Second opinion on NZ$61,200 renovation budget for 105 m² Auckland townhouse

R

romy.wells

Homeowner
Established
The proposed 55-day programme looks achievable on paper, but I hesitate because the quotes reach similar totals through very different assumptions. The working budget is NZ$61,200 for a 105 m² Auckland townhouse.

The plan includes work to the kitchen and bathrooms, new floor finishes, interior painting, electrical checks and modest energy improvements, without extending the structure. Decorative choices can still be changed later; opening wet areas, choosing plumbing routes or discovering structural work after the contract starts would be much harder to unwind.

Before committing, I want the surveyor or contractors to identify moisture risks, confirm access for services and state what has not been inspected. I also need comparable schedules of allowances, exclusions and material lead times. Would you investigate the uncertain areas first and then set the contingency, or retain a larger reserve until work begins?
 
One extra point: I’m struggling to compare the quotes fairly because the totals look similar until the exclusions are read closely. I’m thinking of putting every scope item, allowance and exclusion into one table. Are provisional sums enough for uncertain work, or should some areas be investigated before agreeing the contract price?
 
For that mix of work, I would personally allow around 15–20% until the wet areas and electrical condition are better understood. A lower contingency may be reasonable once access has been opened and assumptions are confirmed.

Ask each contractor who pays for making good after plumbing or electrical access, rubbish removal, protection of retained surfaces, testing, and any return visits by subcontractors. Those gaps often explain why apparently similar quotes differ.
 
Are the kitchen and bathroom fixtures staying in roughly the same positions? Moving plumbing is a very different risk from replacing items in place. I’d also ask whether any work touches shared townhouse elements and whether the 55 days includes approvals, ordering and drying time, or is only the construction period.
 
I’m not convinced a percentage contingency solves the main problem here. NZ$61,200 covers several trades, but the scope is too broad to judge without quantities and specifications. “Electrical checks” could mean inspection only or remedial work afterward; “moderate energy upgrades” is equally open-ended.

A survey may identify moisture indicators and visible defects, but it cannot guarantee what is behind every lining. Define what happens when hidden damage is found: notice, evidence, pricing and approval before extra work proceeds.
 
Agreed that the wording matters more than the headline percentage. I’d split the programme into strip-out, investigation, decisions, rough-in, inspections or approvals if required, closing walls, waterproofing and finishes. Put a decision point after strip-out rather than ordering every finish around an assumed clean start.

For each exclusion, ask for either a price, an allowance, or a clear statement of the event that triggers additional cost. “By owner” should also have a required delivery date.
 
Material lead times and permit timing need to sit outside optimistic trade durations unless the contractor has explicitly included them. Before starting, confirm which items must be on site for the kitchen, bathrooms and flooring to proceed, and who is responsible for ordering them.

I’d keep the contingency separate from upgrade choices. Otherwise it is easy to spend the buffer on nicer finishes and have nothing left when moisture damage or inaccessible plumbing appears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top