Renovation budget for a 235 m² coastal home in Seoul

L

lookTheRiver

Homeowner
Established
I have set an initial renovation ceiling of ₩450,000,000 for this 235 m² Seoul home, but the condition behind the visible surfaces remains unclear. The current brief covers kitchens, bathrooms, floors, painting, electrical inspection and limited energy improvements; an extension is not part of the plan.

My main risks are moisture, restricted access to plumbing or wiring, and the order in which trades and permits must be handled. I would rather narrow those unknowns than assign the entire reserve to finishes. Which contractor exclusions should be priced explicitly, and what inspections would help decide whether the contingency belongs near the lower or upper end? Confirming whether wet areas will move seems like the next useful step.
 
At this early stage I would reserve roughly 15–20%, especially until moisture and service access are understood. That is ₩67,500,000–₩90,000,000 within the stated budget, not extra spending to allocate in advance.

Ask who pays for opening walls, drying, temporary protection, disposal, electrical upgrades discovered after testing, and reinstatement after plumbing access. Exclusions often matter more than the headline quotation.
 
Are the kitchen and bathrooms staying in their current positions, and will the house be occupied during the work? Moving wet areas changes the plumbing risk considerably, while occupation adds phasing and protection costs. I would also want the building’s age and any renovation history before deciding whether 20% is cautious or barely adequate.
 
I wouldn’t automatically lock away 20% after a thorough pre-construction investigation. A smaller contingency may be reasonable once selected areas have been opened and the electrical and plumbing routes mapped. Before that work, however, the larger reserve Hana suggests makes sense. The mistake is reducing it because the visible finishes have firm prices while the concealed work remains vaguely described.
 
Sequence the investigation before final ordering: moisture inspection, targeted openings, electrical testing, plumbing access assessment, then final room layouts. Only after those findings would I release kitchen, bathroom and flooring orders.

Also ask whether any apparently non-structural removal could affect load-bearing elements or waterproofing. “No extension” does not necessarily mean there will be no structural work inside.
 
Contractor questions I’d put in writing: Which surfaces are assumed sound and dry? How much substrate repair is included? Who reconnects and tests services? Are waterproofing, access panels, making good, waste removal and protection of retained areas included? What happens if work stops while a variation is priced?

A quotation should also separate allowances from fixed items. Otherwise the ₩450,000,000 total can look more settled than it is.
 
For a coastal home, moisture deserves its own workstream rather than being treated as a painting issue. Ask the surveyor to distinguish an active leak, condensation and moisture entering through the exterior; the remedies and sequencing differ. Flooring and cabinetry should not conceal unresolved dampness. I’d also ask contractors what moisture condition they require before installing those materials.
 
“Electrical checks” is too broad for budgeting. Does that mean visual inspection, testing circuits, replacing unsafe sections, or upgrading capacity for new kitchen equipment and energy measures? The same applies to plumbing access: establish whether pipes can be reached from service spaces or whether finished walls and floors must be opened. Those definitions should be settled before comparing bids.
 
Material lead times and permit timing can undermine even a sensible construction sequence. List the long-lead kitchen, bathroom, glazing or energy-upgrade items, but don’t order them until dimensions and concealed conditions are confirmed. Separately, ask the relevant Seoul authority and the project team which parts of the proposed work require approval; that depends on the actual alterations, not simply the absence of an extension.
 
Building on the earlier replies, I’d split the next step into two packages: paid investigation first, then construction pricing based on those findings. The investigation brief should identify moisture causes, test the electrical installation, trace plumbing access and flag any internal structural implications. After that, ask each bidder to price the same inclusions and exclusions. Only then would I reduce the initial contingency or commit to long-lead materials.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top