A LITTLE FURTHER TOPOGRAPHICAL SEARCH

The bottom end of the apparent Interceptor Trench running down the approximate centre of the former Uniroyal Chemical site (now Lanxess Canada) is located on the eastern property line at an elevation of 347.75 metres above sea level (masl). The top end is located at a conservative elevation of 352.25 masl. Therefore the difference in elevation from top to bottom is approximately 4.5 metres which is about fifteen feet. Contrary to claims by Lou Almeida of GHD Consulting, pumping stations would not be required for contaminated groundwater and solvents to flow south-east over to the Stroh property.

Another claim made was that possibly the lines that have shown up on a number of satellite photos on-line (Google, Region of Waterloo GIS, Maplandia) as well as maps produced by CRA and GHD were nothing more than a footpath southwards from the old house that was once located on the Uniroyal Chemical property at the north end near Church St. My research to date is not giving that theory much credence. Among other things the timing is off as the estimate I have for removal of that house is around 1985. Even at that late date Uniroyal had been using the east side of the site for toxic waste disposal for the previous thirty years or more. They had a road which crossed a bridge on the west side of the creek property over to the east side and up the hill in order to access the pits (RPE 1-5) running for hundreds of metres southwards. Therefore everything from cars, trucks and heavy equipment would have been accessing the east side both for those pits and for IR-1 and IR-2 waste disposal areas. Therefore it begs the question why would a home at the north end of the site closer to Church St. have a pathway southwards across the roadway that was transporting vehicles as well as sludges and solid toxic wastes from time to time? One the chemical company would not have permitted it and surely the parents of the children who lived in that home would not have permitted an ongoing walkway or pathway across the property and across the vehicle roadway and then further south into the middle of an active and ongoing chemical company. Sorry but that explanation for what is more likely to be an Interceptor Trench is highly unlikely and without backup or evidence seems to be grasping at straws.

The last point is this. Most of the east side supports scrub bushes and vegetation, grasses and even some trees. Why on earth, even if there had been a pedestrian walkway back in the 1950s to the mid 1980s, would the pathway not be overgrown by now? Why would a footpath still be visible from either aerial or satellite photos? If on the other hand the visible line was the result of horizontal drilling or even a backhoe to install tile to run contaminated groundwater across the site, and especially if it was done in 1991 as was proposed by CRA and Morrison & Beatty, then I would expect some parts of it to be still visible.