I would see if the floors can be refinished. I do like them. I also would stick with white countertops, however, not those tile ones, unless you like cleaning grout. A kitchen of your vintage, would also have been done with formica, so maybe a white formica.

This kitchen is not "untouched".

The dishwasher is almost certainly an addition as is the tile countertop and most probably the flooring. The original countertop was probably Formica and the flooring true linoleum in some sort of bold and colorful pattern typical of the 1950s.

If the layout suits you, by all means renovate. For many, many ideas on redoing a mid-century kitchen, see Pam Kueber'sRetro-Renovation. In fact, I'm pretty sure there is a renovated kitchen with just those green cabinets somewhere on the site

There are a number of kitchen designers working in the mid-century genre. I seem to remember there is a list somewhere on Retro Renovation. If not, I'll bet Pam can point you in the right direction.

Work around the original green cabinets unless you just hate the color.

This is a typical retro color and people are paying big bucks today to have cabinets made in that color. You get them for free, so that's a nice jump-start for your project.

You own a vintage house, which means you are the current custodian, but there will be many that come after you. As custodian you have responsibilities to future owners which can be summed up as "Don't screw it up".

There are two cardinal rules:

1. Do the least to your old house that solves the problem, and
2. Don't do anything that cannot be undone.

Good luck with the project.

Thanks - unfortunately a third of the house burned in the Getty fire and with it a bathroom and bedroom with built ins I could never replace. For the rest trying to be minimalist. It was my father in law’s house —I think I heard the floor was concrete for a decade and the tiles probably went in 1960s... the floor is damaged and likely needs replacement. I’ll check out retro renovation. The dishwasher has been broken for 20 years.

Pamela, I’m so sorry about the fire damage. If there is concrete under those tiles, it can be polished. Depending on the aggregate used, you may see some of it subsequent to the polishing. It can evoke the look of terrazzo.

A Formica counter top could look wonderful here, but think a bit about whether you are restoring something to its historical glory, or whether you are interested in fusing the MCM aesthetic with modern functionality. There is grace in both approaches. Are you looking to sell the property or will you be living there? Also, do you know who the architect of the home might have been?

Good luck with your project.

This house has been in our family for 65 years and was designed and literally built by my father in law starting 1951. He was a skilled engineer. Currently we are considering living there... I am interested in fusing the MCM aesthetic with modern functionality. I think that would be best for us --I just don't want someone to go in and mindlessly destroy the many cool and lovely touches that are vintage but can still serve us well. Truth is, the walls and floors are in terrible shape, but we can fix those. The entire house is on a concrete slab. Are you saying the concrete can be polished --or that the tiles themselves can be polished? I was thinking about porcelain tiles in the terrazzo style in this kitchen. Just need to figure out if it is better to go dark or light with that floor....

I'm going to weigh in here. The floor appears to be tiles meant to LOOK LIKE terrazzo. Are they GLUE DOWN vinyl tiles? Or are they porcelain/ceramic/stone tiles?

If these are GLUE DOWN floor tiles, I would be VERY suspicious of the MATERIAL they are made of. If Father In law was into 'cheap and cheerful' then those tiles might just be asbestos filled (if they are vinyl). And if they are vinyl the adhesive below them (black mastic aka. cut-back adhesive) could also be full of asbestos.

While these original MCM homes are darling to look at they are HELL to renovate. They are FULL of asbestos and lead. Lead based paints were banned in 1978. Asbestos was 'grandfathered' out of existence by the mid/late 1980s.

That means your home's ENTIRE life has been spent INSIDE the "dangerous chemicals" era.

Before removing/ripping out/demolishing ANY SURFACE in this house (that includes floors, walls, ceilings, drywall, attic insulation, pipes, etc) PLEASE bring in a professional Abatement company to offer an assessment (paid for please) as to which surfaces LIKELY contain a "dangerous chemical" and which one's probably don't.

That way you can spend your $75/tested surface wisely. Or you could be testing over 150 different items in your home for just the asbestos. Lead testing would be another dozen or so. That adds up QUICKLY.

You can absolutely use terrazzo tiles and they will look beautiful. I was proposing that you just polish the concrete beneath the tiles to get a polished, beautiful look. One thing to keep in mind is that you want the floors to remain at the same height throughout the space if possible. The linoleum tiles in there right now are quite thin, terrazzo tiles are thicker, so if you use terrazzo tiles you will have a floor height change between the kitchen and adjacent rooms. That’s not the end of the world, but it is something to consider. If you are planning to remove the carpet in the adjacent room and replace it with engineered hardwood, you could make up the difference in floor heights that way.

