Renovation budget for an 810 sq ft villa in Los Angeles — thoughts?

H

hearth.patient

Construction professional
The small floor area did not make this budget as predictable as I expected. I have allowed $180,400 for renovating an 810 sq ft Los Angeles villa, but electrical scope, concealed plumbing and material lead times could move the figure quickly.

The work covers the kitchen and bathrooms, new finishes, electrical investigation and some energy improvements, without adding floor space. Before choosing finishes, I want to identify what the contractor has excluded: permits, design, disposal, temporary protection, panel work and repairs discovered after opening walls.

Would you hold one general contingency or separate reserves for hidden conditions and owner-selected upgrades? I would also be interested in which inspections should happen first and which long-lead items could disrupt the sequence.
 
For that scope, I’d provisionally carry 15–20% until the investigative work and contractor exclusions are clearer. Don’t treat it as money available for upgrades. Keep separate allowances for concealed-condition work and for scope choices, otherwise the kitchen will quietly consume the reserve before any walls are opened.
 
What is known about the existing construction and access? In particular: slab or raised floor, plumbing routes, electrical panel condition, signs of previous leaks, and whether the villa will be occupied during renovation. Those answers could matter more than the square footage. I’d also ask whether the $180,400 includes design, permits, temporary protection and disposal.
 
I wouldn’t choose a contingency percentage before doing targeted investigation. Have the likely wet areas and electrical routes examined, document visible moisture damage, and ask the contractor where exploratory openings would change the price. A modest amount spent clarifying access can be more useful than simply adding a large general reserve.
 
Also, sequencing needs to appear in the bid rather than remain an informal discussion. Electrical and plumbing decisions should precede wall repair, flooring and paint. Ask who is responsible if rough work is discovered after finishes have started, and whether remobilization or repeated inspections are excluded.
 
I partly disagree that investigation can settle the contingency. It reduces uncertainty, but moderate energy upgrades can expand once assemblies are exposed, even without an extension. The phrase needs defining: exactly which upgrades, in which rooms, and what happens if existing electrical capacity or moisture conditions make them impractical?
 
The exclusions list is where I’d focus next. Ask each bidder to state assumptions for plumbing access, electrical repairs beyond the initial checks, patching after exploratory work, hazardous-material handling if encountered, permit-related revisions, and owner-supplied materials. If an item is neither included nor priced as an allowance, it is still a budget risk.
 
Moisture deserves its own conversation, especially around bathrooms, kitchen connections, windows and exterior-adjacent flooring. Ask what evidence would trigger broader opening-up, who decides when the area is dry enough to close, and whether repair of damaged backing or subfloor is included. A surface reading alone may not explain where water came from.
 
To compare bids, I’d issue the same written scope and room-by-room finish assumptions to everyone, then create a simple table of inclusions, allowances and exclusions. A lower total with vague access assumptions may not be cheaper. Request a sequence showing investigation, permit-dependent work, rough trades, inspections, closing walls and finishes.
 
Material lead times and permit timing should be visible as assumptions, not optimistic blank spaces. Ask which selections must be finalized before work begins, which items can delay rough-in or cabinet installation, and whether the proposed start depends on permit approval. Also clarify storage and return responsibility if materials arrive before the site is ready.
 
My practical next step would be to freeze the defined scope, commission targeted checks for moisture, plumbing access and electrical condition, then have bidders revise against identical information. After that, set the contingency from the unresolved items rather than from square footage alone. Until those answers arrive, 15–20% remains a reasonable planning range, but not a promise that the final budget will fit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top