two. Apparently, I was wrong and at least one person can conceive this link. So I have to be duly charged with forgetting to add the smiley face or LOL, and make it blatantly obvious to everyone, that it was said in jest ... not poking fun at someone because of their circumstances. I was playfully making light of their reasoning about how to deal with those circumstances, in an attempt to get them to see that there is a disconnect between their problem and their projected solution. The flip side to this discussion is that there ARE people who literally have none, or barely any sense of humor. They can't hear a joke without thinking it is serious and that there is ill intent behind it. Addie, you might consider not looking so hard on the dark side of whatever is said. If something --- especially something that is wildly ludicrous -- is said, you might just ask yourself if it could possibly be intended as a joke. If it's possible, then you might just let it go, giving someone the benefit of the doubt. If you're 100% certain it's not a joke, then it might be worth commenting about. Other than that, it seems you're just as likely to wrong as right.