How to Estimate costs before you buy

gk5000

Hello All,

Is there a good way to estimate to see if you can afford to buy, obviously without spending too much - ball park price for re-model, upgrade and extending a 60's/70's house before you buy?

Looking at a 90 SqM Dormer bungalow with 2 bedrooms at back downstairs, and 1 at front upstairs.
Would plan to
(1) Single story extension out the back - 9 x 3.5 ~ 32 SqM , and then together with 2 old bedroom make this into kitchen/living room - Thinking up to €60k for this
(2) Remove sloped roof at back and build up straight on top of existing downstairs back wall - now spanned - giving 2 bedrooms totaling 28 Sqm - Thinking €40k for this
(3) Remodel existing house - move/reverse stairs, new bathrooms, new hall, new windows, all doors, skirtings, rewire, re plumb + new boiler & rads, insulate, skim... - Thinking upto €100k for this.

How does the above sound - so €200 k assuming contractor - in West Dublin ?
Alternatively SCSI gives €290 k for 150 SqM (90 old + 60 new)?

Thanks in advance, and would appreciate any suggestions.

Gumbo

Beer mat calculation while viewing, just to give you a ball park on where you might be is 2k per square meter for new build and 1k per square meter for renovation.

Exact prices will then vary depending on spec and level of detail.

Have you considered your planning fees and professional fees?

seamus

Prices appear to be crazy enough in Dublin at the moment because demand is so high. I'd put in €2.5k per square metre for an extension, 1.5 for renovation work.

So that's €150k for the ground floor extension + first floor addition, and €135k for the renovation work = €285k.

Everyone I've spoken to in the last few months has gone in with €2k per square metre in their head and come out paying 2.5 - 3k. In Dublin that is. If you have connections and contractors from rural areas who are willing to travel, you might do better.

gk5000

kceire wrote: »

Beer mat calculation while viewing, just to give you a ball park on where you might be is 2k per square meter for new build and 1k per square meter for renovation.

Exact prices will then vary depending on spec and level of detail.

Have you considered your planning fees and professional fees?

Yes that's roughly the figures I was using - but thinking squaring out the roof upstairs would be a bit cheaper - no new footprint.


Was thinking 5k for architect and 5k for engineer - but is that too light?

gk5000

seamus wrote: »

Prices appear to be crazy enough in Dublin at the moment because demand is so high. I'd put in €2.5k per square metre for an extension, 1.5 for renovation work.

So that's €150k for the ground floor extension + first floor addition, and €135k for the renovation work = €285k.

Everyone I've spoken to in the last few months has gone in with €2k per square metre in their head and come out paying 2.5 - 3k. In Dublin that is. If you have connections and contractors from rural areas who are willing to travel, you might do better.

Thanks. Your figures scare me probably because they may be true! But I'm hoping they are South Dublin and there a West Dublin discount !

Any idea what could be saved by direct labour and project managing it ourselves?

seamus

If you can purchase the house and do any demolition and clearance work yourself, you can probably save the guts of €500 per square metre. But you'll still have your own costs here, namely equipment hire and waste removal, not to mention the personal time cost.

Unless you're in the business and have your own insurance, no contractor will allow you onsite to assist with the build, even if you're just laying blocks and lifting wood.

It can also be difficult to say, "I'm going to do X work first, then the builder is going to come in and do his bit". You may need to have the demolition bit done before anyone will quote you. If the builder agrees to take on the job and then you get crushed by a wall while doing the demolition, it could make things messy for him.

Mellor

gk5000 wrote: »

Yes that's roughly the figures I was using - but thinking squaring out the roof upstairs would be a bit cheaper - no new footprint.


Was thinking 5k for architect and 5k for engineer - but is that too light?

5k forbthe architect fees is tiny if you are expecting them to be involved beyond concept stages.
If they were to be involved the whole way through, probably about 20k

Gumbo

gk5000 wrote: »

Any idea what could be saved by direct labour and project managing it ourselves?

I spent 125k recently in D11 gutting existing house (90 Sq. M) and extending single storey to rear, hip conversion to gable, and 2 storey bay to front. The attic was already converted but I had to need it up as it wasn’t great and obviously extend into the new roof space. Extensions in total was about 25 Sq. M.

