Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter says Beyond Hello sign differs from approved renderings
Summary
A resident told the board that the Beyond Hello storefront and sign differ from the conditional-use renderings approved during zoning review and that the installed sign visually reads 'marijuana'; township staff said they had sent notice and would pursue a meeting with the business.
A public commenter at the June 24 Upper Chichester Board of Commissioners meeting said the newly installed Beyond Hello sign and building paint look markedly different from the renderings the business showed during its conditional‑use review.
The commenter said the in-person signage and building colors “looked much different” than the approved materials and that the sign’s design made it appear as if the word “marijuana” was displayed. In the meeting transcript the commenter said, "you could have sworn it said marijuana," and asked the township to follow up.
Township staff said they had sent notice to the business three weeks earlier asking for a meeting to resolve outstanding items and that they would try to arrange an in‑person discussion with the owner. Board members emphasized that the conditional‑use approval was based on the renderings shown in the hearing and that changes to the storefront or signage that depart from those renderings raise compliance questions.
The board asked staff to provide the property address before the end of the meeting so officials could inspect the site and report back the following day. No enforcement action or formal finding was recorded in the public portion of the meeting; staff indicated next steps would include an on‑site check and contact with the business to seek voluntary compliance or determine whether a formal zoning enforcement action is required.
Because the transcript contains statements from a private commenter and staff follow‑up rather than a formal enforcement motion, the board did not vote on enforcement at the meeting.
