CACO Three, Inc. v. Bd. of Supervisors of Huntington Twp., (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004), 845 A.2d 991

Case Details:

In reversing the trial court’s decision, the Commonwealth Court instructed the Board of Supervisors of Huntington Township to approve CACO Three’s preliminary plan subject to the specific condition that it must comply with all the requirements under the Ordinance for final approval. In reversing the lower court and township board, the Court first opined that a preliminary land development plan cannot be denied based on: (i) an inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, standing alone; (ii) general, non-specific standards, including “potential danger to health, safety and welfare”; (iii) minor technical defects; (iv) failure to provide design details and documents relating to water supply capacity; (v) failure to obtain state agency permits; (vi) failure to obtain the County Conservation District’s approval of an erosion and sedimentation plan where the ordinance merely required that the preliminary plan be accompanied by the a plan “for review by the County Conservation District” or (vi) the mere possibility of future modification of the plan, including modifications required by state agencies in their respective permitting proceedings. The Court further opined that the correction of minor technical defects and obtaining required permits from state agencies are appropriate conditions for final approval.

No liability is assumed with respect to the use of information contained in this website. Laws may be amended or court rulings made that could affect a particular procedure, issue, or interpretation. The Department of Community & Economic Development assumes no responsibility for errors and omissions nor any liability for damages resulting from the use of information contained herin. Please contact your local solicitor for legal advice.