I was thinking of hardwood to replace the carpet in the attached living room. There is a height difference even now --the carpet is higher than the kitchen. I think these current tiles are like kentile tiles --but not kentile, because they do not have asbestos according to the inspector. They are very thin. So I was thinking of just putting terrazzo tiles in porcelain on top of them?

We have had an abatement company all over the house due to the fire --legally we had to do it in order to work with the insurance company. All asbestos and lead in the burnt rooms were removed professionally. The walls had a small amount of asbestos. But those tiles are asbestos-free, which shocked me. I guess my father in law was literally too cheap to get real kentile tiles!! Nonetheless, I would not remove them, just put real porcelain tiles on top of them. The subway tiles on the kitchen counter contain lead. Those we will remove.

Sure, why not! In a nod to the engineer who built and designed your lovely space, I guess I should recommend that you look for tiles and hardwood that are roughly the same thickness.

There are counter materials that evoke the look of terrazzo as well. If you love the material, you will see it more on the counter and backsplash than you would on the floor. Just a thought to consider as using terrazzo for both might be too much of a good thing. Have you any inspiration images?

And yes, there was a load of asbestos in the burnt bathroom --including the black mastic, all removed professionally. The only thing I plan on literally ripping up is the old carpet and kitchen counter. Otherwise, a nightmare!! I think we can tile over safely and those tiles do not contain asbestos. We could rip out all the drywall (due to smoke damage) or just repaint....

Thanks eam44 --That is one gorgeous Terrazzo counter --the one at right. But then what would you do with the floor? I was thinking something understated for the floor, like these --any opinion if one of these would work with the green cabinets and white counters?

If I were to use terrazzo for the counter, I would probably use hardwood for the floors throughout the home. I wouldn’t use terrazzo for both the floor and the counter. If you think you really want it for the floor - that was your original idea - that’s a great idea too. I like the second tile from the left for the floor.

The decision could be influenced by the post and beam ceiling over the entire open space including kitchen and dining area -- see this.... might just be simpler to have wood floor...

Tiling over old tiles (assuming some sort of vinyl....thankfully WITHOUT asbestos!) is tricky. But it can be done (very well trained/expensive tile setter).

The substrate (old floor tiles) need to be 'roughed up' and then primed in some way. The FLATNESS rating of the substrate (old tiles) must be assessed as to the feasibility of this project by said tile setter). And then new backer board is attached (re: appropriate method to be determined by VERY skilled tile setter) and then new tiles can be installed. This will DEFINITELY raise the floor height.

Or you can rip out the tiles can keep going. The concrete would then be cleaned up (as determined by the tile setter) and then new tile can be installed over the concrete (with or without backer board depending on flat/levelness of your concrete. Again the FLATNESS rating of the newly exposed concrete will have to be measured and corrected before any tile can go down.

Terrazzo is a stunning product with a BREATH TAKING price tag. It is SOOOO breath taking that many people walk away from the quote so that they can catch their breath. Once breath has been caught they run....far away from the quote.

Not to say that terrazzo is a bad thing. It is just very pricey. The overall house value *might warrant it...but many do not.

And the fun thing about carpet....it HIDES some of the WORST concrete in the world of residential building. Before you get your heart set on ANY form of flooring, you will want to be aware of the COST to get the concrete up to snuff.

The age of the house is old enough to have moisture issues through the slab. Carpet was used to allow the moisture to evaporate through without causing wetness. An old slab that accepts rigid flooring throughout most of the house (more than 60% - 70% of the house gets the new 'rigid' flooring) will be MORE LIKELY to have wet/damp flooring issues in the future. This poor person JUST discovered this...twice in 2 years. It is worth reading the thread.

https://www.houzz.com/discussions/5902606/wet-slab-again-mould-floors#25503646

Be VERY careful about adding rigid flooring (like wood) over an old slab that used to have carpet.

I shudder to think of all these complexities and what I will run in to. Because of the smoke damage, though, it has to be done. Guess no wonder father in law never touched this. I was not thinking of REAL terrazzo --which is too costly for me, even though the house would warrant it-- it is currently the least expensive house on the street and most are fully renovated and larger-- it is just too expensive for me. I was thinking of porcelain tiles with a terrazzo look. These are about $6-$9 per square foot just for the tile, and I think is my max. I think this is less expensive than hardwood.

