Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy Multifamily topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan commission starts discussion on multifamily housing targets after village president's request
Summary
Commissioners received staff analysis showing Germantown has about 25% multifamily housing among a 17-community peer group (median 32%). Members and staff agreed this is an initial baseline and asked for further demographic and market data before considering any cap or policy change.
The Village of Germantown Plan Commission discussed, as a first step, a staff-prepared analysis of multifamily housing in Germantown and 16 peer communities following a request from the village president to pause and study multifamily development.
Staff reported Germantown's current multifamily share is about 25% of housing units, below the 17-community median of 32%. The packet compared communities including Mequon, Wauwatosa and others; Mequon and Muskego were shown at roughly 14'15% multifamily while Wauwatosa and Cudahy (example) ranged in the low 40s.
Why it matters: Commissioners said the data provide a baseline but do not answer demand questions. Several commissioners requested additional demographic and market detail, such as vacancy rates and age cohorts, and suggested comparing ownership versus rental units rather than using "multifamily" as a single category.
Details: Staff used U.S. Census American Community Survey data and recommended expanding comparisons, segmenting tenure (rental vs. ownership), and tracking trends in age groups and household size. The commission discussed placing any policy language about multifamily targets into the village's 2050 plan housing element if a cap or target is later adopted.
Next steps: Commissioners asked staff to gather supplemental data: changes in age cohorts over time, multifamily unit vacancy and turnover, rental versus ownership splits, and examples of other municipalities that have set targets or caps and how those measures were implemented.
Ending: The discussion closed with agreement that the current materials are a starting point; commissioners asked staff to return with additional analysis before the commission or village board contemplates a formal policy or cap.
