Think about the cost of living in either plan, and I am not talking about dollars. There is a big difference between a cottage and a house, and these plans are cottages. Are the compromises you will have to adjust to living in this reduced square footage acceptable to you?

Hi Mark, Thank you for your reply! You make a valid point and I have thought long and hard on this. I should have noted I rarely even go downstairs of my current house and spend most weekends away from home. My older brother has a vacation home in Asheville, NC that is approx 1500 sq ft that im quite comfortable at and that got me thinking it would be more than enough to downsize to a similar size. Part of my goal is to make the house as simple a design as possible to further cut construction cost and these are both very basic designs.

Both houses/cottages are extremely tight and small. Are you sure you could live in either of them? Could you even fit your furnishings in the room sizes? Is there enough closet space for your clothes, the towels, toilet paper and garbage? Where do the HVAC, water heater and recycle materials go?

As for cost, no one here knows what it costs to build in upstate SC. As for comparisons, are excavated basements common where you plan to build? Depending on soils conditions (rocks and proper waterproofing/drainage/backfill) they can be much more expensive than a simple slab on grade foundation and a second level.

Good luck on your project.

Much of my work is converting family cottages into retirement homes.

The vast majority of people in the world live in much smaller houses than these and prior to a couple of decades ago these would not have been considered small in the U.S. My wife and I lived in a 900 sq ft house for a number of years and two of those with a kid and we were quite happy. Much less space to clean, less energy use, less cost to build, less depreciation cost, very comfortable.

Will one bedroom be enough for your kids to visit? How about with boyfriends or husbands? You can also build a single room guest cottage later on if needed. Will you need an office type space?

As to cost, my guess is that the first will be the least expensive overall but the second might be the least expensive per sq ft.

All that said, I'd start with your lot and then pick the house for the lot. Where to you want windows and sitting areas for views and energy efficiency, etc.

That first plan will live REALLY tight. It's 676 sq feet on the first floor with pretty much everything jammed in there. Plan 2 seems much better as you can stretch out a little on the first floor.

However, it does some things that aren't lovely - like taking that back corner for a closet, the bathroom in the master is cramped and poorly laid out. Where is the garage? outbuilding? how will you enter the house with your groceries? in the rain? etc.

The smaller the square footage, the more maniacal you have to be about design and making the best use of space. I understand the desire to downsize. My main floor is 1800 sq feet and I almost never got upstairs or downstairs. (of course it's only 1 bedroom on this floor) but I think you can do better than either of these - but the second one at least has potential.

Hi,

Your question was about construction cost difference between two alternative plans. Given that construction costs vary significantly across the country, you would be best served directing your question to builders in your area.

Best wishes for a great project.

Hi matt, cost wise I agree with the PROs that you really need to discuss this with a builder, even without an intensive look at your plans you should be able to find out the cost per sq foot in your area and the economics of a basement vs crawlspace. The roof of the first house would certainly be cheaper than the other. Then there is HVAC, etc. As you had your current house built you know the list goes on and on.

Is it just you or another person as well? Are there pets? Will the girls visit much? Other family or friends? What if your brother's situation changed and you couldn't go there every weekend?

If I lived alone with only a dog or 2, I could probably handle the small one, but not happily, and I currently live in a 1400 sq ft home (HEY, does that make mine a cottage?) with loft (300 uncountable sq ft). and half basement/half garage.

Just a few other thoughts from my current ongoing experience.

We originally planned on going "tiny" to a 26' x 26' house but the more we thought about it, there was no real "get away from each other" space. So now we are building a 2000 sq ft ranch with 3 BRs which originally had a big open Great Room (are they still called that?) but now has been divided into half great room and separate TV room, plenty of space to escape each other should we need to without resorting to one of us having to hide in a bedroom (as well as hide from guests I suppose).

It's on a crawlspace, (which was cheaper than a basement foundation) but while that was a bonus for us the real reason is we're getting older and didn't want to walk up and down so many stairs. We probably went through a hundred various designs, too.

