Debating local vs general anesthesia?

Today I had a consultation for a unilateral otoplasty. My surgeon states that it shouldn't be a complicated procedure and would be very similar to ear pinning and would not require cartilage transfer or anything like that. She states that she prefers to do the procedure in an OR with her patients under complete anesthesia so the patient is more comfortable, she has better lighting/her instruments are right next to her, she doesnt have to keep leaving the room, and the procedure wouldn't take as long. However because it is a more straight forward procedure, she said she is comfortable doing it under localized anesthetic in her clinic if that's what I elect, but the procedure would take 2.5 hours rather than an hour. Both of these options have pros and cons. Personally I prefer to avoid being completely put under, and am comfortable with the prolonged procedure and more discomfort, but I want to be sure it won't lead to a poor outcome. The cost difference between the two options are considerably different as well, as to do it under general anesthesia in the OR would be about 6k, whereas in the clinic under local anesthesia would be more like 2k. What would you do in this scenario? It's also possible that because it's a congenital deformation that insurance might possibly cover some of the procedure. If they do then I might be more willing to consider having it done in the OR.