ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
March
1,
1979
WILDROSE CORPORATION &
L.A. GOLDSCHMIDT,
Petitioners,
PCB 78—253
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY,
Respondent.
OPINION
AND
ORDER OF THE BOARD
(by Mr. Goodman):
On September
18,
1978,
Wildrose Corporation
(Wildrose)
and
L~A~Goldschmidt filed a
petition for
variance
requesting
relief from Rules 604,
951
and 962 of Chapter
3: Water Pollution
Control Rules and Regulations, to allow
a sanitary sewer ex-
tension tributary to the St.
Charles,
Illinois sewage treatment
plant.
No hearing was held in this matter,
and the Board has
received no public
comment.
This matter is similar to two cases decided previously
by the Board,
Shodeen and St. Charles
v. EPA, PCB 78-173 and
Rossetter,
Fitzsimmons
and St. Charles
v. EPA,
PCB 78-147.
~
with an
Illinois
Environmental
Protection Agency (Agency)
sewer ban
in St.
Charles,
Illinois due to intermittent sanitary sewer
overflows into
the
Fox River in violation of Rule 602(b)
of
Chapter
3 of the
Board~sRegulations.
Although the
St. Charles sanitary
treatment
plant is capable of handling all
current sewage
flows,
there
is apparently not adequate capacity
in the delivery system
to handle flows during periods of exces-
sively
heavy
rainfall when infiltration and inflow of extraneous
water into the system due
to defective piping and illegal connec-
tions
necessitates
bypassinq into the Fox River.
The
parties herein
have entered into a stipulation of
fact and have agreed
that a variance is necessary only from Rule
962 of Chapter
3,
The
stipulated facts include information
concerning the St.
Charles
wastewater treatment plant and the
delivery system with
respect to overflows during excessively
heavy
rainfall.
In
addition,
the parties stipulate to information
contained
in a
report
developed
by RJN Environmental Associates,
Inc.,
for Shodeen,
Rossetter and Fitzsimmons
in the previous
variance cases
decided by the Board.
This information was the
basis for the
Board~sprevious grant of variance in Shodeen and
Rossetter.
33—25
—2—
New facts brought to the
Board’s attention in this case
include
a program by the City
of
St. Charles
to minimize
and
eventually eliminate sanitary
sewer overflows.
The City
has been awarded a Step
I
grant and
is conducting a sewer system
evaluation study which is
now anticipated to be completed by
early summer
1979.
In addition,
St. Charles
is initiating
a
program to fix defective pipes,
which will allow infiltration
into the system,
and to identify
and eliminate illegal connections
to the sewer
system.
St.
Charles thus expects to gradually
decrease the volume of extraneous
flow through its system.
The St. Charles program is
projected to be completed prior to 1984.
The development under
consideration here, Wildrose Springs,
will be completed gradually
over
a
five year period and will
generate a wastewater flow
estimated to be between 10,000 and
51,000 gallons per day over a
period from 1980 through 1984.
The projected completion dates
and the cumulative wastewater
contribution of the project
are listed on page
4 of the Stipulation
presented to the Board,
dated February
9,
1979, which Stipulation
is incorporated by reference
as
if fully set forth herein.
According to Tables 11—5,
11-6,
and 11—9 of the RJN study,
the additional wastewater flow
resulting from Wildrose Springs
as fully developed
would have added no more than
1.8
to the
maximum previously
recorded overflows in
1976.
In addition,
it
is anticipated that
as
the
Wildrose Springs contribution increases
year by year,
the program instituted by the City of St. Charles
will be concurrently
decreasing the flows due to adverse weather
conditions.
The Stipulation of Fact
recites the history of the proposed
development dating from 1970 when
Wildrose began the process of
planning, engineering and design.
This process was completed in
1975 when the property was annexed
to St. Charles and all pre-
liminary approvals of the site plan
and zoning were obtained.
Due to severe financial problems at
that time,
Wildrose was unable
to commence construction and
was consequently unable to make
required payments on outstanding
loans.
