The Prescott City Council on Aug. 5, 2025, voted to deny the revised design for the proposed Prescott Plaza Hotel, a four‑story, 47‑room project at 136–140 South Montezuma Street in the Courthouse Plaza historic district, after hearing hours of staff analysis, expert testimony, and 37 members of the public during a special meeting.

Council acted on an appeal of a previous Prescott Preservation Commission decision and evaluated the design solely against the city’s Courthouse Plaza historic design guidelines (Ordinance No. 3744) and the historic preservation master plan, the city attorney said at the start of the hearing.

Staff and the applicant’s architect walked the council through changes since the earlier denials: the project was reduced by one story from earlier submissions; the building was reconfigured to show a stepped‑back fourth floor and a rooftop terrace; window and storefront treatments were revised; and the design team proposed composite materials intended to resemble wood. City planning staff and the preservation specialist identified two criteria that were not fully met: the required use/appearance of wood for doors/windows/storefronts (partially met, per staff) and the guideline that requires a zero setback to the roof line for specified portions of the front façade (not met, per staff). The applicant’s architect, Doug Stroh of Stroh Architecture, said the team could add opaque lower panels to rear storefronts and adjust some materials; he said the fourth floor was set back intentionally to reduce perceived massing and that the elevator overrun (mechanical) would reach 48 feet in some places.

Council members and members of the public debated both technical and policy questions. Supporters of the project — including the applicant, property owner comments and an attorney from the Goldwater Institute — framed the proposal as a design that largely conforms with the guidelines and emphasized private‑property rights and economic benefits. Opponents — including the Prescott Preservation Commission chair, multiple PPC members, adjacent business owners and a large number of residents — said the hotel’s scale, rooftop terrace design and façade details would not be subordinate to surrounding historic buildings and would harm Whiskey Row’s character. Speakers also raised construction‑period impacts (parking, staging, alley access), potential structural risks to adjacent historic buildings, and the limits of local review authority versus zoning entitlements.

After public comment and rebuttal, Mayor Goode moved to deny the design approval; a second was recorded. The council voted to deny the design. The council’s motion denied the applicant’s current design submittal; the official vote tally as announced in the meeting transcript is not clearly specified in the record provided.

The denial is a decision on the design review appeal before council under the Courthouse Plaza historic design guidelines and does not itself approve or deny any future zoning, special use, water service, construction permits or demolition permits. City staff and the city attorney reminded council that hotels are an allowed use in the downtown business (DTB) zoning district and that, should the applicant revise the design, the project may be resubmitted for review following the design review and permitting processes outlined in city procedures.

Council and staff directed that, if the applicant chooses to resubmit, the record and the historic preservation guidelines should guide revisions. During the hearing staff and the applicant discussed potential stipulations (for example, adding opaque lower storefront panels at the alley, alternative roofline treatments or a fixed roof line to meet the 0‑setback requirement) and the applicant indicated willingness to consider further revisions.

The council adjourned after the vote. The denial leaves open the administrative and permitting path described by planning staff: revised design review before the Prescott Preservation Commission, possible special use permit review (water service agreement and associated review steps), and then construction permits only after those approvals. No construction or demolition approvals were granted during the meeting.