Cheektowaga board hears developers on Indian Road solar project as neighbors raise safety, visual and decommissioning concerns

AC Power representatives presented the proposed Indian Road Solar Project to the Town of Cheektowaga Town Board at its Jan. 14, 2025 work session, describing a roughly 3.25-megawatt (AC) community-scale array to be installed on about 20 acres of a 42-acre closed and capped landfill near Indian Road.

The presentation matters because the project would place solar infrastructure atop a capped municipal landfill in an area that spans parts of Cheektowaga and Depew, and because residents submitted petitions and comments to the town. AC Power said the principal remaining Town action is site-plan approval; the company said the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a use variance in August 2021 and that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) issued a Type II determination for solar on landfill, which AC Power said requires no further environmental review.

Gina Wolfman, team lead and senior director of project development at AC Power, said the firm specializes in siting solar on previously disturbed land and “we only develop these types of sites. We don't build on farmland.” Alex Kaven of Tetra Tech, AC Power’s engineering and environmental consultant, described the layout and engineering controls, saying the array will be ballasted on concrete blocks and sited on the flattest portions of the cap to preserve structural stability. Kaven said the project will maintain a 100-foot buffer from a nearby creek and that interconnection with the grid is via NYSEG along Indian Road.

Developers said they have submitted a detailed engineering package to DEC Region 9 that includes geotechnical analysis, stormwater calculations and a full plan set; they reported receiving only minor engineering comments from DEC and said they have addressed them. AC Power said it submitted a State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) request and received a determination of no impact, and that US Fish and Wildlife and DEC reviews for threatened and endangered species also required no further action. The company said there is no battery storage associated with the proposal.

Town board members and residents raised multiple concerns during the discussion: visibility from nearby homes and whether renderings accurately represent what residents will see; risk of fire and emergency access for volunteer firefighters; wildlife impacts and recreational use of the parcel; long-term decommissioning and who would pay for site restoration; and whether the project’s components (panels, inverters, ballast) would be sourced from particular suppliers.

On decommissioning, AC Power said typical project life is 20–30 years and that decommissioning is handled under a decommissioning agreement and a surety (bond) consistent with town requirements. Henry Zomerfeld, outside counsel for AC Power, said the company would execute a bond or similar surety to cover removal and restoration and that the town could require incremental increases in the surety during the project's life.

On fire and emergency response, AC Power representatives said operations-and-maintenance (O&M) plans include monitoring, emergency shutdowns, and coordination with local fire officials. Alex Kaven noted real‑time monitoring systems that report performance disruptions to operators; the presenters said they are willing to meet with local fire companies to develop response plans and access arrangements, and that many of the site’s nearest homes are about 600 feet from the array. The company said in many cases local fire departments would manage incidents consistent with their protocols and that the proposed array has no on-site batteries, distinguishing it from recent solar-plus-storage fires.

Developers also discussed mitigation for visuals, showing renderings and line‑of‑sight modeling based on surveyed topography, lidar and street‑view data; their renderings indicate limited visibility from the neighborhood in summer (leaf‑on) conditions and modest visibility in winter. AC Power said it conducted drive‑by field checks from public rights of way and modeled viewpoints to respond to residents’ visual-impact comments.

Company representatives said they are preparing a pilot payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) agreement and are open to negotiating a host community benefits agreement with the town and taxing jurisdictions. They also said they commissioned property‑value research and cited industry studies and national appraisals that, in their view, show mixed or negligible effects on nearby property values.

What the board may decide next: the developer said the remaining local step is site‑plan review under town code. Counsel stated that because the ZBA granted the use variance and DEC issued a Type II determination, the town board’s discretion is limited to the site‑plan standards the code specifies. Developers offered to accept reasonable site‑plan conditions addressing access, safety and aesthetic measures.

The town board heard the presentation, followed by an extended question-and-answer period. No vote on the site plan was taken at the Jan. 14 work session; the application remains pending before the town board for site-plan action.