Ron,

I'm pretty much in agreement with Jay. Principally that the architectural (including site) design needs to be in parallel to the timber frame design. And that the design is first, and frankly is more important than how tight your joints are (something that timber framers are notoriously bad at keeping in mind).

I'm also in agreement with the team approach. For future clients, try to have that team assembled. It doesn't need to be one specific architect or builder--it could be a few that are either interviewed by the client, or maybe you just pick who you think is appropriate.

There's a problem that often occurs in the usual design/bid/build model of construction. The clients and the architect sit down to design their dream home/barn/shop. It's exciting for everyone. Then it goes out to bid, and the clients learn that the project as drawn is 75% over their budget. It doesn't always happen--there are plenty of architects that can design to a budget--but it happens enough that it's worth mentioning.

I get around that problem in a few ways. First of all, we don't bid on projects (well I would, but they would have to pay me). I want clients who want to work with us. Secondly, I'm involved in the design process, not the whole way through but at least at stages. So earlier in conceptual design, or schematic design, I'll look at things, offer some commentary, suggestions, value-engineering, and preliminary pricing. That may also include various other consultants and subcontractors. All of that happens under a preconstruction contract, which ensures that everyone gets paid for their time.