Ask A Genius 1419: Maximizing Space in London’s “Two Up, Two Down” Terraced Houses
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/09
Rick Rosner is an accomplished television writer with credits on shows like Jimmy Kimmel Live!, Crank Yankers, and The Man Show. Over his career, he has earned multiple Writers Guild Award nominations—winning one—and an Emmy nomination. Rosner holds a broad academic background, graduating with the equivalent of eight majors. Based in Los Angeles, he continues to write and develop ideas while spending time with his wife, daughter, and two dogs.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen is the publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978-1-0692343) and Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369-6885). He writes for The Good Men Project, International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN 0018-7399; Online: ISSN 2163-3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), A Further Inquiry, and other media. He is a member in good standing of numerous media organizations.
Rick Rosner vicariously explores London’s compact Victorian and Edwardian “two up, two down” terraced houses, noting narrow dimensions, high per-square-foot costs (£900–£1,200) in central areas, and inefficient hallways. He advises potential buyers to avoid properties with long corridors, favoring open-plan layouts or minimal core areas to maximize usable living space.
Rick Rosner: So, our kid got married. She is living in London. She and her husband are renting a place, and now they are exploring the possibility of buying one. So, housing in London is surprising if you’re coming from somewhere like L.A., where houses are expensive—but at least you get some square footage for your money.
In London, most of the housing stock—especially in older, central neighbourhoods—is made up of Victorian or Edwardian terraced houses. A common type is called “two up, two down,” which refers to two rooms on the ground floor—typically a kitchen and a reception room—and two bedrooms upstairs. They were initially built for working-class families in the 19th century, so they’re not luxurious—just basic row houses.
These houses are narrow—often just 12 to 16 feet wide—and you still have to fit a staircase inside. You don’t get much usable space. For something around £600,000 (depending on the neighbourhood), you might get about 650–750 square feet. That works out to roughly £900 to £1,200 per square foot, sometimes more in central areas. That’s more per square foot than L.A.—and the space feels tighter, too.
London is expensive primarily due to its limited housing supply, zoning restrictions, and the age of its buildings. Most of this housing stock was built over a century ago, during a period of rapid urban expansion in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
Anyway, I’ve been house-hunting vicariously in London because I’m curious. I’ll offer my two cents at some point, even if they don’t want to hear it. One thing I’ve realized, after years of looking at floor plans, is this: hallways are a waste.
If you’re looking at a place with long or awkward hallways, walk away. Hallways often mean lazy or outdated design, and they eat up valuable square footage that could go to actual living space when you’re shopping in cities where the price per square foot is a huge issue—places like Vancouver, San Francisco, L.A., or London—long hallways are a red flag.
Unless it’s a place where you can knock down non-structural walls and open up the space—connecting, say, the kitchen and the living room—that’s a better use of the square footage. You gain versatility and flow.
If you’re looking at a 700-square-foot home and 80 square feet of that is a hallway, that’s a severe inefficiency. It’s entirely possible to find homes with minimal hallways. I’ve seen floor plans where there’s just a small core area—10 or 15 square feet—where the doors to the bathroom and bedrooms open. That’s the ideal.
If you’re rich as hell—which is not me or anybody I know—then hallways can serve a purpose. If price is no object, they can be used to create privacy, like placing the parents’ bedroom on the opposite side of the house from the kids’. But that’s only for people with mansions.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 