Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Cannabis Warm Springs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies animated, 24/7 cannabis sign proposal; neighbors said sign would intrude on adjacent Stonehaven Commons
Summary
The Enterprise board voted to deny signage design review for animated/24‑hour signage for a proposed cannabis retail store on Warm Springs Road after multiple residents said the tall, animated sign would affect neighboring homeowners' sleep and quality of life.
The Enterprise Town Advisory Board on April 30 denied a signage design request for a proposed cannabis retail store on Warm Springs Road that would have allowed an animated (chasing‑lights) freestanding sign and 24‑hour illumination above the local code height.
The applicant, represented by Marissa Furman, said the original freestanding sign height was reduced from 35 feet to 25 feet during review and emphasized that the proposed sign would be shorter than other nearby commercial signs. Furman told the board the freestanding sign would be about 232 feet from the nearest residential lots to the south and that the south‑facing wall signs would be illuminated but not animated.
Residents from adjacent Stonehaven Commons strongly opposed the animated lighting and continuous illumination. Edward Lopez, who said he lives “literally right behind” the site, told the board: “I oppose that a 120%,” and said he feared the light and traffic would harm residents’ sleep and property values. Kelly Verba, who said she has lived in Stonehaven Commons since 2010, urged the board to “maintain established code and help us protect the community which we call home.” Kurt Hague asked whether the proposed wall signs and lighting would actually be blocked by landscaping and the parking area and urged the board to consider visibility from backyards.
Planning staff recommended denial of the animated sign (signage design review #1) and recommended approval of a separate design review (#2) for a modest increase above the 20‑foot maximum. After hearing public comment and applicant responses, the board voted to deny the signage application (SDR250269).
The transcript records board members saying the animated “chasing lights” were particularly problematic and that 24‑hour animated illumination is difficult to shield from adjacent residential windows. The decision will be forwarded to Clark County for final consideration as required by the hearing rules.
