Floor plan of a single-family house with basement, 150 sqm, only single-story allowed

...even if the rooms now always only get light from one side.

It doesn't have to. With a gable roof, roof windows are common. My program only draws them in the "roof view," which is why they are unfortunately not visible in the sketches.

What I would still be interested in is the cross-section to compare the heights.

By the way, I would omit the balcony and simply make a flat-roofed bay window out of it.
Additionally, one could consider converting the window to the pantry into an exterior door to load groceries directly from the car. I am usually against such doors, but here it really makes sense in my opinion.

Yes, I also think a red brick facade does not yet make this house a Northern Light. It still needs a half-hipped roof with a thatched roof and a bat dormer, right?

It probably starts with a brick facade, then in my opinion come the casement windows.

If you don’t mind a step to the balcony, then go ahead, but it should be in the plan. Unfortunately, there have already been disappointed builders here several times because they overlooked this detail. The floor construction on the upper floor can be raised to come out on one level. But that also means a low room height and one more stair step if the stairs are not to become steeper. The additional stair step also makes the staircase longer, which again affects the floor plan and this is not always positive for the floor plan. Even such small details can influence your rough planning.

That’s exactly how it is and from personal experience you know that and therefore pass it on to people like you who have not yet experienced it! And for this very reason, the following could lead to the realization that seemingly insignificant circumstances can bring unforeseen consequences:

The thing with the parapet height was actually not directed at you and your hint was so important/interesting to me that I immediately told my wife, because I hadn’t thought of it before.

It is therefore quite surprising when one reads that the apparently inexperienced builder has come to this attitude:

I thought practical tips would be given here. ......that is filtered out anyway.

...and as a participant you know that as a layman you apparently do not know the impact and meaning of some circumstances you consider unnecessary. It is not about attacking you because you could have come earlier or maybe even want three gables but you must also be allowed to say that. It is clearly about the fact that an inexperienced customer was presented with a really weak design here, which you yourself now attribute the quality to, only to be slightly adjusted in small details. But the crux lies exactly where you vehemently reject it, namely also in the timely, consistent, and precise planning of the - real - pieces of furniture. Everything in your build has an impact and it must be considered as best as possible BEFOREHAND. If the door is 20 cm too far left or the window too far right, that can be very annoying later or even lead to structural correction because you get frustrated about it. A door opening on the wrong side or the botched planning of the dressing room on the upper floor would cost you a lot of money to make it look half decent and probably always annoy you. In a clever plan, a inexpensive Pax fits; in a less clever one, maybe a carpenter’s piece for five times the price has to be installed, etc. Suspecting resentment here deprives you of help that you would otherwise have to pay for dearly and without even knowing if you are well served (see current planning). And precisely because one has to keep drilling the same thick boards again and again here, the participants say it directly because the same thing has been said 100 times before. You are not the first here, so you should not despair at the clarity of some statements, but rather ask yourself why they were so clearly expressed. We do not criticize you, but your planner!!! And he gets paid by you and may well make more effort so that you get your “dream house.” We are on your side, therefore the criticism of the plan. From the corner of the comment you experienced as extremely bad now comes a design, made with great effort AND imagination as a gift for you, which might make clear to you what a poor job your planner has done so far. Exactly the same OP has already told you this so clearly about your previous design, which you did not want to hear. So don’t drive people away but listen and think through every, even critical comment objectively without dismissing it too quickly from your layman’s corner, because someone took time for you. One of my favorite sayings is: “You can’t sing criticism,” and here the criticism was exclusively directed at the planner and his at least so far weak performance and certainly not at you. He gets paid for it and should therefore deliver better than a “hobby planner” in a layman’s forum. The planner of our general contractor was super friendly but professionally close to zero. As we later saw, he lived as unimaginatively as we ourselves never wanted to live. Fortunately, we got help and got strongly involved ourselves, so that we can now live nicely, albeit certainly not perfectly. My compliment. The important points of criticism and especially the staircase are very well solved here; building on this, something nice could now become possible..... for the OP. I especially like the staircase solution, as well as the offset at the end of the kitchen, and that also makes a pantry sensible if one wants it. With this plan, I would even consider completely omitting the door to the all-room, but everyone has their own preference and it certainly also depends on the feeling regarding children. Great!

I reread all the posts, and indeed the comments seemed much less negative in my memory than upon a second reading.

You started the thread under the mistaken belief that the draft was already good and you only wanted suggestions for improvement. But it is simply the case that laypeople regularly do not recognize the nonsense they are being served. And presumably it simply exceeds your imagination that someone with four decades of planning experience can see in less than a minute that the planning already rolled onto the runway too early.

Well, because the house is not yet built. From that point of view, I would still call the current moment the right moment. And without the first draft, you wouldn't know what to pay attention to in the next one :D

No, you should have come with the preliminary draft. Instead, you either had a faulty preliminary draft further developed into a draft, or even skipped the preliminary draft altogether (which all copy-paste workers and increasingly also young architects do). That is why I say: I will only comment on a new preliminary draft here, because anything else would be professionally sloppy.

Sure. I will forward Katja’s floor plan to my planner tomorrow. Let’s see what he makes of it. I have actually spent the last 1-2 hours intensively dealing with this floor plan and think I like it better than the one we showed. Above all, the upper floor with the staircase in the bay window is definitely nicer for us,

No, better not. Your planner will then only take note that Katja’s draft is to be taken as a new basis for further refinement. As much as I agree that Katja’s draft is clearly better, it still has a fundamental error: namely visibly trying to save the template. You should rather get your planner to develop a new preliminary draft methodically clean and discuss it while it is still a sketch!

The floor structure on the upper floor can be raised in order to come out on one level.

I would rather start the ceiling lower in this area (but that only on the side, as said here a restart is needed).

..., yet he has a fundamental mistake: namely, obviously trying to save the template. However, you should rather have your planner methodically develop a new preliminary draft and then discuss it as long as it is a sketch!

I agree with that. As a reader, the input is simply too little to recognize the dreams and wishes. Therefore, one sticks closely to the template. If it were mine, I would always start from scratch with a completely blank sheet and boldly ask whether the symmetry at the captain really is that important? An offset might seem much more individual and cozy.

I see it the same way. As a reader, the input is simply too little to recognize the dreams and wishes. Therefore, one stays close to the template.

On the one hand, I find that nice of you and many original authors appreciate it too. But unfortunately, many of them are then satisfied with the conciliatory interpretation, thinking their initial draft probably wasn’t that bad after all, and are happy about the improved basis for further maturation – meanwhile, unfortunately, the seeds of the false start have remained in the DNA of the not really suitable draft.

If it were mine, I would always start anew with a completely blank sheet and boldly ask whether symmetry for the captain is really that important? An offset might appear much more individual and cozy.

A germ-free new petri dish is already the smarter way. Without any burdens, i.e., no single cube must remain in the dish. The wish that a six should be included in the new throw may go on the wish list. Symmetry is not only aesthetics for proportion dyslexics but also not exactly cheap inasmuch as it usually only works from about twelve meters of house width.