Menomonee Falls trustees deny rezoning for proposed Discount Tire on Appleton Avenue

Menomonee Falls Village Board of Trustees voted unanimously March 3 to reject a request to rezone 1.35 acres on Appleton Avenue to allow a Discount Tire store and apply the OC‑5 Commercial Service overlay.

The proposal, advanced by Stephen McCleary of R. A. Smith Inc. on behalf of Discount Tire, sought to rezone the parcel identified by tax key number 13.996 from C‑4 Suburban Retail Business District to C‑4 with an OC‑5 overlay to permit a 7,000‑square‑foot tire retail and service building. Planning staff told trustees the site plan and elevations went to the Architectural Control Board (ACB) and the Plan Commission, both of which recommended approval; the planner said staff was still working on details for one elevation.

Opposition at the public hearing came from neighbors and nearby property owners who said the proposal would be out of character with surrounding professional and retail buildings, would constitute spot zoning for a very small parcel, and would increase traffic and U‑turning on Appleton Avenue. John Niebler, a longstanding Menomonee Falls resident and owner of the adjacent Riverview Professional Building, said the proposal conflicts with the area's land‑use pattern and that prior approvals for nearby development had set a higher architectural standard. “There isn't one C‑5 zone in that area,” Niebler said during public comments.

Other neighbors and nearby business owners echoed concerns about the building's design, the small size of the lot compared with nearby parcels, and potential parking and traffic impacts. James Carrig, a partner in the Riverview property, called the rezoning “spot zoning” and warned that an OC‑5 overlay could be used for more intense automotive uses in the future. Several speakers said the building’s rear elevation would face existing office tenants and could depress nearby property values.

Trustees who spoke during the discussion cited overlapping service coverage by several existing auto service locations within roughly 1.5 miles and said the application had not overcome concerns about intensity and compatibility with the surrounding commercial and professional uses. After public comment and trustee discussion, a motion to approve the rezoning failed. The board chair announced, “That item fails 0‑7.”

Because the OC‑5 overlay would remain available for any qualifying automotive‑intensive use if approved, multiple speakers and trustees framed their opposition around the overlay’s intensity rather than the single proposed tenant. The planner and village staff said the application had been reviewed by the ACB and Plan Commission and that staff was still finalizing building elevation details; those approvals did not persuade trustees to change course.

No formal conditions, continuances, or amendments were adopted; the application did not receive the rezoning the applicant sought, and trustees indicated they did not expect to send the item back to the Plan Commission for further revision.

The denial leaves the parcel at its current C‑4 Suburban Retail zoning. Trustees did not adopt any alternate restrictions or mitigation measures at the March 3 meeting.