I thought I lived quite spacious. Terraced house measurements are about right for how I live at the moment. Sometimes am thinking about downsizing.
depends on style of terraced house. As i said elsewhere, mine is as narrow as they come, more like a glorified passageway. The larger of the two downstairs rooms is aboput 160 square feet (not troubling to subtract for space taken up by chimney breast and stairs) which would be fine if not for 3 entrances/exits making adjacent space unusable space..and the depressing dearth of natural light (the only window being squashed into the space next to kitchen, looking out into a narrow passage beween my kitchen and the dividing wall between properties )
I have a sofa, armchair, bookcase, computer desk, TV stand and a couple of coffee tables in this space, and that's quite enough to make it feel cramped and cluttered. There is nowhere remotely suitable to fit a dining table, so eating is done casually, on laps.
I'd like to "downsize" to a single bedroom flat with nice big windows. The right downsize (indeed most such flats) would be consideberably more spacious, and also easier to keep warm. (victorian houses are notoriously cold and draughty) But the rents are too high, and the landlords won;'t take tenants on benefits anyway. Ground floor flats in paticular are like gold. and that's what I'd be looking for...indeed I was looking for one a few years back, but gave up) . These houses are p[retty much the cheapest thing on the market.
It could be worse. They built masses of these terraces m in Victorian times, in the vicinity of the factories, and squeezed large -often extended- families into them. We're heading back towardas that kind of cramming in Britain now...but without the convenient workplaces! Heck , an awful lot of people are living on the street in my city, and i can count myself lucky not to be one of them, (it almost did come to that) so I'm not grumbling. But at the same time, it isn't something to aspire to either.