ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

October 25, 1973

MISS

MABEL

HOLLE

PETITIONER

v.

)

PCB 73—319

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY

RESPONDENT

OPINION

AND

ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Marder)

This action involves a variance request.

Relief

is

sought

from Order ~7 of League of Women Voters vs. North

Shore Sanitary

District, PCB

70—7,

12,

13,

14.

Grant of this variance would al-

low a sewer hookup for a lot in Lake

County.

A similar petition was filed by Miss Holle’s sister on May

7,

1973

(PCB 73—188).

The Board on July 2,

1973, denied this pet-

ition without prejudice.

The identical issues are raised in this

action that were raised in PCB 73—188.

The

only difference is that

the Petitioner is the landowner rather than the intended purchaser.

The Agency contends that Miss Holle

is an improper petitioner

in

this action.

This contention

is certainly open to dispute; how-

ever,

in this

case Miss Holle

is clearly pleading her sister’s

hardship rath~r ~tianher own.

The

only contention of hardship on

the

Petitioner’s

part

is that she has incurred normal costs

as

part of owning land.

The land was owned by Petitioner for over

ten years, and there

is no evidence entered as to whether Petition-

er had ever tried to dispose of this

land.

In the Board’s decision regarding PCI3 73—188, certain quest-

ions were raised.

Because of the lack of answers to these quest-

ions,

the petition was denied without prejudice.

This opinion

stated that the original Petitioner

(Mrs.

Patrick)

could file

a

new petition detailing certain points.

A new petition should con-

tain information on the following points:

1)

The possibility of obtaining Social Secur-

ity payments for minor children

2)

The rental structure in the area and avail—

9

—

645

---

—2—

ability of

a lower—rent apartment.

3)

Petitioner’s financial ability or in-

ability to:

a)

Purchase an existing home.

b)

Continue

to

rent

her

present

apartment.

The

decision

to

impose

a

sewer

ban

on

the

North

Shore

Sani-

tary District was not made lightly.

Testimony elicited at the

time

clearly

showed

a

serious

condition

existed,

and

that

Lake

Michigan

was

in

danger

of

being

irreparably

damaged

due

to

the

discharge of raw sewage.

It was recognized at the time that this

ban would impose hardship on the residents of the affected areas,

but

non-action

would

have

imposed

a

much

greater

hardship

on

a

much greater number of people.

On October 25,

1973,

the Board received a report from

the

Environmental Protection Agency regarding the present status of

the

sewage treatment plants in question.

This data indicates that

many of the plants

in the North Shore Sanitary

District are upgrad-

ed sufficiently to allow

the

Board

to

somewhat relax the still—in-ef-

fect sewer ban.

Although the instant case leaves

a

few

points un-

answered,

it

is

the

Board’s ooinion that

a hardship case

is evident.

A variance will be granted

in light

of said hardship.

This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions

of law of the Board.

ORDER

IT IS THE ORDER of

the

Pollution Control Board that

a variance

be granted to Miss Mabel

Hoile

to connect

a single-family residence

to the

North

Shore Sanitary District’s sewer system.

It

is to be

understood that this variance shall apply to a single family resi-

dence in the name of

f4iss Mabel ifolle or Mrs. Patricia Patrick.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

I,

Christan

L.

Moffett, Clerk of the

Illinois

Pollution Con-

trol

Board,

certify

that

the

above

Op1

ion

and

Order

was

adopted

by

th

Board

on

the

~

~\

day

of

~

,

1973, by

a vote

of

______

to

~