Out of curiosity, why did you choose these 2 particular plans? What do you like about them? (Other than less square footage than your current home.) One has a nice master bath the other shares a small one, (big cost savings right there). One shows an unfinished basement, which would obviously be cheaper than a finished basement.

Many people prefer to have a larger home that they can enjoy all the time, instead of taking vacations/eating out etc. Don't try to force your own values on others. I'm quite happy in my 2800 sq ft house with just me and a small dog.

Anglophilia, you'll note that I said "I'm not at all against large homes if people can afford them ...". In fact, my wife and I are building a house that's over 6500 sq ft (which does seem quite ridiculous to me but that's another story).

I'm not forcing values on anyone, only pointing out that this narrow-minded Amero-centric belief that people MUST have large houses or that those plans above that are larger than the vast majority of homes in Europe today or in the U.S. prior to 1990 are too small is ignorant and misplaced.

Mebbe I missed something...was there any ignorant or misplaced commentary in this thread? The ultimate irony in this thread may be someone building a 6.500 SF new home reminding everyone of the virtues of small homes, apartments and condos...

"Both houses/cottages are extremely tight and small."

Really? Extremely? Or only relative to the McMansion craze that's engulfed the U.S. the past couple of decades?

If you go anywhere outside of the U.S. and say that about those plans people would think you're nutty. Or even if you'd said that in the U.S anytime but just very recently.

I somewhat agree about the irony. I'd be quite happy with a 800-1500 sq ft house. However, my wife has 6 brothers and sisters and they and their children are proving as proficient with producing children as her parents. I think we are building a B&B as much as a home for ourselves. Fortunately I quite like her family and having them around.

It's not about the size of the two houses the OP has posted, as much as it is about the lack of any sort of design experience or smarts. The two house plans attempt to get 10 pounds in a 5 pound bag...and not very well at that.

It's possible to design a wonderful and joyful small house. These two plans are not that.

The OP can do much better.

Here's one source: http://www.allisonramseyarchitect.com/plan-details.cfm?planNumber=07403B

The OP is downsizing from a 3000 sq foot home. (S)He is used to living a certain way. OP lives in SC not Paris. OP expects to have American sized stuff. OP wants to downsize, not "go tiny" (another, IMO, ridiculous craze that is the polar opposite of conspicuous McMansion consumption)

Feedback about the plan sizes and flow take above into account.

There's been no discussion on the OPs financial situation - only some cursory inquiries about cost.

Don't need to be Judgey McJudgerson. Especially when you are building a 6500 sq foot glass house.

Of the two the OP posted, I prefer the second one, but the Ramsey plan that Virgil posted is really a nice little design. Look to it for more inspiration. I think you can stay within your size requirements and live better.

It sounds like it's just you living in the home most of the time, right? The first house that my husband and I ever bought was 800 square feet. We lived in it with two dogs and never felt like it was cramped (aside from the lack of closet space which was par for the course in a house built in 1910). I'm a big fan of smaller homes if they are well-designed and not so tiny that it feels silly.

One of my favorite small home architects is Ross Chapin. Check out his website. He builds pocket neighborhoods of smaller homes, but also has a ton of plans on his website. I think that you can do better than what you're currently looking at, but think that you're on the right path. Be careful that in your quest to build as cheaply as possible that you don't end up with a house that isn't very livable, especially as you age.

I would also look at plans from The Bungalow Company. They have some smaller plans that work really well.

If it was my house, I'd look at a 1 1/2 or two story concept, with all the adult living on the first floor and use the second floor for guests and visiting family.

Thank you all for your input! A lot of good information provided. I apologize it took me awhile to reply..I went on vacation for 2 weeks right after posting this and honestly forgot I had even posted here until stumbling across it in my bookmarks tonight and reading through all the replies. I have without a doubt chosen the 2nd plan but do look to do some modification to it to better suit our needs.

I love the second plan. If it were me, I'd put the door to laundry room off of the closet instead of in the main area. Reduces steps to and from master. Please keep us posted. I'd love to see it all come together for you.

The first plan would be too small for me but I could very easily live in the second one, though I'd never need that big closet. I would make the laundry room bigger so it could hold large pantry items instead.

A 10' living room is extremely tight.