The 84 plans are in their Retro Home Plans Library here. Above: The 1,080 sq. ft. ranch house #95000 — golly — I think there were about a million of these — likely more — built back in the day. This little three-bedroom, two-bath house is about all anyone needs! Note, the company told me there is no date visible on the original plans. I think this design could date back to the 1950s.
There are a lot of vacation home plans in this retro house plan collection — probably because there is a larger market today for small vacation homes than for small full-time homes. I talked to the company about these retro house plans. They say they don’t sell a great many, because new-home-builders today want larger houses.
Another amazing fact: Bobbie, who I talked with on the phone, says the company purchased all the original, vintage Garlinghouse house plans about 10 years ago. In fact, the official company name is The Garlinghouse Company. Garlinghouse was a biggie back in the day. Again — it sounds like Family House Plans likely has many many more small, midcentury modest house plans in their archives — they just don’t have them listed online because Americans want their 2,700 sq. ft. houses — not 1,000 sq. ft. houses. Read more about Family House Plan’s Garlinghouse archive here.
Heck, there are a lot of houses to show. Want to see them all:
John J. Mackey says
Loving this site. I’m cutting up parts of different floor plans and laying them out to produce my ideal home.
An apartment I grew up in in the 60s was two apartments put together, each with a living-room, 2 bedrooms, bath, and kitchen. We broke through the common wall for the kitchens, put in a doorway, recently found out the apt. was 2,000 sq. feet, (1,000 sq. feet. each) that is bigger than homes being built then. My grandmother owned the bldg. (6 apts., 5, 2br,/ 1, 1 bedroom), and parents had to pay full rent on both. An original 2 story Levitt Home on Long Island, looking at real estate sites giving square footage is maxed out at just over a thousand sq. ft. if not expanded. I’m into smaller sized ranches, space for the sake of size doesn’t impress me, with the right layout and best use of space, small can function better, besides, I don’t have six kids to house either.
Scott says
Oh gee thanks Pam, now I can never say I’d never want a new house! I’m not seeing a name, but 21122 checks all the boxes on my dream house checklist, peaked glass, carport… lovely!
https://www.familyhomeplans.com/house-plan-21122#image-slideshow
Pam Kueber says
Nice one indeed!
DJ Sparkles says
Thank you for this site! I am looking for smaller house plans for when we retire (still in the future, but it’s a closer future than it used to be!) It’s so nice to see plans that A. Make Sense and B. Aren’t McMansions. Right now, I’m kinda in love with the one that has an octagon-shaped breakfast room! I also found the plan that looks like a house I drooled over in an ad in my FB mid-century ads group; I’ll have to link it.
I’m a 60’s gal living in a 60’s house in a 60’s neighborhood. I didn’t see our house yet, but I did see others that look familiar. 🙂
ineffablespace says
One thing that may be an issue in *some locations with regard to permits is bathroom size. International Residential Code has fairly small required clearances similar to those in many houses of this era, but local codes have enlarged some of these dimensions.
For example, many older plans have 24″ wide doors into bathrooms, and toilets on 12-15″ centers with 21″ front clearance. The on center minimum is now 15″, with 18″ required in some locales and some require 30″ doors, even though IRC is silent on that.
I bring this up only because with the existing size of some of these houses, altering that part of the plan may require enlarging the entire footprint of the house… even for the matter of a few inches, because of adjoining areas of the plan.
An architect friend of mine had a situation with row houses where the difference of a few inches in each house resulted in one less house that would fit on the block.
Modern construction is often so oversized that there is extra inches to play with, but these Midcentury plans were usually very efficient in using space.
Pam Kueber says
Great points. Yes: Building codes!
Nikki says
Thanks so much Pam for this fun blast from the past! The first home my husband and I bought was #9500…. still miss that little house, we were so happy there!