is it better to knockdown and rebuild or renovate an old home?

Knockdown-Rebuild: Pros:

• Complete design freedom

• Modern, energy-efficient home

• Lower maintenance costs

• New home warranty (typically 6 years)

• Often more cost-predictable than renovations

• No compromises with old structures

• Can usually build bigger/taller than existing

Cons:

• Higher upfront costs ($600,000-$1M+ for construction)

• Longer period without living in the property (12-18 months)

• Council approval can be challenging

• Must find temporary accommodation

• May lose character features

• Could face heritage or tree preservation restrictions

Renovation: Pros:

• Can be done in stages to spread costs

• Might preserve character features

• Often cheaper than full rebuild

• Can potentially live in part of house during works

• May be easier to get council approval

• Maintains existing building envelope/height

Cons:

• Unexpected issues common (asbestos, termites, structural problems)

• Cost blowouts frequent

• Limited design flexibility

• May still have maintenance issues

• Energy efficiency compromises

• Could still need significant structural work

The better choice typically depends on:

1. House condition (poor condition favors knockdown)

2. Budget constraints (renovations can be staged)

3. Heritage considerations

4. Council restrictions

5. Your desired outcome

6. Property value in the area

Generally, knockdown-rebuild is often better when:

• The house has significant structural issues

• You want a completely different layout

• The renovation would cost >50% of a new build

• The existing house doesn't maximize the block's potential

Renovation is often better when:

• The house has good bones

• You value character features

• Budget is tight

• Council restrictions make rebuilding difficult

• You need to stay living in the property