cleanup · Erie County

Depew Village Landfill

Depew

Former 1940–1961 village landfill and incinerator beside Cayuga Creek. A halted 2001 streambank project exposed hazardous lead-bearing fill, prompting a larger State Superfund investigation and a two-part remedy for the landfill, creek bank, sediment, methane, and erosion pathways. Long-term monitoring and site management continue.

The documented story

What happened here?

Depew operated a municipal landfill and refuse incinerator beside Cayuga Creek from about 1940 to 1961. Contemporary boundaries were never recorded, but later estimates describe a roughly 20-acre operation receiving about 10,000 tons of municipal waste each year, with incinerator ash and other fill spread across a creek-bounded peninsula now shared with public-works infrastructure.

The environmental story re-emerged during an Army Corps streambank project in 2001. Excavation along Zurbrick Road exposed fill containing lead as high as 86,000 parts per million and material that failed the federal leaching test for hazardous lead. The Corps stopped work, and subsequent investigation expanded the state registry boundary from 1.3 to 20 acres after finding that contamination extended far beyond the original mapped parcel.

Lead was mainly bound to soil and ash rather than significantly moving in groundwater, but erosion carried metals from exposed banks into Cayuga Creek sediment. Methane was also widespread in the fill, creating a separate accumulation hazard for buildings and utilities. Those different pathways drove a two-part remedy for the upland landfill and the creek, banks, floodplain, and Zurbrick Road fill.

An unmapped municipal dump spread beyond its original registry parcel

Depew's landfill became a Cayuga Creek and floodplain cleanup

32 acresapproximately, evaluated in the broader study area

Disposal era

Municipal dumping changed a bend in Cayuga Creek

Waste and fill were placed near the creek without a complete boundary map. Later public-works and sewer infrastructure occupied parts of the altered floodplain landscape.

2008-2009 decisions

Two remedies separated upland waste from the creek environment

DEC created distinct operable units for the landfill/source area and for Cayuga Creek, sediment, floodplain, and Zurbrick Road fill, allowing each pathway to receive an appropriate response.

Construction and stewardship

Excavation, cover, and bank restoration replaced open disposal

Cleanup addressed contaminated fill, creek-bank material, exposure, and migration. Site management, inspection, and controls continue after construction.

NYSDEC: Depew Village Landfill record of decisionNYSDEC: 2023 periodic review reportNYSDEC: Depew Village Landfill documents

News record

Major news events

Coverage selected here marks a turning point in public awareness, policy, enforcement, employment, or cleanup. Links open at the original publisher or archive; WNYAtlas does not reproduce restricted articles or images.

Local

A creek-bank project uncovers hazardous lead and stops work

Army Corps excavation along Zurbrick Road encountered fill with lead up to 86,000 ppm and material that failed the hazardous-waste leaching test, revealing that the former landfill extended beyond its small registry parcel.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Local

Long-term review finds the creek-edge remedy protective with maintenance still required

DEC's periodic review kept annual inspection and water and sediment monitoring in place and identified well repair and seep sampling work—an example of a completed remedy still needing active stewardship.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Chronology

Timeline

  1. 1940–1961

    The village landfill and incinerator reportedly handled about 10,000 tons of municipal waste per year beside Cayuga Creek.

  2. 2001

    An Army Corps streambank project exposed fill with lead up to 86,000 ppm and stopped after material failed the hazardous-waste leaching test.

  3. 2004–2007

    Investigation confirmed extensive metals contamination, returned the site to the Class 2 registry, and enlarged its listed footprint from 1.3 to 20 acres.

  4. 2008–2009

    DEC selected separate remedies for the landfill/source area and the Cayuga Creek, sediment, floodplain, and Zurbrick Road areas.

  5. 2012–2020

    Construction removed bank material, stabilized and restored the creek edge, installed cover and gas controls, and culminated in final engineering and site-management plans.

  6. 2022–2023 review

    Periodic review found the remedy remained protective while calling for continued annual water and sediment monitoring, inspections, and repair of a damaged well.

Environmental record

Documented impacts

  • Approximately 2.8 acres of soil contained lead above the commercial-use criterion, and about 12 acres exceeded the ecological soil criterion used in the 2008 decision.
  • Erosion from lead-bearing soil and ash affected Cayuga Creek sediment; lead exceeded the severe-effect screening level at four of seven sampled stream locations.
  • Groundwater investigation did not identify a site-related contaminant of concern, while methane in the fill required passive venting and continued vapor review for future buildings.

Response

Cleanup and controls

  • DEC divided the remedy into operable units so upland fill and the creek environment could be addressed appropriately.
  • Contaminated bank soil and fill were excavated and integrated beneath the upland cover; the creek bank was rebuilt and stabilized to interrupt erosion into Cayuga Creek.
  • A one-foot soil cover protects vegetated land, pavement or concrete covers active work areas, and passive vents control landfill gas.
  • An environmental easement limits the property to commercial or industrial use, restricts groundwater use and excavation, and requires monitoring of groundwater, surface water, sediment, and biota.

Then and now

The site today

The landfill now functions as a managed public-works landscape, but the creek bank, cover, vents, wells, and easement are working parts of the remedy. DEC's recent periodic review called it protective; that conclusion applies to the maintained controls and documented site—not to every reach of the larger Cayuga Creek watershed.