I seek advice on how to design a home to maximize construction efficiency and minimize construction cost.  After much reading I have determined the following methods are favored:

1. Dimensions that match that of standard construction materials
2. Straight walls
3. Few corners
4. Simple roof (gable being the simplest) at minimum pitch
5. Clustering plumbing on common wall(s), preferably non-load-bearing ones
6. Cheaper to build 'up' rather than 'out' (more square footage under a smaller roof)
7. Fewer windows/doors. Use standard sizes wherever possible.

Are there any other design ideas that make construction simpler and thus cheaper?  I'd rather spend money on quality materials than on fanciful design.  I am new to this, so please correct me if I am wrong and forgive me if I have missed something obvious.

Many thanks!

Hi there
I too am building and am looking for ways to save money and not lower quality. Here are some ideas I have so far:
1) definitely put in a basement and finish it as opposed to making the footprint bigger if possible.
2) Behr paint at Home Depot just came out with a paint and primer in one. This should save you one round of labor in the painting. Behr paint is also high quality and not expensive, it is usually rated very high for value by consumer reports.
3) I am using a sheetrock return for my windows instead of trimming them out. This should save a lot of money and the look is acceptable to me.
4) Finish attic space over the garage, instead of increasing the footprint of the house.
5) Lowes has great tile really cheap, I would also look at discontinued tile from local stores. There is no reason to pay more than $1-$2 a foot for good quality ceramic or porcelain tile, if you are not trying to make your home the latest fashion statement. This tile is much cheaper than natural tile and easier to maintain.
6) I would not limit windows as that can make the house dreary, but you can use a good quality vinyl window and that would be less than wood.
7) Eliminate doors and walls that are not needed
8) a range is cheaper than a wall oven and separate cooktop
9) Use seed instead of sod when you are done.
10) Use mdf trim instead of wood if you are painting it (but I heard it dents easier and is not good for wet areas, so consider that).
11) I would not worry so much about clustering bathrooms because it may really impact your design and save you very little. Some plumbers price by the fixture and don't even take into account where they are so just make sure you are not really ruining your floor plan to accomplish this for minimal savings.
12) Find a plumber that is used to working with PEX. You will definitely get a better price and the quality is good. Many plumbers are still using copper because they are just used to it, but PEX can give you a good savings.
13) Although more expensive up front, geothermal heating and cooling is definitely a winner in the long run, and the federal gov is giving a 30% rebate on the cost with no limit. This makes it a no brainer, even if it means borrowing more upfront to pay for it.
Your utility bill will be dramatically reduced.

Hope some of this is helpful, even though some of it is not design issues.

#10 mdf trim
I wouldn't use mdf trim/boards/sheets or products containing mdf such as cabinets or furniture in a tight house because of air quality issues.

If the trim is being painted, wouldn't that seal the material & prevent off-gassing?  Maybe not, but it seems to me like it would..

Mountainstone..

I would agree with your points and others - I think you're off to a good start.

I'll add a couple more - sometimes to be cheaper, you need to spend more money.  Don't skimp on the envelope, insulation, etc.  For our house that we're starting, this was a big thing.  We came up with our budget but then realized we were spending far more on mechanicals & insulation than is "normal".  This required us to make a few compromises.  What we decided to do is take a hard look at what we could relatively easily upgrade/change later, and what is a "one-shot deal".  Things like flooring, counter tops, fixtures, etc....those things can be upgraded down the road pretty easily.

The biggest thing is to do your homework, and this site is a great resource.   Make sure you're looking at the whole project and how systems work together.  If you spend more to get a very well insulated tight house, it's going to cost more - BUT - you may be able to get away with a smaller HVAC system because of it.  Stuff like that can "even out". 

We have a lot where the back side of the house is south-facing, so we're designing for passive solar.  It's not something that will affect the sizing of your HVAC system (because you still need enough capacity to heat when there is no sun, at night, etc.), but in the real world I'm expecting to save significant money because of it. 

12.  I agree about pex.  From what I've seen in our area, that is pretty standard - if you want copper, it's an upcharge.  That may not be the case everywhere, though.

