This hotel must be going for some sort of a record, or something…
In this post:
The Hyatt Place London Paddington’s tiny rooms
The Hyatt Place London Paddington is expected to open in 2025. The 87-room property is the conversion of a decades-old independent hotel, which was desperately in need of a renovation, and not well reviewed. Traveling For Miles makes some fascinating observations about the room sizes at this hotel.
At the Hyatt Place London Paddington, the entry level rooms are anywhere from 96 to 161 square feet. That’s of course a huge variance — a 161-square-foot room is objectively tiny, while a 96-square-foot room… makes you wonder how that even works? Fitting a queen bed and bathroom into a space that compact is no small feat.
Next up is the king bed high floor room category, with rooms that are 107 to 150 square feet. 
Interestingly it looks like the king bed (non-high floor) rooms may just be an upgrade over that, as those rooms are 118-182 square feet.
Don’t worry, the property also has duplex suites… which are 204-226 square feet!
Will there be interest in a hotel with rooms this small?
Traveling For Miles makes an argument about why he thinks this hotel belonging to the Hyatt Place brand doesn’t make a whole lot of sense:
- This property doesn’t have hotel rooms, but rather has oversized closets
- The market for people who are okay with rooms this small is primarily backpackers and students, but they probably won’t be happy paying what the Hyatt Place will try to charge
- Since there’s no shortage of hotels in London, he wonders if the owners have thought through what their target market is, given that there are other hotel groups with reasonably priced rooms that aren’t nearly this small
- He thinks most people booking directly through Hyatt will avoid this hotel, so it’ll mostly be booked through online travel agencies, which perhaps somewhat negates the value of belonging to a major hotel group
I think those are all totally fair points, though I have a slightly different take. The hotel has a central location near Paddington, I suspect this will be the most reasonably priced Hyatt property in London, and it’s also not a very big hotel, so there aren’t that many rooms to fill.
I do think there are a fair number of people who might be loyal to Hyatt in some way, and want something that’s semi-affordable. Hotel loyalty programs make us act irrationally, and I don’t think this will be any different.
So whether it’s someone who wants to stay at a Hyatt while paying as little as possible, or someone wanting to redeem as few points as possible, I don’t think the hotel will struggle too much with getting decent occupancy levels.
Now, I do think this property will probably get pretty lousy guest ratings, when people book this hotel without carefully reading the room descriptions. I mean, the room pictures don’t necessarily do justice to just how small some of the rooms are. At the end of the day, those people will only have themselves to blame, though.
Bottom line
The upcoming Hyatt Place London Paddington must have some of the smallest hotel rooms I’ve ever heard of, let alone with a major hotel group. The property’s entry level rooms will be just under 100 square feet, while the property’s suites will be just over 200 square feet.
Would you stay at the Hyatt Place London Paddington if the price were right? Are there any other hotels belonging to one of the major hotel chains with rooms starting at under 100 square feet?
Hyatt has been so desperate for UK growth in the London market that they've went from virtually no London properties to a bunch in a very short period. Two or three were Crowne Plazas that converted. It seems like they'll take anyone these days. And don't forget, at Hyatt Place in Europe, breakfast isn't free for all guests. This hotel seems to be competing with that Four Points by Sheraton Express property that Marriott announced....
Hyatt has been so desperate for UK growth in the London market that they've went from virtually no London properties to a bunch in a very short period. Two or three were Crowne Plazas that converted. It seems like they'll take anyone these days. And don't forget, at Hyatt Place in Europe, breakfast isn't free for all guests. This hotel seems to be competing with that Four Points by Sheraton Express property that Marriott announced. There were allegations that not all of the rooms were en suite.
The fact that it's at Paddington means this could essentially serve as an airport hotel for Heathrow. If it's prices are reasonable, I'd very easily overlook a small room for a one night stays.
One time our corporate travel agent booked me in a tiny windowless shoebox in Stockholm because it was the policy to book the lowest priced room at any given hotel. I was on the road and got surprised at check in. Of cause all the nicer rooms were taken.
Some innocent business travelers may get surprised after their agent told them “I booked a Hyatt for you!”.
Yep I learned the hard way that using an "OTA" in Europe sometimes gets you exactly what you pay for and _nothing_ more. My shoebox occurred in Copenhagen, where my room was in the basement and faced the alleyway/garbage chute.
I am back from a trip to London and simply could not believe the sky-high hotel prices there... The stay at the Sheraton Park Lane was the worst experience this year. What a shabby hotel, no upgrade for elite guests, old and tired room with no view. Wow! But what is going on with the pricing?!!
