Some of the "rules" about comma usage are left up to the discretion of the writer. Of course, there are situations where commas are required; "required" in the sense that if you leave them out you've made a grammar error. For example, after what is intended to be a non-restrictive relative clause:"Rooms in, and buildings around, the house"...
"Rooms in and buildings around the house."
Tom ran over the cat, which annoyed his wife.
Tom ran over the cat which annoyed his wife. X
(Gee, all that poor cat said was that her shoes didn't go with her dress...)
The comma is required. However, sometimes commas are optional. Here's the question: is there something about the meaning of "rooms in, and buildings around, the house" that suddenly becomes unclear or misleading when changed to "rooms in and buildings around the house"? Not to me. Both are completely clear to my reading, and so I say the commas are optional. Some may prefer the commas, or sincerely believe the look or sound better. That's fine. But are they required? Others may disagree, but I say no. I'm with you. Lose the commas: not because they're wrong, but simply because they're unnecessary.
Student or Learner