ddarroch Thanks for all the great suggestions. Pity indeed about the directions of the sun and view. Can't change the profile of the block only can try to work out the best based on what it is. Very valid points about the heating VS. clerestory windows. We are in the temperate climate region which keeping warm it’s an issue in winter. We have thought about to have low-e glass in the south facing side but looks like we probably need to have double glazing in places like the north facing clerestory windows like you suggest. No ideas how much more double glazing will cost but certainly we need to include a fair amount into our budget. Agree with having a door separating the living from the back of the house like you said. Much better for heating and sound insulation. Again thanks a lot.

Louise, sorry but u are messing with a good design - have a read of the design notes at yourhome.gov.au. The design is a 7star design including reverse brick veneer (fancy term for bricks on the inside..thermal storage), the roof line is changed - have a look at the high up windows which provide light and warmth, the bedrooms are now at the back of the building (cold and darker). the whole design is now changed, airflow is affected as is the wonderful views that the building would have from each room (except the media room - and who cares with that anyway?) Also I am proposing a double garage/carport with a nice breezeway to connect the house. Also the study is now gone! As I suggested above, the trees on the east may have to make way for the home, but in the long run they can be restablished, and the garden modified to suit the contours of the land, and the look of the new building.

Hi Jessica, This is not a question that can be answered without the very the specifics of your site and the design of the home you are trying to place on it. Even for a ball park figure. 1m does not sound like a very severe slop to be adding allot of additional site costs. Pole frame home on a very steep site can avoid allot of additional cost, if you do not want to make it a flat site and leave the natural slope in place. On the other hand, placing slab-on-ground on a moderate to low sloping site at the wrong levels can add a ton of cost. This all assumes that the ground you are looking at on site is the Natural Ground level and doesn't have a load of fill. Once there is allot fill you will need to have the piers of the house drop down through the fill and into the natural ground. This can get expensive if you need allot of them at many meters each. There are also many other factors that could drive the cost of the land down, like easements through the site. How much of the site is actually available to build on? There could also be zoning issues, can you actually build a house on the site? In NSW all this information is contained in a Section 10.7 Planning Certificate that the local council can provide you and is usually attached to the contract of sale. I assume that there would be similar information available in other states also. Call your local council to learn more about the site and what can or can not be built. Hope this helps you find more information to understand how much you should be paying for the site. Additional site cost are only 1 possible factor and these can change this type of construction best suited to the site.

Talking about a complex roof design, yes that will increase costs. It will also be a nightmare for solar PV panels (which should be an important consideration for all homes nowadays). Not only will the complex roof increase the complexity & cost of solar installation. The results will look pretty terrible too - if that's an issue - as rectangular panels don't fit well on triangles & trapezoids. One reason for the complex roof - other than Australia's love of hip & valley roofs - is the complex floorplan. A complex shapes footprint will lead to a complex roof. Talking about trying to keep costs down, as you've started, a complex footprint not only results in a complex, costly roof. Complex footprints will increase building costs in other ways. They'll result in a larger external surface area. As external walls are more costly than internal walls, larger external surface areas increase cost. Each corner will increase cost. There's a lot of corners in this building. There's unusual angles, which will also greatly increase costs. On a sloping block a large footprint will lead to much more cutting & filling, much more retaining. I'm not expert, but I'd weight up the costs of a large single storey home on a sloping block, verses a much simpler shaped rectangular home, with a much smaller footprint, double storey at the rear. It may turn out that in this case a split level home - with increased comfort & far more northern light to living areas, & views to the south in many rooms - may be worth an additional investment. In any case, is be looking at reducing the size of the build, of costs are an issue. It will be much better for the environment in any case. Looking to utilise multi-purpose rooms, such as a home theatre that doubles as a guest room. Limiting hallway space, dead space in some people's books, removing the scullery (I personally hate these things). I think good design is far more important than having a home that is larger than needed.