Stonehouse Hotel

Neutral on the project but urged the commission to secure workforce housing impact fees and a local-hire, union-wage construction agreement; also flagged overgrown brush on Sunridge Drive.

Opposed; said Highway 12 traffic studies are unrealistic, residents can't turn left out of the driveway, and a rooftop terrace would bring serious noise to her Brush Creek Road home.

Neutral but worried: her driveway opens onto the hotel parking lot, and she fears pool noise, pump noise, and unmanaged events like last July 4th's fireworks.

Says the pool, fire pits, and outdoor bar will bounce noise off concrete and water into nearby homes; wants the eight-foot wall built of precast concrete or block.

Disappointed the new building ignores the 1912 Stonehouse's character and dwarfs it; thinks 70 rooms is too many for a residential area and should be closer to 50.

Strongly opposed after 42 years in his Massimo Circle home; says nothing buffers his yard from the pool, questions how cars make a 90-degree turn off a 40 mph road, and fears a $100,000–$200,000 property value hit.

Lives directly behind the project and is completely against it; says noise from even the current small operation carries to her home and the hotel will tower over her property line.

A building designer who walks the trail daily; her main complaint is aesthetics that have nothing to do with the Stonehouse, and she thinks 70 suites is too much for the location.