This is just plain bad science. In fact to credit it with the term "science" is being generous.
Even the included graphic shows no hole in the ozone. Sure there's a depletion zone where the ozone is thinner, but that's not a hole. But the word "hole" is so much more emotional and exciting -- unfortunately it's not accurate, but it does get people attention like any other scare mongering.
Can we expect a purely emotional response in other Universe Today articles? The alternative would be to try and put the facts! A rather novel idea I know.