ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    January 6, 1972
    RICHARD ABEL &
    COMPANY,
    INC., and
    ZION STATE BANK AND TRUST
    CONPANY,
    as Trustee under Trust No. 135
    #71—290
    v.
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    MR. DONALD C. LUNDQUIST, ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONERS
    MR. RICHARD COSBY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, ATTORNEY FOR
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    PROTECTION AGENCY
    OPINION OF THE BOARD (BY MR. LAWTON):
    Petition for variance was filed by Zion State Bank and Trust
    Company, Trustee under Trust No. 135, as record title holder, and
    Richard Abel & Company, Inc. as contract purchaser, seeking relief
    from our sewer ban order entered in League of Women Voters v. NSSD,
    #70—7,
    to enable the contract purchaser to construct a new whole-
    sale book warehouse in the Zion Industrial Park, Zion, Illinois.
    Abel presently operates its wholesale book business in Zion, em-
    ploying approximately 100 persons. The present location is leased
    until 1973 and Abel does not anticipate any problem in renewal of
    the lease. However, the present space is inadequate, both as to
    accommodating growth of the business and in providing suitable
    parking. A 50,000 square foot structure is contemplated on the
    new site with expansion ultimately to 100,000 square feet. The
    same number
    of
    persons would be employed at the new site as at
    the old.
    The evidence indicates that an average of 610 gallons of water
    per day are
    discharged from the present structure, principally
    from washroom use.
    No industrial sewage is generated by the opera-
    tion, nor will any be at the new location. The present facility
    is not air—conditioned while the new one will be. The evidence
    is not clear as to whether this will create any increase in the
    water flow into the sewers or whether water used for air—conditioning
    will be recycled.
    Construction cost of the new structure will be
    in the range of $800~000.00. No work has been done on the premises
    to date and Abel’s contract of purchase is conditional on allowance
    of the sewer tie—in. Petitioners allege that a septic system
    could be installed at the new location for $12,000.00.
    3-159
    On the facts of.the~present case, we must deny the variance.
    We recognize that the hydraulic and organic load on the sewer
    system generated by the proposed operation will not be extreme.
    However, this case must be decided on the doctrine set forth
    in Fred Wachta and J. Richard Mota, d/b/a Belle Plaine Division
    v. EPA, #71-77; Robert H. Monyek v. EPA, #71-80 and Robert C.
    Wagnon v. EPA, #71-85. No construction has been initiated, to
    date. Further, there is no question but that the premises vacated
    by petitioners will be available for continued use, presumably
    of an intensity comparable to that presently existing. This is
    not a simple case of moving one sewer load to another location.
    The sewer load, in effect, would be doubled by allowing the new
    operation, ~and at the same time permitting the availability of
    the old site for continued use.~ Cf. Lake Cot~ntySchool Distiçict
    #64 v. EPA, #71—313, #71-382; Wai4kçgan Park District v. EPA,
    #71—314, #71—342.
    We recognize the desire of the City of Zion to have the new
    facility in its industrial park, as eloquently expressed by Mayor
    Dunbar. However, the hardship on Petitioners is disproportionate
    with that which would be imposed on the community if we do not
    adhere to our original order set forth in League of Women Voters
    v. NSSD, #70-7, which we have varied in only the most extreme cases
    of hardship and where the public welfare would not be adversely
    affected by such variance. The showing in the present case is
    not of a magnitude to justify this action.
    The Board is presently conducting hearings on regulations rela-
    ting to sewer connection bans, #R71-19. At such time as these
    regulations are adopted, petitioners may again seek such relief as
    is appropriate. Our Order of denial in this proceeding in no way
    forecloses them from taking such action.
    This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
    of law of the Board.
    Mr. Dumelle dissents.
    IT IS THE ORDER of the Pollution Control Board that the variance
    be denied.
    I, Christan Moffett,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Bard, certify that the above Opinion was adopted on the C~’day
    of January, 1972.’ by a vote of 3-L.
    3
    —
    360

    Back to top