I've stayed at the Mercure Hotel there at Paddington several times, and the rooms are TINY, and it's fine. I'm usually passing through London for 1-2 nights and just need a place to crash and it does the trick. The last time I was there (February 2023) I had a double bed pushed up against the wall with barely enough room to walk around the room, let alone open my suitcase, but it was clean...
I've stayed at the Mercure Hotel there at Paddington several times, and the rooms are TINY, and it's fine. I'm usually passing through London for 1-2 nights and just need a place to crash and it does the trick. The last time I was there (February 2023) I had a double bed pushed up against the wall with barely enough room to walk around the room, let alone open my suitcase, but it was clean and comfortable, and the price was about half the price of a "traditional" hotel room, and that's all that mattered to me. The location is fantastic, which is another big selling point. I was also a solo traveller, so it I wasn't sharing the room with anyone so that certainly helped.
I am absolutely nowhere near a backpacker and wouldn't ever set foot in a hostel, so this is not some place that naturally appeals to me, and it was still fine, it does what it needs to do. If you do need a traditional hotel room there is a spacious Hilton right next door.
Slap the word Hyatt on it - fool people who believe Hyatt is somehow a premium brand, make money off of blindly-brand loyal fools
Hi Lucky; have you done a search on hotel pricing in London lately? It’s off the roof. So if they price themselves accordingly I can see them being full all the time. But yeah I don’t think anytime pays attention to the room size until they get there. I spend 160+ nights a year in hotels and honestly the only time I look at room size is when I’m gonna use a suite night award.
Was this once a Quality Inn? Because we once stayed at the Quality Inn Paddington (about 20 years ago) with rooms exactly like this. The first night was spent in a room so small that it was just big enough to accommodate the bed. Our luggage blocked the door. But the furnishings, TV, bathroom, etc were brand new and very nice. They upgraded us the second night, to a room that was still small but...
Was this once a Quality Inn? Because we once stayed at the Quality Inn Paddington (about 20 years ago) with rooms exactly like this. The first night was spent in a room so small that it was just big enough to accommodate the bed. Our luggage blocked the door. But the furnishings, TV, bathroom, etc were brand new and very nice. They upgraded us the second night, to a room that was still small but not laughable. This new Hyatt Place reminds me very much of the aforementioned hotel.
Raise your hand if you thought Traveling for Miles was Ben's son's blog.
@ Alonzo -- LOL. Well, since he's two, his blog would probably be called ONAAT (One "No" at a Time).
Agree with Ben - even though this isn't a very compelling experience, the LOCATION of this as a place to spend Hyatt points on a lower category hotel is much needed - anytime i want to spend Hyatt points in London it's either a bad location or much further upmarket than I need.
The Four Points by Sheraton Euston is even worse at 8sqm or 86 square foot.
What do you mean this hotel doesn't belong in Hyatt.
It directly represent Hyatt's core brand image.
The footprint is so small and clustered. It's hardly useful for guests who like to go around a lot of places.
As an American who suffers through Premier Inns or hubs to save some money in England, I would much rather suffer through a loyalty program I value, but it has to be comparable in price!
Years ago, I stayed at a hotel in London where there was a twin bed (single bed) against a wall. There was a narrow walkway along one side of the bed. There was a closet at the foot of the bed and a little sink in the corner. In retrospect, I estimate the room to be 10 ft x 5 ft or 50 sq ft. Maybe it was 65 sq. ft.
It did have...
Years ago, I stayed at a hotel in London where there was a twin bed (single bed) against a wall. There was a narrow walkway along one side of the bed. There was a closet at the foot of the bed and a little sink in the corner. In retrospect, I estimate the room to be 10 ft x 5 ft or 50 sq ft. Maybe it was 65 sq. ft.
It did have a window! That's more than I can say about another London hotel that was in the basement and had a window facing a brick wall and about 3 ft. of space between the window and the brick wall of the next building.
The base rooms at Le Belgrand Hotel Paris Champs Elysees, Tapestry Collection by Hilton are 12 sqm or about 129 sq ft, not much bigger than the smallest base rooms here.
I'm afraid this is much more common than you think Lucky! Especially across Europe.
@ Ken -- Hah, I know small hotel rooms are common, but there's a big difference between 9 square meters and 12 square meters!
33% bigger to be EXACT, which is A LOT.
If these rooms were on the Orient Express they would be considered luxury suites priced at thousands of dollars. One way to look at it...
They should rebrand this as a Yotel.