Wellesley McMansions not so big after all

By Lisa Kocian, Globe Staff

Wellesley's McMansions just don't measure up. Dover is the place to go for big houses.

A survey of the biggest new houses built in the region from 1999 to 2005 found that Dover had the highest average square footage of new home construction in that period. While the average Massachusetts home built during that period was 2,700 square feet, the average Dover home weighed in at a whopping 6,700 square feet, according to a report by Mass Audubon.

Wellesley, which drew attention after enacting tighter reviews of so-called McMansions in 2007, ranked eighth, with new homes averaging 4,600 square feet between 1999 and 2005. Of the top 10 towns with the largest new homes, nine were in the suburbs west of Boston. Lincoln, Brookline, Weston, and Carlisle rounded out the top five.

See Top 20 communities with largest houses here.

Wellesley is filed with half-acre lots, said local builder Ron Compagnone, and when someone tries to build big on a small lot, the charge of ‘‘McMansion’’ is often hurled. Dover doesn’t really have that issue because homes are set back from the street on larger lots, he said.

Even as a builder, Compagnone said he is all for ‘‘large house’’ restrictions — like those in Wellesley, Lincoln, and Weston — that let neighbors have a say when a proposed home goes over a certain threshold.

Unlike those three towns, Dover hasn’t had the debate over restricting home size, suggesting that mansions might just be more common there.

‘‘I feel like I’m privileged to live in a community with a tremendous amount of open space and good zoning and large lots,’’ said Carol Lisbon, chairwoman of the Dover Board of Selectmen. ‘‘I think Dover is a wonderful community, which has managed to keep its open, green character regardless of what the numbers look like.’’

Last year, Dover put 100 acres of land under conservation restriction, she noted.

Lincoln has had a ‘‘big house’’ bylaw since 2003. It was developed for the same reasons as Wellesley’s: ‘‘The smaller homes that had been in existence were getting torn down and the McMansions were going up,’’ said Mark Whitehead, Lincoln town planner.

But here’s the multimillion-dollar-meticulously-landscaped-marble-tiled question: Are such restrictions working?

‘‘Yes and no,’’ said Whitehead, because the bylaw doesn’t restrict the house size, but instead triggers a site plan review.

The Planning Board looks at the overall scale and style of the house and ‘‘whether it’s overly imposing on the neighborhood,’’ he said.

‘‘They can get them to scale down in certain circumstances, but it doesn’t happen too often,’’ said Whitehead. ‘‘We’re still getting some fairly large homes.’’

Compagnone is working on two houses in Dover on a little more than five acres. The $7.5 million house, which will be 9,200 square feet when finished, is set back from Dedham Street. He also just completed an 8,500-square-foot house on Pine Street that is on the market for $3.8 million.

Both houses are on what had been empty land.

Of course the economy has slammed the real estate market, but you’d never know it talking to Compagnone. ‘‘The higher-end homes, they haven’t been hit as bad,’’ he said.

The news from Mass Audubon (www.massaudubon.org) comes in the fourth edition of its report ‘‘Losing Ground,’’ a series that began in 1991. A key finding in this edition is the reversal of a long-term trend: Massachusetts is now protecting about twice as much land as it is losing to development, for the first time in decades. Open spaces are being developed at a rate of about 22 acres per day, while about 43 acres are being protected daily, a huge change compared with a decade earlier.

The report includes information on big houses.

But there's no need for millionaire bashing. Here comes the counterintuitive twist: It turns out that constructing a large home in a community like Dover, which is already well developed, is preferable from an environmental standpoint to gobbling up a smaller tract in the more pristine environs of Western Massachusetts.

‘‘A McMansion in the suburbs is less ecologically damaging than a modest-sized home in the Berkshires,’’ said Jack Clarke, director of public policy and government relations for Mass Audubon.

Really?

‘‘It’s better to build a house of that size in suburbia than it is in a rural part of the state in terms of impacts on the surrounding environment,’’ he repeated.

He explained that’s because communities closer to Boston are already built out or close to it. The wildlife habitat has already been disrupted, for example.

That’s not to say Mass Audubon is promoting large home construction anywhere. But it has to pick its battles, so the group is promoting rezoning and conservation, particularly in the western and southeastern parts of the state.