13.  I would absolutely disagree with this statement.  Geothermal can be a great longterm investment in the right situation, but to blindly recommend it is short-sighted.  You need to have heat load calcs done & decide based on the numbers.  Utilities will almost certainly be less with geothermal, but how much less is the question.  If you're paying $7000-$10,000 more for the system (based on my experience), you need to have significant savings to make it worthwhile.

I'm considering it a good decision for us if the payback is <10 years.  In that case, we would need to save $60-$85/month to hit our target.  The tighter & more efficient your house, the harder it will be to get there, since your "baseline" utility bills will be much lower to start.

I know that geothermal almost always makes sense in the long run and usually pay back is less than 10 years. With the 30% tax credit, it seemed to me from what I have read that it becomes much more attractive and will usually pay for itself and give you savings. Yes, of course, you should compare for your own situation, but generally, from what I have read and I am no expert, with the federal tax credit, it will make sense in most situations if you can swing it. If your house is tighter, you should be able to downsize your geothermal system (loops and unit) and so the initial cost should be lower as well to install, so even though you might be saving less each month, because you are not needing so much to heat and cool, you initial investment should also be proportionately less. Just my thoughts, again, I am no expert.

I will respectfully disagree with you.  When we first started our building plans, geothermal was on my list of "we MUST do these things".  As I learned more over the last 2+ years, I had to re-evaulate.  I still haven't ruled it out, but it's not a guarantee at this point.

Something to remember - there are fixed costs & variable costs with a geo install.  Things like well-drilling or trench digging are basically fixed costs.  Regardless of the size of your system, these costs will be there, and not vary a tremendous amount.  The actual heat pump unit, which may be smaller, is a fairly small percentage of the total cost.

Again...let's say that because our house is very well insulated, our "baseline" heating bill is $60/month (heating portion of the utility bill).  Even if you can save 50% on your bill, you're saving $30/month.  If the geo install was $7000 more, it's a roughly 19 year payback.

The one thing I'm trying to consider for our situation is the likelihood of gas prices going up.  As those prices go up, the payback gets shorter - I'll give you that one.

Last point..  I'm not trying to argue against geothermal.  It can be a great system and make a lot of sense.  It has to be the right scenario, though.  I would say the same of just about any product/system/construction method - don't recommend until you know the whole story - what works for one may not work for another.

You are right, in the end you need to evaluate your own particulars. Our prices in NJ are so high for utilities that I guess I am biased in favor of anything to reduce them.

I'll direct these comments toward sarayale, and Mountain Stone. Jerkylips, who is also planning to build a new home, is making a great case, in this thread, for considering SIPs, eg his comments re: tight, energy efficiency construction. However, he has eliminated this option primarily, it seems, because the contractor that he has chosen can't make it pencil for him. There was a very "lively", and I think informative, thread, on the General Residential Forum that is titled
"Alternative to SIPs". if you haven't already read through that thread, you might find it interesting to do so.

In the meantime both of your "lists", for building less expensively, include the concept of simple, more cost effective designs. This concept blends well with the utilization of SIPs for your building envelopes. I'm happy to address questions, and discuss, my perspectives in connection with the use of SIPs, either on this public forum, or via the PM (private e-mail) option that is provided on this website.

I am already using icfs although I have heard good things about sips.

sarayvale, are you going to use ICFs just for your basement? or for above grade walls also? Either way, SIps my be a viable option, either for above grade walls and roof with ICF basement, or roof on ICF walls.

If you haven't already chosen your ICF system, you might want to look at TF (the original "Vertical" ICF system). There are some excellent current posts , regarding the use of this system, on the GBT ICF Forum, by Clark, a very thorough "DIY'er"

C'mon man, we went over this.....

There are basically 2 SIP suppliers locally.  One does the manufacturing & installation, the other does only the manufacturing.  The first place was astronomical - close to $150,000 for basement walls & SIP walls & roof -  for a 2000 sq ft house.

The second place bid out the materials.  The materials alone were more expensive than my GC's bid for the framing job, including labor (Sipper - that's what I was referencing in the other post when I said my builder shouldn't be expected to work for free).

We are using Nudura icf for all exterior walls. At this point, we have been in the planning stages for years and I cannot handle any more new stuff to investigate. Between the icfs, geothermal heating, solar panels, being my own contractor having no previous experience, designing the 12,000 square foot monster practically myself, even though I do have an architect, and trying to get the money to build upfront because construction loans seem like a huge headache, AND trying to stay on budget, I am already overloaded and cannot consider SIPs. There is just a limit to what I can handle with 5 kids to boot. I eliminated sips for the roof early on because I have heard it is really expensive and there is a just a limit to what we can afford, although I did not get estimates.

