How much contingency for a HK$1.674m renovation of a 100 m² Hong Kong apartment?

X

XaviReed

Property investor
Established
I have checked that the initial plan does not include an extension, but the condition of the existing services is still unclear. The apartment is 100 m² in Hong Kong, priced at HK$7,293,000, and the preliminary renovation figure is HK$1,674,000.

That budget covers new kitchen and bathroom work, surface finishes, decoration, an electrical review and some efficiency improvements. Before treating it as workable, I want to separate choices that can be reduced later from disruptive items such as drainage access, water damage, rewiring or structural intervention. What investigations should happen before the layout and material orders are fixed, and how would you divide the reserve between a general contingency and specific unresolved risks?
 
I would initially keep 15–20% outside the HK$1,674,000 rather than burying it in trade allowances. Ask each contractor to price demolition, disposal, access, testing and making good separately, then list every exclusion. A low total is not useful if half the risk sits in exclusions.
 
Are the kitchen and bathrooms staying in their current positions? Moving drainage or water points changes both access risk and sequencing. Also, will the apartment be vacant throughout? Those two facts matter more to contingency than the purchase price.
 
I wouldn’t automatically reserve 20% for a moderate, non-structural refurbishment. That can unnecessarily lock up a large sum. First establish whether walls are being altered, wet areas are moving and old services are being retained. A smaller contingency may be defensible once those uncertainties are investigated.
 
Diego’s caveat is fair, but “no structural extension” does not tell us whether internal walls or bathroom layouts change. I’d have the surveyor identify which proposed openings or removals need further investigation, rather than accepting a contractor’s assumption that every partition is straightforward.
 
Before tendering, create an opening-up list: beneath sinks, around bath or shower edges, at suspicious flooring, near windows and wherever plumbing is boxed in. If access is refused before appointment, make those areas explicit provisional items and state how they will be valued after demolition.
 
Sequencing can be disrupted by the building as much as by construction. Confirm management procedures, permitted working arrangements, lift protection, debris removal and any required submissions before agreeing a start date. Ask who prepares each submission and whether the programme includes approval time.
 
One caution on early ordering: long-lead materials may need prompt decisions, but fitted items should not all be ordered from drawings. Strip-out can reveal dimensions and service routes that affect cabinetry, screens and stone. The programme should distinguish safe early orders from items requiring site verification.
 
“Electrical checks” needs a deliverable. Ask what will actually be inspected or tested, what written findings you receive, and whether remedial work is included. The contractor should also confirm assumptions about existing circuits and the demand from the proposed kitchen equipment and energy upgrades.
 
For plumbing, ask where isolation points, risers, waste connections and concealed joints can be accessed. Who pays for opening and making good if the assumed route is blocked? Bathrooms can look simple on plan while access behind finishes drives the variation.
 
I’d add moisture investigation to Fatima’s opening-up list. Record visible staining and take readings around bathrooms, windows and air-conditioning drainage areas. More importantly, require an explanation of the likely source; replacing paint or flooring before resolving ongoing moisture is false economy.
 
Once those inspections are done, issue all bidders the same exclusions table. Include waterproofing repairs, service replacement beyond visible areas, substrate levelling, concealed pipework, electrical remediation, permits or submissions, protection and final cleaning. Make them answer included, excluded or allowance—no blank cells.
 
What counts as the moderate energy upgrade? Lighting changes, air-conditioning work and appliance-related electrical changes have different dependencies. Define the intended measures now, even if product choices come later, so ceilings and wiring are not completed before the necessary routes are understood.
 
Permit timing should be a line in the programme, not a vague contractor qualification. Ask the designer and contractor to identify any building-management or government submissions they believe apply, who is responsible for each, and what work cannot begin until they are resolved. Requirements depend on the actual alterations.
 
I’d also agree the variation process before work starts: written description, price and programme effect before approval, except where urgent protection is genuinely necessary. Tie payment stages to observable completion rather than material merely arriving, and maintain a simple list of order dates and required-on-site dates.
 
A compromise on the contingency debate is to divide it. Keep one reserve for known allowances that still need measurement, and another untouched reserve for concealed conditions. As surveys and opening-up remove uncertainty, allowances can be firmed up without pretending all remaining risk has disappeared.
 
That split makes sense. I’d now revise the HK$1,674,000 worksheet into three columns: fixed scope, unresolved allowances and contingency. Then obtain management requirements, targeted moisture and service investigations, and comparable exclusion schedules before choosing a contractor. Only after that would I decide whether the initial 15–20% reserve can safely come down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top