Foes say BC plans ignore aqueduct

With the city's zoning commission poised to weigh in on the university's plan tonight, the neighbors and environmentalists - including the Conservation Law Foundation and a former head of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority - want the panel to refrain from voting without a fuller review of how the expansion might disrupt the regional water mains.

"The public has long-range interests in the water supply in the Chestnut Hill area, and it's more than just that neighborhood," said Douglas B. MacDonald, who led the MWRA from 1992 to 2001 and later served as transportation secretary for Washington State, where he now lives.

Of particular concern is an area called Beer Can Hill, a wooded 4-acre tract that sits atop the site, where the aqueduct serving Boston and adjacent towns splits into northern and southern mains. While BC does not own the site and has no plans to develop it, the concerned groups say that construction of nearby athletic and academic facilities might damage the giant pipes and cut off the flow of water to the region.

Kairos Shen - chief planner for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, which must sign off on development plans in the city - defended the review process and dismissed environmental concerns as "crying wolf." The MWRA also does not share the concerns and does not plan to object tonight, because BC's 10-year master plan leaves Beer Can Hill untouched.

The site is officially known as Shaft 7, the access point that descends to the split in the water main. About 80 percent of the approximately 200 million gallons pumped daily by the MWRA passes through that point and branches from there to reach communities as far away as Wilmington to the north and Stoughton to the south, according to the MWRA.

MacDonald wrote to the city Monday objecting to any zoning changes that would enable BC's expansion until a fuller environmental review can be completed. In the letter and in an interview yesterday, he said the MWRA was shortsighted in seeking to protect only Shaft 7.

Blasting in the vicinity might disturb the rock ledge at Shaft 7 and cut off the region's water supply, MacDonald said. Meanwhile, future construction of secondary pipes to allow water to continue to flow in the event of a planned or unplanned disruption to the main MWRA line could complicate BC's campus-expansion plans at the expense of the university and water ratepayers, he said.

"It's more than just a neighborhood question of how or where you're going to put a soccer field or a baseball field," he said by phone yesterday. "It's a question of how the land over that network of pipes should be kept accessible for future planned or emergency needs of the water-supply system. I would hope that there's no rush to judgment at the zoning commission."

The Conservation Law Foundation and the group Brighton Neighbors United expressed similar concerns in letters to Mayor Thomas M. Menino and the zoning commission this week.

An MWRA spokeswoman said that the water authority, BC, and the BRA discussed the sensitivity of the area extensively over the last several years and that the MWRA believes that the proposed master plan would not harm the water supply.

"They worked this issue pretty hard, and we feel as though [BC has] addressed our concerns," MWRA spokeswoman Ria Convery said yesterday. "We will try to work with them on the easement issues. And, obviously, our first concern is protection for the water supply."

BC wants to build a host of academic, recreation, and fine arts buildings, a trio of new playing fields, and enough additional beds to house all students on-campus, either on the main Chestnut Hill campus or on nearby land in Brighton obtained from the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston.

BC spokesman Jack Dunn said the university is satisfied by the MWRA opinion and hopes the commission approves the zoning changes tonight that will allow the project to proceed.

"Boston College has presented a thoughtful and balanced plan that has already been approved by a neighborhood task force and the BRA, and we trust the zoning commission will review the plan based on its merits," Dunn said.

Ram Rao, cochairman of Brighton Neighbors United, said the group did not raise questions about the water issue until recently because it was unaware of its significance. The discussions between the university and the two authorities occurred largely beyond public view, he said. "The BRA is a public agency that is supposed to be representing the community, but it has felt quite the opposite to us."

Menino said yesterday he was unfamiliar with the water issue. But he vowed that the city would continue what he called a deliberate review of the university's plans.

"I'm not going to let BC steamroll anybody," he said. "But we have growth. They bought the property, and they have certain rights."

Michael Levenson of the Globe staff contributed to this report.