SJ McCarthy --That post on the slab is scary!! Our house sits on a flat lot on top of a canyon, and water flows down past the house --there is no way it can pool but still this is a cautionary tale. That said many of the other midcentury homes in this neighborhood have been renovated with wood and tile and they seem okay. I think the current carpet at least goes back to the 1970s. We should have an engineer check it out. I will do that before ANY flooring, thank you so much for this alert.

Well, keep in mind this house is in southern California. I‘d bet your slab is perfectly fine.

My father in law was an obsessive person. Everything he did was meticulous and measured perfectly. He did it all himself.

Thats how engineers roll. My brother-in-law was a chemical engineer as an undergraduate. He knows how everything works, and how to fix anything. I love that about him!

The slabs porosity and the hydrodynamics of your lot aside, the terrazzo-like tile is TECHNICALLY less expensive than hardwood to PURCHASE. The money comes in the demolition/subfloor preparation. AND the labour + materials to install.

A GOOD subfloor (as in nice, clean concrete with NOTHING on it) runs about $2/sf to get ready for tiles. That's all the grinding and the filling, etc.

A concrete slab in BAD condition (or with old vinyl/linoleum tiles left in place) can be $4-$5/sf.

Then the cost of labour to install a tile floor (regardless of what they look like) can be another $6/sf depending on your local labour conditions. In an expensive Canadian city like mine, the labour is $10/sf. In an depressed area it can be $2/sf (which carries SOOOO many 'low-ball-fly-by-night' caveats you really don't WANT to be that low).

At the end of the day a tiled floor can cost $12 - $20/sf (depending on TOTAL job requirements).

Thanks for the reality check SJ McCarthy. And I guess a wood floor same or more?

The tile counter absolutely could be original. Tile in 50s California was pretty common. The accent tiles over the stove are pretty cool!

It's a pretty kitchen to save. The green is one of my favorites. :)

Well....that depends on the SUBFLOOR prep required (are you talking about in the kitchen?) and the TYPE of installation you are willing to pay for.

Again, concrete must be flat/even (prefer level but don't always need it) and free of any contaminants. The preparation is the key. Did I mention the preparation? Right. That's the fist step that people want to go cheap on because no one can see the results. Yet it is the FIRST thing we, flooring professionals, POINT TO if the homeowner is upset about how a floor PERFORMS (ie. feels underfoot or is ruined by moisture coming up through the slab, etc).

*Technically a wood floor can be FLOATED over the old tile in the kitchen BUT it requires flat substrate = work. Work = Time. Time = money.

Carpets HIDE some wonky concrete. That's why they were used. The builders HID their AWFUL concrete underneath flexible products like sheet/glue down vinyl OR carpet.

The only way to get an ACCURATE quote is to rip up the carpet and have a wood flooring professional come out and offer their quote. Even then, they will be offering a PRICE RANGE for the concrete preparation.

A floating wood floor normally requires engineered wood (you can get expensive solid hardwoods that are allowed to be floated...but they are hard to find). Engineered hardwoods tend to be more expensive to purchase. A floating floor is a 'mid-price' range install.

The cheapest install for wood is nail/cleat/staple down but that isn't an option because you are on concrete. A floating hardwood is the next in price (takes a bit more time and requires the use of adhesive on the edges).

The MOST EXPENSIVE wood install is a GLUE DOWN OVER OLD CONCRETE. The adhesives themselves (and this is NOT included in the subfloor preparation) can range between $2-$4/sf. That's because they are used as 100% moisture barrier. These are EXPENSIVE adhesives. They can be $300 for 5 gallons and a gallon offers 30sf of floor coverage (it needs to be laid THICK to create the 100% moisture barrier).

The glue down method requires a VERY knowledgeable wood flooring expert who UNDERSTANDS the adhesive, the trowel sizes, the spread rates, the 'tack up' time, etc etc etc.

The adhesive can still be mucked up (and you can still have issues with moisture intrusion) by the INSTALLER if s/he doesn't get it right! And THAT'S when the REAL problems begin.

A tile floor can be very expensive. A wood floor can be equally expensive. It all depends on the work needed to be done BEFORE the floors are installed. And the value you pay for in a high-quality craftsman is where you find the most money will be spent.

Human sweat has a price. TALENTED sweat can be double that price.

I appreciate all this warnings and will bear it all in mind, believe me.

yes thanks Fiori --I'll try to save those tiles over the stove, but the counter as got to go, I believe.

Not everything original is lovely. I would not grieve for that counter. :)

Some of the solid surface counter materials (Corian, manmade quartz--especially the terrazzo-ish ones) would be fabulous in there.