Sara
Your kidding right?  Your designing and GCing a 12,000 ft^2 house  with geothermal,  and solar with no prior experience and you are worried about inexpensive construction techniques? I have to think the geothermal system alone will run you 100K.   How about eliminating say 10,000 square feet and see how afordable Sips become.   

Eric

12,000 ft house? I thought this was a thread on inexpensive home construction. LOL

Mountainstone, You'll notice a lot of the homes built in the early 1900s were nearly square two stories. A square footprint gives you the maximum square foot with the minimum exterior surface area. (Well ok a round house would but I like to work with right angles). Less wall area = less cost. This can also help with minimizing utility bills.

Building up does get you twice the space with the same footprint foundation and roof but you lose some space for stairways. Generally you end up ahead with the stairs and the stairs can be a nice feature. But keep in mind that some people grow tired of going up and down stairs.

Don't scrimp on insulation. Good insulation will payback better and longer than even the most high tech heating systems.

Build walls on 24" centers with single top plates and the 2nd floor joists and roof trusses stacked directly above the studs.

Plan the window locations to match up with stud spacing to minimize stud usage.

A house actually doesn't need much trim. Forego baseboard trim. If you don't like the look it's easy to add it back later.

Minimize kitchen cabinetry. A good built in closet style pantry with a simple interior door will get you a lot more kitchen storage space at a fraction of the cost of cabinets.

It's a good idea but not as easy as it sounds to design to standard construction material measurements.

Ok guys, yes the house is big, but 4,000 square feet is the basement. And, of course I have to worry about containing costs, all the more so with a house this large. The geothermal and solar eventually pay for themselves. In NJ we have excellent state incentives (plus federal rebate) for solar, so it really is worthwhile from a $ viewpoint. Geothermal is also very worthwhile right now due to the federal rebate.

And you may be laughing, but I am eliminating the GC also to save money. Cut down on square footage?? We already did, the original plan was over 9,000 square feet! We also eliminated the elevator and radian heat! I am hoping some of our kids will get lost in the house and we can get a rest from them.

sarayale, if I'd known that you were building a 12,000 sf house, my comments might have been a "bit different". You followed MountainStone's post with what appeared to be an objective that was similar to his, which doesn't appear to be the case. However I still contend, that any size home, with any level of amenities, should be super energy efficient. While ICF walls are certainly an excellent choice in this regard, if you don't complete your building envelope with a well insulted, penetration free, roof system, you'll lose much of the advantage gained with your ICFs. If its a relatively simple design with vaulted ceilings and/or conditioned attic space, it will likely be difficult to accomplish the same level of energy efficiency with "sticks and foam" as you will with SIPs, for less $$. Having said that, there are other factors that come into play, in addition to design considerations, the primary one is finding a contractor who is familiar with the system, or one who is interested in learning, at a price that makes sense for all concerned. (It ain't "rocket science" guys!)

jerkylips, In my opinion this thread really isn't about you, and my most recent comments weren't directed at you. However, I did mention you by name, and I understand your desire to continue to justify your decisions. However, I'm suggesting that we not hijack StoneMountain's thread by continuing our little "discussion" here. Maybe you would like to start yet another thread titled something like " $150K SIP shell for a 2,000 sq ft home" and then explain how this number was arrived at, along with more details regarding your other cost related comment.

(Imagine a smiley face here)

No need for another thread & I'm not trying to hijack. I don't really feel the need to "justify" anything - you just had the facts wrong based on our previous "discussions".

MountainStone
One of the suggestions is to "Finish attic space over the garage, instead of increasing the footprint of the house." I want to inject a word of caution; as we tighten up our houses the chances of infiltration of carbon monoxide from the garage increases, so the need for vigilance and care in sealing the garage space also increases. I'd suggest as a minimium - on the bottom of floor joists over a garage - a layer of XPS foam foamed at the seams and taped with drywall under that. Do not run ductwork inside the garage. Install a low speed exhaust fan in the garage which runs continuously. Better yet, build a detached garage.