Relatively mid/high finish ie white oak internal doors, Solar PV, large vaulted ceiling will walls of glass, new windows, heating and insulated throughout, oak and glass banisters etc

I used direct labour but I’m in the game as such and pulled in all favours and managed the job myself which took up every spare minute for 6 months during the build.

gk5000

Mellor wrote: »

5k forbthe architect fees is tiny if you are expecting them to be involved beyond concept stages.
If they were to be involved the whole way through, probably about 20k

Was thinking of only using them upto the planning stage and then..not fully sure but probably a technician to do builders plans, and then an engineer to visit/supervise important elements like foundations and structural, rsjs etc.

gk5000

seamus wrote: »

If you can purchase the house and do any demolition and clearance work yourself, you can probably save the guts of €500 per square metre. But you'll still have your own costs here, namely equipment hire and waste removal, not to mention the personal time cost.

Unless you're in the business and have your own insurance, no contractor will allow you onsite to assist with the build, even if you're just laying blocks and lifting wood.

It can also be difficult to say, "I'm going to do X work first, then the builder is going to come in and do his bit". You may need to have the demolition bit done before anyone will quote you. If the builder agrees to take on the job and then you get crushed by a wall while doing the demolition, it could make things messy for him.

Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology = "direct labour and project managing " - meant hiring and scheduling the different trades directly and not using a contractor. So someone to do foundations, RSJ's, Walls, .....

Gumbo

gk5000 wrote: »

Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology = "direct labour and project managing " - meant hiring and scheduling the different trades directly and not using a contractor. So someone to do foundations, RSJ's, Walls, .....

Have you got experience in this?
The change over on trades need to be carefully arranged and at times you need both or all there at once.

gk5000

kceire wrote: »

I spent 125k recently in D11 gutting existing house (90 Sq. M) and extending single storey to rear, hip conversion to gable, and 2 storey bay to front. The attic was already converted but I had to need it up as it wasn’t great and obviously extend into the new roof space. Extensions in total was about 25 Sq. M.

Relatively mid/high finish ie white oak internal doors, Solar PV, large vaulted ceiling will walls of glass, new windows, heating and insulated throughout, oak and glass banisters etc

I used direct labour but I’m in the game as such and pulled in all favours and managed the job myself which took up every spare minute for 6 months during the build.

So roughly 1000/Sq.M. but would not have your insider knowledge or contacts.
Would only aim for slightly above average spec with a few features, maybe wooden windows, and no PV, but maybe put in some mounts or preparation for PV in case to add in the future.



Would managing the job as a team - her with the time during the day and me with reasonable DIY (just to know what to look for) in the evening be a recipe for disaster?

gk5000

kceire wrote: »

Have you got experience in this?
The change over on trades need to be carefully arranged and at times you need both or all there at once.

Yes on Project Management but no on building. Would rely on the trades themselves to a degree to tell what they need and then try to find someone.
Yes...I can see the holes in it already - probably would end up with delays waiting to get the trades lined up together.


And it gets worse - see my last post - we were posting at same time:
"Would managing the job as a team - her with the time during the day and me with reasonable DIY (just to know what to look for) in the evening be a recipe for disaster?"

seamus

gk5000 wrote: »

Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology = "direct labour and project managing " - meant hiring and scheduling the different trades directly and not using a contractor. So someone to do foundations, RSJ's, Walls, .....

No, that's definitely my mistake, not yours! Misread the post

Gumbo

gk5000 wrote: »

Yes on Project Management but no on building. Would rely on the trades themselves to a degree to tell what they need and then try to find someone.
Yes...I can see the holes in it already - probably would end up with delays waiting to get the trades lined up together.


And it gets worse - see my last post - we were posting at same time:
"Would managing the job as a team - her with the time during the day and me with reasonable DIY (just to know what to look for) in the evening be a recipe for disaster?"

You cannot reply on the trades imo. They want to get in, get the work done and get paid to put it bluntly. With some trades they will need to be there, gone for a day then back to tie in with another trade, for example, the sparks and the plumber when connecting the central heating actuators and time clocks.

Then the plumber and the plasterer so that pipe work is sticking out in the right places.

The trouble is when one trade finishes, then the next comes in and he just carries on from what was left for him. Who blames who? Ultimately it’s you.

Also, nothing you can do in the evening, as the trades be gone by 4pm or 5 at the latest.

Mellor

gk5000 wrote: »

Was thinking of only using them upto the planning stage and then..not fully sure but probably a technician to do builders plans, and then an engineer to visit/supervise important elements like foundations and structural, rsjs etc.

That's not really significantly cheaper.
Hiring an architect and technician separately isn't going to be any cheaper than going to an one company to produce Concept/planning/construction drawings. The workload is more or less the same. The above covers 3 of the 4 design stages. So you are looking at 75% of a full service fee to that point.

