Floor plan of a single-family house for 4 people with problems on the ground floor

I would also rotate the guest toilet and the wardrobe somehow. Above all, the wardrobe is most practical when it is accessible parallel to the hallway. This way, there is plenty of hanging space but little traffic area in front of the actual wardrobe, and despite the amazing hallway, you still step on each other's feet right inside the front door.

I have no quick idea how that could work because of the passage to the garage.

hm… ok… how old is the architect?

Just before retirement.

The master suite on the upper floor is totally misplanned.

So far, I actually liked the solution. But we will reconsider it. We would rather not rotate the rooms in the northeast because of the windows. I think the wardrobe offers enough space. The architect only drew that huge closet there, but it can be solved better. I would like the outdoor kitchen just for grilling (with gas)/pizza baking/bread baking. So just a counter with a sink and gas grill. I thought the covered area would be good for that. Having to carry ingredients over is of course true. We'll see, maybe just a gas grill near the kitchen is enough. Great feedback, thank you all.

Shortly before retirement.

Before the how long postponed one?

I see a changed exterior wall thickness, now actually the classic 36.5 cm - but (how?) double-layered; and in the attic both 11.5 cm and 12 cm (from what, why?). The hallway on the ground floor appears visually quite crooked in the overall spatial impression. I would "sacrifice" the garage passage for a breakthrough, and the statement about the technical room outside the thermal envelope deserves a satire special prize in the category of nonsense. To me, the design overall seems like the inevitably failed attempt to "rebuild" some magazine dream house model by integrating inadequately compatible modifications. Throw such templates overboard, otherwise it will become a McMansion hell to Frankenstein’s greatest pride. Go back to a specifications document, make a concept out of it. Only based on this concept should you then develop a design. Into this design (THREE wishes and SEVEN dwarfs please do not confuse!) only the most defining quotes from the dream house model are incorporated, and the rest is left out for the sake of the overall result.

I have now gone through the thread again from the beginning and have come to the view to give the self-diagnosis

have we gotten ourselves lost?

a ringing endorsement with trumpet and seal.

The comparison of the drafts from posts #1 and #17 shows no maturation in architect-quality, but rather in draftsman-quality, in the form of the largely adopted upper floor from Yvonne’s draft in post #9. Apparently, it was already overlooked that this was not a compensatory alternative example, but merely a rescue attempt (with a new room layout in the old framework). A ground floor was then correspondingly adjusted, nothing more. The front risalit was retained, and because it shows no justification for existence, it also got a useless and unused counterpart at the back. And that at a time when even is ready to part ways with the reverse captain. Also retained was the generous smoker’s balcony for the cigarette after the marital duty, but it now casts its shadow over the terrace before the already cooler evening sun. The children have just migrated from Siberia to the Adriatic, and the poor staircase was replaced by an even worse one: the exit is now not only disadvantageous globally but also qualitatively exemplarily worsened in detail. One could easily make from this an error-finding discussion template for architecture students to qualify for the second semester – chapeau!

The dressing room has swapped its master-slave size ratio with the bedroom and now at least has closet space in addition to the dance floor. But from there to the bathroom, you still have to pass by the sleeping partner, although (still) there is space for bathroom access from the hallway. Not to mention the disgrace of a HAR outsourced in such a mansion. Even the double garage can only accommodate either a second car OR bicycles. If I tell this in my club, no one believes me. This again contains more signs of nuts than of an architecture degree; seriously: what does this architect do professionally?
(Not forensic investigation or pet supply trade, since one obviously learns more from those)

I honestly see no even the slightest suspicion of completing a performance phase 2 here, but rather my suspicion confirmed: the OP here seriously gave the famous “mixture from various magazines” from the questionnaire to a professionally weary draftsman as a coloring template for stamping approval and plotting for the building application. This is not how heroes are made, but McMansion Hells :-(

Crime scene investigation and pet stores definitely not, you obviously learn more from that)

I ask that professions not be dragged through the mud by being mentioned in this forum. They are personalized for insiders here.