In June of 1976,
Wildrose
filed a petition for arrangement
under Chapter XI of the
Bankruptcy
Act
in the United States District
Court listing liabilities
of
about $800,000.00,
In December of
1976, Wildrose contracted to sell
the west 125 acres to Goldschmidt.
The
bankruptcy court approved
the agreement, and Goldschmidt
subsequently proceeded with the
pre-
development work—~inc1uding
architectural
design, engineering
plans,
market research, etc. incurring
expenses in excess of $60,000.00
as
of March
10,
1978,
the date when the Agency placed St. Charles on a
restricted status.
Construction was
to commence in mid—1978,
If Wildrose Springs
is unable to proceed, Wildrose will be
denied an opportunity to
make
a
return on its investments.
In
addition the park and school
districts will lose
a
donation in
the form of land and/or cash,
and the City of St. Charles will
33—26
—3—
be denied sewer connection fees and water connection fees which
have been earmarked for capital improvements to the City’s waste-
water treatment facilities and water distribution systems.
Further-
more,
taxing bodies in the area will be deprived of tax revenues,
as was the case in Shodeen and Rossetter.
The Agency in its recommendation proposes that the Board
deny the requested variance, stating that any increase in the
discharge to the Fox River,
however small, would be detrimental
to the environment.
In the alternative, should the Board
decide to grant the variance, the Agency suggests that the
variance be conditioned upon step—wise discharges,
scheduled pur-
suant to the proposed building program contained in the Stipula—
tion of Fact.
In this manner
it
is hoped that the increased
discharge by Wildrose Springs would be countered by concurrent
improvements
in carrying capacity due to the program being
pursued by the City of St.
Charles,
Wildrose on the other hand
argues that
it should be granted an unconditioned variance similar
to those granted in Shodeen and Rossetter without the stepped
discharge condition.
Balancing the very minor potential environmental harm
against the potential
financial damage to Wildrose and the
surrounding community should the variance be denied, and
considering the fact that Wildrose was well into the development
of this area prior to the imposition of the restricted status
on the St. Charles
sewage system by the Agency, the Board
finds that it would be an arbitrary and unreasonable hardship
to deny the requested variance in this case.
The Board
is not
pursuaded, however, by the Wildrose contention that it should
be granted an unconditioned variance.
The petition for variance
was founded upon the plan of development proposed and followed
by Wildrose prior to the Agency restricted status determination.
It
therefore follows that any variance granted should be conditioned
to follow the proposed development plan.
The Board will condition
the variance upon a step—wise discharge limitation pursuant to the
previously noted program contained on page
4 of the fact stipu-
lation,
In addition,
the Board shall, on its own motion,
implead
the City of St. Charles
in this matter for the purpose of notice.
This Opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Board in this matter.
ORDER
It is the Order of the Pollution Control Board that:
1)
Wildrose Corporation and L.A. Goldschmidt be granted variance
from Rule 962 of Chapter
3: Water Pollution Control Rules
and
Regulations to allow a sanitary sewage extension tributary
3 3—27
—4—
to the St. Charles sewage treatment plant subject to the
following conditions:
a)
Discharge shall be limited in a step—wise fashion pur-
suant to the estimated flow contained on page
4
of the Stipulation of Fact filed before the Board
February
9,
1979, which stipulation
is incorporated
by reference as fully set forth.
b)
Within 45 days
of the adoption of this Order, the
Wildrose Corporation and L.A. Goldschmidt shall
execute and forward to the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency,
2200 Churchill Road,
Springfield,
Illinois 62706 a Certification of Acceptance and
Agreement to be bound to all terms and conditions of
this Order.
The
45 day period shall be held
in abey-
ance during any period this matter is being appealed.
The Form of said certification shall
be as follows:
CERTIFICATION
I,
(We),
having read
and fully understanding the Order of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board in PCB 78-253,
hereby accept said Order and agree
to be bound by all of the terms and conditions thereof.
SIGNED _________________________
TITLE ____________________________
DATE ______________________________
2)
The City of St. Charles
is made a party hereto for the
sole purpose of notice.
I, Christan L, Moffett,
Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board,
hereby certify the above Opinion and Order
were adopted on the
~
day of
____________,
1979
by a vote of
___________________
ntrol Board
33—28