The 4th stage is tender advice, construction drawing modifications, payment certs, site inspections, defects, certificate of compliance with Planning & building regs.
Sound like the engineer will be doing some of that.

So you're looking at maybe 80-90% of the fees, to do it properly. And you are giving to a lot of service and experience for the saving.

Victor

gk5000 wrote: »

Was thinking 5k for architect and 5k for engineer - but is that too light?

15% of construction cost would be a good indicator.

tradesman

I left a renovation / extension site yesterday being done by the owner (40 yr old) who had been plastering all his life . He is bald but he was still tearing his hair out trying to organise trades. They turn up go through the job explaining they will do this that & the other, they go away & literally disappear into thin air! Never to be heard of again! It is disasterous organising a job. You need a thick skin & great patience

gk5000

Mellor wrote: »

That's not really significantly cheaper.
Hiring an architect and technician separately isn't going to be any cheaper than going to an one company to produce Concept/planning/construction drawings. The workload is more or less the same. The above covers 3 of the 4 design stages. So you are looking at 75% of a full service fee to that point.

The 4th stage is tender advice, construction drawing modifications, payment certs, site inspections, defects, certificate of compliance with Planning & building regs.
Sound like the engineer will be doing some of that.

So you're looking at maybe 80-90% of the fees, to do it properly. And you are giving to a lot of service and experience for the saving.

I'm not fully sure how to go about things yet but my reasons are:
1. Experience of a friend who hired and architect for turnkey job based on percent - but the architect wished to use very expensive builders known to him - so my friend had to pay him off and hire builders himself - much cheaper but still good.

2. I think you still need an engineer involved after design as architects are not good/capable for that type of work - structural specifics - I think.

3. Not sure if want someone else involved during the build
i.e.- builder talks to architect who talks to me... I might be safer talking directly to the builder because ultimately it shall be my decision ( and sure don't want an architect making changes or deciding things without me)

4. Prefer everybody on a fixed price with clear inputs/outputs - architect on % seems dangerous.


I have a fair idea of what overall shape/plan I need so maybe should skip architect and go straight to ???. My concern is things like size of halls, where to put velux's, stairs etc. for good flow and light, use of space etc.

Gumbo

gk5000 wrote: »

I have a fair idea of what overall shape/plan I need so maybe should skip architect and go straight to ???. My concern is things like size of halls, where to put velux's, stairs etc. for good flow and light, use of space etc.

You are now talking about the person who does this, but you want to skip them?

Mellor

gk5000 wrote: »

I'm not fully sure how to go about things yet but my reasons are:
1. Experience of a friend who hired and architect for turnkey job based on percent - but the architect wished to use very expensive builders known to him - so my friend had to pay him off and hire builders himself - much cheaper but still good.

2. I think you still need an engineer involved after design as architects are not good/capable for that type of work - structural specifics - I think.

3. Not sure if want someone else involved during the build
i.e.- builder talks to architect who talks to me... I might be safer talking directly to the builder because ultimately it shall be my decision ( and sure don't want an architect making changes or deciding things without me)

4. Prefer everybody on a fixed price with clear inputs/outputs - architect on % seems dangerous.


I have a fair idea of what overall shape/plan I need so maybe should skip architect and go straight to ???. My concern is things like size of halls, where to put velux's, stairs etc. for good flow and light, use of space etc.

1. Architect was recommending a good builder. If you friend wanted a cheaper builder, that was entirely up to him to decide. Nobody had to be be paid off.

2. You'll need a structural engineer regardless, it's not something you need after design though. Architect doesn't replace engineer and engineer doesn't replace architect. And I wasn't suggesting they do.
I was pointing out that you plan of using an architect for planning, a tenhnician for construction drawings, an engineer for structurals, and whoever for sign off. It's not going to be significantly cheaper than getting somebody to manage the lot.

3. It's only safer to handle discussions yourself if you know what you are talking about. Regardless, having an architect involved doesn't mean they have to project manage. You can have a full scope design service, and project mange yourself.

4. An Architects fee as a % is how the fee is calculated. It is still agreed in advance. It's not a "cut" of the total costs. It doesn't increase if the cost of your blocks increases. However, adding to the project as you go will of course mean an additional fee is fair (a variation).

gk5000

Mellor wrote: »

1. Architect was recommending a good builder. If you friend wanted a cheaper builder, that was entirely up to him to decide. Nobody had to be be paid off.

