Cost-Saving/Value-Adding Design Tips from an Architect

[Josh Johnson]

Extraordinary architecture isn't dependent on expensive materials, complex details, or fancy decoration. Thoughtful design can transform ordinary materials, typical details, and minimal/no decoration into something more desirable and potentially more affordable. For me, architecture is simply creating order. It's observing all the constraints (project type, budget, familiar building materials/techniques, site, codes, etc.) and organizing them into a design strategy. Some of the following ideas were shared with me, others were lessons learned. So here are a few tips (not rules) to add value and save costs in the design:

Simple Forms
Don't try and get fancy. Some of my favorite buildings have four walls and a roof. I've been told from multiple builders that more corners = more cost. Pay attention to the other buildings in the neighborhood. Unless you're trying to make a statement, don't put a 16:12 roof on a two-story house in a post-war neighborhood filled with ranchers (happens all the time in Nashville).

Familiar Materials, Creative Implementation
Get familiar with local/common building materials, but look for opportunities to use them in a creative way. Just because white 3x6 subway tile is all you can afford doesn't mean you must install it in a running bond pattern. A stack bond pattern is appropriate in more contemporary situations. Exterior window trim might otherwise be 1x4 stock material on all sides with mitered corners. Add visual height and presence to that same window simply by using 1x4 on the sides (jambs) and 1x8 at the head and sill.

Modular Layout
Lots of building materials and construction methods are based on a 2-4' module (sheet goods, framing, masonry, finish materials, nailing patterns). Why not design your floor plan in 2' increments? You'll save in time and materials and have a grid that is the basis of creating order. Pay attention to center lines. Say you have three identical windows on 4' centers; the framing at the ceiling should have a void between joists to install a junction box or recessed light fixture directly centered on each window. And those center lines can carry all the way through the building; why not have a window, centered on a light fixture, centered on a door, centered on a hallway, centered on an entry to a room with a centered fireplace? It all aligns and fits within the modular layout, improving the quality of space while reducing waste and effort in construction.

Repeat-ability and Consistency
When possible, minimize varying sizes/types of the same building component. This includes cabinets, windows & doors, hardware, shower/tub inserts, among other things. When it comes to windows & doors I like to align the heads along an imaginary horizontal plane. If the doors are 7'-0" tall, the window might be 5'-0" tall with a 2'-0" sill height. And the kitchen cabinet carcasses ought to be nice and organized (you didn't forget about the 2' grid did you?) with a sink centered on an island, centered on a light fixture, centered on...

Finishes & Fixtures
Lots of potential to affect the budget here... But if the architecture is good (ordered and deliberate), then the finishes become less important. It's probably best to look at comps in the neighborhood. I like surface mounted lighting. It's often cheaper and less annoying to install and maintain than recessed lighting. And the buyer/tenant can upgrade easily if they don't like them. Plumbing fixtures and door/cabinet hardware don't need to be fancy, they just need to work well.

Consolidate Utilities
Consider plumbing and mechanical chases. If bathrooms can back up to each other, you can minimize runs of pipe/PEX, not to mention a single stack vent at the roof instead of two. It's not uncommon for a multi-story commercial building to be designed with a "service core" where all the systems, bathrooms, elevators, and other service functions are consolidated in one area.

Simplify Architectural Drawings
This is more for my fellow design-bid-build architects out there. I worked for an office several years ago whose clients got higher-than-normal bids from contractors simply because the architectural drawings appeared to be too complicated/expensive/high-end. Maybe that means take the fancy logo off the drawings and swap it out for text-only contact info. Maybe that means limit the amount of notes on the drawings. There's no need to have the same note twice. Use references, clearly organize drawings, beef up the index sheet with typical notes/details & coordination. When it comes time to pull a permit, only show the required drawings to the city. If you have a unique fireplace mantle detail, leave it out - the city doesn't need to see that one.

I hope there are some other architects & designers who can add to this list! Also hope this will be useful for those of you who decide against hiring an architect, or those of you who like to keep your architect in check!

-J

[Josh Johnson]

@Bill Gulley - Thanks for the great suggestions! Couldn't agree with you more on all those points.

I would probably recommend against a concrete tub for the purpose of this conversation... It's more of a premium feature that wouldn't align with the clean, simple, cost-effective ideas here. I suspect a concrete tub is similar to concrete counter tops in that if you're going to do it, hire a professional to do it well. I've seen a few houses that have concrete counters that were obviously poured by someone who just watched a YouTube video... Don't do that.

The space allocation method you mentioned is an interesting way to handle sizing each room. And to be honest, I've never looked at it that way. I have some standard dimensions I like to use for each room. In fact, when I'm laying out a floor plan I have a little Altoids Tin full of various-sized rectangles cut from a sheet of cardboard (to an architectural scale) that I can easily rearrange and explore different layouts and spatial relationships. And these shapes are all on a 2' module, so a standard living room might be 14x18 and a standard bedroom might be 12x14. But what you're suggesting would be great to utilize once you have finished a layout. Calculate the space allocation at the end as a way to confirm you don't have any rooms out of proportion with the rest of the house.

@Sean Davidson - I love hearing thoughts from the market and economic perspective. If there's a scale from "market/economy" to "design/aesthetics", obviously my default position leans more toward the design side. But my goal is to demonstrate those two ends of the spectrum aren't mutually exclusive. So I welcome opinions from a strictly business and profit point of view.

I think there are opportunities to add value to any house, street, and neighborhood - even with two narrow, tall houses side by side on a 50' lot. The problem with using similar or identical floor plans is little or no regard for privacy and views from inside the house. I see two things happening regularly in Nashville: 

1 - Houses with a similar or identical floor plan will be mirrored and crammed next to each other on a narrow lot. So someone in house A is in the kitchen, washing a dish, looking out the window above the sink only to see someone in house B doing the exact same thing. One simple solution would be to not mirror the plan at all. Both kitchens face the same direction instead of facing each other. Take a look at the historic Single Houses all over Charleston... The floor plan is basically the same from house to house, but they all face the same direction and work really well together down an entire length of street. 

2 - Another thing I see happening in Nashville is a front-to-back development where the plans are similar or identical. It's like sitting in your car in a traffic jam (this also happens too regularly in Nashville, but that's another story). House A backs up against the front of house B. The front porch on house B is then looking at the back side of house A (with all it's mechanical equipment, trash cans, etc.) In both cases, the problem is solved just by being thoughtful about the floor plan and how it relates to the other house, neighbors, and site.

As for reconciling the difference in scale between new HPRs and existing single-story homes, it's difficult to do... And I can only speak in general terms here - every project is unique. But there are aspects of these houses other than scale that can be contextual. Things like exterior materials, shape/slope of roofs, shape/size of windows and doors, trim details, colors... Or maybe there's a piece of the house that relates in scale to the existing homes. Maybe there's a front porch with a roof that's the same height as the neighbor's roof, and the two-story house is behind the porch, pushed back and less prominent than if it were towering at the zero lot line.

You're exactly right about buyers not being interested in changing anything about their brand new house. And I don't mean for "upgrade-ability" to be a selling point. My suggestion with the surface-mounted light fixtures was more about serviceability and maintenance than switching them out. And while interior design and staging are important, you can't please everybody. Someone will walk through and hate the back splash. But if you pay attention to comps, use similar type and quality materials for the neighborhood, and implement the design in an ordered and deliberate way, most of your target audience will respond positively.