200m2 single-family house for 4-5 people without a basement on a narrow plot

want to get through halfway in between?

Getting through halfway.., unfortunately that doesn't help.
Without flipping through the thread again (I don't know what it's about now), I answer the question:
The space in front of a wardrobe should be sized so that I can open the door, take half a step back, to have the wardrobe contents in view. Additionally, the partner should still be able to get through while I am standing there. I would personally avoid an elongated arrangement of a wardrobe room. Rather arrange the wardrobes as an L, then there is more space in the middle for dressing. The latter word (dressing) deliberately indicates that a dressing room is not a storage room for clothes, but a room where you choose your clothes for the day and also dress there. It may be that Twiggy can undress in such narrow aisles – but even for her, there are problems with the bra and the silk tights. Consider elbows or knees moving away from the body.

One more question @ypg, what width would you recommend for the dressing room, if you have two 60cm wardrobes opposite each other?

So that you can sit on a chair in this room to dress and undress. Even socks. Everything else that is usually planned here hardly makes sense.

For kitchens, 120 cm between the rows is calculated, which mostly consist only of elements at work height. For a dressing room, the individual door widths are comparable, but the proportion of tall cabinets is significantly higher. I wouldn’t go below 150 cm aisle width there – however, I assume a dressing room is a space where the clothes taken from the closet are also put on immediately – for mere removal and the task of "dressing" elsewhere, less space is possible, but even then less than 100 cm is probably uncomfortable, unless one literally wants to stand with their backside against the wall in front of the opened cupboard door. Before it degenerates into "social housing," I would place the closet old-fashioned in the bedroom instead of writing a "dressing room" as a joke in the floor plan.

Getting by halfway.., unfortunately that doesn’t help.
Without flipping through the thread again (I don’t know what it’s about now), I’ll answer the question:
The space in front of a wardrobe should be sized so that I can open the door, take half a step back, and have the wardrobe contents in view. Also, the partner should still be able to get through while I’m standing there. Personally, I would avoid an elongated arrangement of a wardrobe room. Rather arrange the wardrobes in an L shape, then more space remains in the middle for dressing. The latter word (dressing) is deliberately chosen, as a walk-in closet is not a storage room for clothes, but a room where you select and put on your clothes for the day. It may be that Twiggy can undress in such narrow passages – but even she has problems with bras and silk tights. Consider elbows or knees moving away from the body.

So that you can get dressed and undressed on a chair in this room. Also socks. Everything else that is usually planned here hardly makes sense.

Dear Yvonne,
thank you very much for the quick response! Specifically, it was about the bedroom arrangement in the picture, where the walk-in closet was only 170 cm wide before, but could now grow to 210 cm, for example. Is 210 a step forward or do you still consider it far too small for two 60 cm wardrobes facing each other?

What other arrangement would be advantageous for the walk-in closet given the room dimensions?

Best regards

Specifically, it was about the bedroom arrangement in the picture, where the dressing room was previously only 170 cm wide, but could now, for example, grow to 210 cm.

Because of what: inheritance, interest, global warming, Christmas bonus? - twenty percent more on everything that has a plug or except pet food - when there is "too little," you can't buy ice cream for "even less before."

I am currently reworking the plan a bit, and it made sense to allocate a few more centimeters to the dressing room. If 220 instead of 210 makes the big difference, that would also be feasible. If 280 is the minimum, it will be rather difficult and I will have to change the concept entirely. "Putting on clothes" should not take place between the cabinets, rather "sorting in" and "taking out".

Keep in mind that cabinets are not placed directly against walls. I also consider a) 210 to be far too tight to make use of this area. It is worse than a conventional closet in the bedroom. b) I think 310 is too narrow for a bed with access. Sit down yourself on a chair/bed edge and lean forward: how much space do you take up without bumping your head? It may work in your rental apartment right now, but the time will come when you can no longer just jump into bed but need the space next to it.