2. You'll need a structural engineer regardless, it's not something you need after design though. Architect doesn't replace engineer and engineer doesn't replace architect. And I wasn't suggesting they do.
I was pointing out that you plan of using an architect for planning, a tenhnician for construction drawings, an engineer for structurals, and whoever for sign off. It's not going to be significantly cheaper than getting somebody to manage the lot.

3. It's only safer to handle discussions yourself if you know what you are talking about. Regardless, having an architect involved doesn't mean they have to project manage. You can have a full scope design service, and project mange yourself.

4. An Architects fee as a % is how the fee is calculated. It is still agreed in advance. It's not a "cut" of the total costs. It doesn't increase if the cost of your blocks increases. However, adding to the project as you go will of course mean an additional fee is fair (a variation).

Had to pay him off because already had a contract for x percent, and needed to get the drawings etc to use himself with the builder - so he had to pay more than if he had only specified design at the onset. (Edit to add - architect would only work with builders he recommended - note this was before the boom so maybe things are different now)

The % fee (and pay off) included the original very expensive builder and materials as opposed to my friends very good builder and materials.
I think but cannot be sure that my friend had already an outline budget which was way exceeded.

Regarding "handling discussions myself if you know what you are talking about"
I'm first curious what the architect would bring after the design phase, i.e. during building assuming the drawings were correct.?

And what discussions could/would the architect have with the builder without involving me?

Mellor

gk5000 wrote: »

Had to pay him off because already had a contract for x percent, and needed to get the drawings etc to use himself with the builder - so he had to pay more than if he had only specified design at the onset. (Edit to add - architect would only work with builders he recommended - note this was before the boom so maybe things are different now)

That's incorrect. An architect can't insist he'll only work with a certain builder. Before the boom or otherwise. Maybe there was some dodiness going on, but its more likely that you're friend if giving you a condensed version.
If he was trying to removed work from the scope, it's complete fair that the architect gets paid his agreed fee.

The % fee (and pay off) included the original very expensive builder and materials as opposed to my friends very good builder and materials.
I think but cannot be sure that my friend had already an outline budget which was way exceeded.

People budgets are always overly optimistic. In the OP your budget was 200k. You will probably be looking at 250k. If you proceeded with 200k in mind, woud you blame the architect when it came in at 250k?

Regarding "handling discussions myself if you know what you are talking about"
I'm first curious what the architect would bring after the design phase, i.e. during building assuming the drawings were correct.?

You said you were only using the architect for planning, not detail design stage.
As for what they bring, have a look at the difference between a set of planning drawings and a set of construction drawings.
If you are conformable turning planning drawings into construction information yourself, then go for it. But if you are, you'll need a professional to do it for you.

Alternatively you let the builder do whatever he wants.

And what discussions could/would the architect have with the builder without involving me?

None. Why you have this idea that they would?
We are talking about a professional handling the design and documentation. You are still the project manager.

If you want a professional acting as project manager, that's a different situation

gk5000

Yes, I may not have the fully story but I think the original agreement was for the architect to project manage, and that had to be changed.
I think it was more a case of budget of 200k, and tenders coming in at 300k so possible end cost of 350k. Anyway, end result is I do not wish for an architect to project manage, so it would probably either be contractor turn key, or reluctantly myself.


My terminology may be loose but I would need somebody for the detail design, but not sure if this is architect, technician or engineer.

Gumbo

gk5000 wrote: »

My terminology may be loose but I would need somebody for the detail design, but not sure if this is architect, technician or engineer.

Whoever, make sure they are experienced, competent and carry the required PI insurance to do detailed construction drawings and inspect and sign off.

Mellor

gk5000 wrote: »

Yes, I may not have the fully story but I think the original agreement was for the architect to project manage, and that had to be changed.

So they had a agreed contract of work. But then friend wanted to change the agreed scope. It's fair to pay off architect in that case. As it would be in any industry.

Anyway, end result is I do not wish for an architect to project manage, so it would probably either be contractor turn key, or reluctantly myself.

Then dont have an architect project manage. That's entirely separate to design.

My terminology may be loose but I would need somebody for the detail design, but not sure if this is architect, technician or engineer.

All three could potentially do it if they were experienced. But I don't see a benefit in contracting this separately concept/planning/design

gk5000

Thanks guys, enough for me to think about for now - and whether the house is worth bothering with given the work needed and the general uncertainty of overall cost.


I have another question about upstairs party wall but I'll post it in the general forum