Menomonee Falls trustees deny permit for 80-foot wireless tower in village center

The Menomonee Falls Village Board on July 6 voted unanimously to deny a conditional use permit for an 80-foot wireless communication tower proposed for N89W16785 Appleton Avenue.

The application, filed by Derek McGrew of CelluSite LLC, sought approval to place a stealth monopole in the village center. After a staff presentation and more than an hour of public comment — including several residents who urged denial and one speaker who supported the project — trustees debated visual impacts, redevelopment implications, coverage needs for public safety and whether the board should act on material presented at the meeting.

Why it mattered: The tower would sit inside the Village Center overlay and near the historic Main Street district. Opponents told the board the structure would be two to three times taller than surrounding buildings and would harm the area’s historic character and prospects for redevelopment.

Resident Joan Plumley told the board: “I urge you to vote no on this proposal for the good of the citizens and the architectural and historic integrity of the village.” George Jenkins, who said his apartment building is about 120 feet from the site, said the proposal “directly threatens the property values of a large quantity of Menomonee Falls homes,” noting he counted roughly 70 apartments within 300 feet of the proposed tower.

Applicant Derek McGrew responded that the application includes required materials, coverage maps and a lease, that the design had been shortened from a prior 95-foot monopole to an 80-foot stealth design, and that the tower would be built to engineered standards. “We will stay within FCC limits,” McGrew said, committing to compliance with federal radio-frequency rules.

AT&T and Verizon counsel Rod (Rodney) Carter told the board his office reviewed the village code and state law and argued that local denials cannot be based solely on aesthetics or height for structures under 200 feet; he also highlighted letters and a police-department statement about coverage gaps. “The record shows…that coverage is poor and the tower is needed,” Carter said.

Several trustees questioned the visual simulations, the finished-floor elevation used to gauge relative height (staff noted the adjacent Fresh Thyme roof peak is about 37 feet), and whether the revised stealth design shown at the meeting had been part of the materials reviewed by the Planning Commission and Architectural Control Board before those bodies recommended denial.

A trustee moved to approve the conditional use permit; after additional discussion trustees voted and the motion failed. Village leadership announced the application was “unanimously denied.”

What’s next: Trustees and staff noted the applicant may resubmit a revised application or pursue additional pre-application meetings with village staff or the Plan Commission; a new complete application would trigger another public hearing and the municipality’s review timeline.

Reporting note: Quotes and claims in this article come from the July 6 Village Board meeting record and the public hearing transcript.