There is a conversation we have had, in some form, on almost every project. The client arrives with a folder — a collection of images saved over months or years, the visual language of what they want their home to feel like. The folder is a gift. It tells us a great deal.
What it sometimes also tells us is how much of what they love is, in the language of the design industry, trending. Fluted cabinetry. Limewash walls. Bouclé everything. Arched doorways. These are not bad choices — several of them are genuinely beautiful. But they are choices that carry a timestamp, and a timestamp is the one thing a home built to last cannot afford.
The difference between a trend and a choice.
A trend is a collective response to a cultural moment. It rises because something about it speaks to a shared hunger — for warmth, or simplicity, or a texture that feels handmade in a world that increasingly is not. This is not trivial. Trends often begin as genuine ideas.
The problem is not the idea. It is the adoption curve. By the time a detail appears in mass-market design publications, in new construction across the country, in the renovation portfolios of a thousand builders — it has been extracted from the context that gave it meaning. What was once a considered choice has become a signal. And signals age.
Limewash walls, done with care and intention in the right house, can be extraordinary. Limewash walls chosen because they were the finish of 2023 will look, in 2033, like exactly that.
"We do not ask what is current. We ask what is correct — for this house, this owner, this light, this life."
What we look for instead.
Our material palette tends to be narrow and consistent across projects: stone, oak, plaster, steel, unlacquered brass or blackened iron. Not because we lack imagination, but because these materials have proven themselves over centuries of use. They improve with age. They are not trying to say anything beyond what they are.
When we deviate from this palette — when a project calls for something more particular — we ask a single question: will this choice be more beautiful in ten years than it is today? If the answer is yes, or even probably, we proceed. If the answer is uncertain, we return to first principles.
At The Stone House on S Street, the Calacatta marble was not chosen because it was fashionable — though it is. It was chosen because it is a material with three thousand years of use in domestic architecture, because it improves as it ages, and because its veining is specific to that slab and cannot be replicated. In twenty years, it will look like a decision someone made with great care. It will not look like 2025.
A note on restraint.
The hardest conversation we have with clients is not about trends. It is about restraint. About the moment we suggest that the thing they love — the detail they have been imagining for years — may not belong in this particular house.
Washington is a city of extraordinary architecture. It is also a city full of renovated homes where every surface has been maximised, every wall activated, every room given a feature. The result is often impressive in photography and exhausting to live in. A house that is trying to be interesting in every corner gives you nowhere to rest your eyes.
The homes we are most proud of are the ones where the restraint is invisible — where you are simply comfortable, without knowing why. Where the rooms feel, somehow, larger than their dimensions. Where the light is always right. These effects are not achieved by addition. They are achieved by knowing what to leave out.
That is, ultimately, what we mean when we say we build for fifty years. Not that the materials will last — though they will. But that the decisions will still feel correct when the world looks quite different from how it looks today. That is the only standard worth holding to.