Fourteen months from site assessment to client occupancy. Two thousand two hundred square feet. A residential project in Evergreen on a two-acre site with mature trees, significant elevation change, and a complex brief that evolved three times during design.
The Brief
Three bedrooms, open living, office space, storage for mountain equipment, and a primary goal: a house that feels light and open while maintaining privacy from the street and an adjacent property. The site slopes significantly, with the home needing to be accessed from above and positioned to preserve existing tree canopy.
The Three Pivots
Design locked on a 1,800 sq ft configuration with a basement. Soil testing revealed poor basement drainage conditions. Decision point: either engineer an expensive drainage system or redesign to eliminate basement. The redesign expanded the main floor to 2,200 sq ft instead, incorporated more of the topography, and actually improved the project. Cost neutral. Program better.
Second pivot came at framing. The client saw the open plan at full scale and wanted to close off the master suite more. The kitchen sightline felt intrusive from the living room. We modified the wall location, adjusted the kitchen opening, and preserved the openness while creating privacy. Two-week process instead of a catastrophe because we planned for design refinement during framing.
Third pivot came when material sourcing revealed that reclaimed Douglas fir wasn't available at the quantities we planned. We redesigned structural approach using a combination of reclaimed timber (where visible) and new-growth for hidden connections. Design language stayed consistent. The project timeline stayed intact.
The Timeline
Months 1-2: Site assessment, soil testing, drainage evaluation, initial design documentation. Months 3-4: Design development with two major revisions based on site conditions and client input. Months 5-6: Construction documents and permitting. Month 7: Site work and foundation. Months 8-10: Framing, design refinement, material procurement. Months 11-13: Systems installation, finishes, corrections. Month 14: Client move-in preparation and occupancy.
What usually breaks this timeline: unclear site conditions, design changes during construction, material delays, permit issues. We managed by front-loading site work, budgeting framing-phase adjustments, and sourcing major materials before permitting.
What Went Right
The site-first approach paid off. Understanding the drainage problem early meant design could address it directly instead of fighting it later. The decision to include architect on site during framing prevented expensive change orders. The material sourcing started early enough that supply chain disruptions didn't derail the schedule.
The client's willingness to engage with design evolution was critical. They understood that site conditions revealed information that the initial design couldn't have anticipated. When we needed to adjust, they saw it as improvement, not failure.
What We'd Change
We'd budget more time for permitting coordination with the county. Our initial estimate was six weeks. It took eight. The county's processes are reasonable but slower than our initial assumptions. Next project, we add two weeks to permitting timeline.
We'd also tighten the material selection process for finishes. The client changed cabinet finish and flooring selections three times before locking them at framing. That indecision cost about two weeks in procurement and installation. Clearer decision-making processes earlier would have prevented that.
The Outcome
The residence opened in November 2025. The clients moved in for their first week in late November to experience it through season transition. They reported that the open plan works exactly as designed, the materials feel appropriate to the site, and the home performs better thermally than expected (south-facing orientation and thermal mass performed better than modeling predicted).
More importantly, they felt engaged in the process. They weren't passive recipients of a design. They participated in real problem-solving when issues came up. That engagement changes how people relate to their buildings. They understand the decisions that made it work.
Fourteen months from assessment to occupancy on a 2,200 sq ft residential project is achievable if you design the process for it. Site-first assessment. Locked design early. Materials sourced before framing. Architect on site during critical phases. Client engaged as collaborator. The result is a building that works better and a client who understands why.