October 6, 2026 – Village of Germantown, WI – Following a nearly 4-hour discussion the Village of Germantown, Wi board on Monday night voted 6-2 turning down a proposed 256 rental home development on 47 acres of the combined Roskopf and Barnes properties. Click HERE to watch meeting video.
The proposed development included: Rezone approximately 71 acres from the A-1: Agricultural & A-2: Agricultural Districts into the Heyday
Germantown PDD for purposes of developing a 256-unit residential community located on Lilac Lane east of Schoen Laufen Park and west of Division Road.
The proposal also asked to amend the 2050 Future Land Use Plan classification of 40 acres from the “Schoen Laufen-Menomonee River District” to the “Lannon- Mequon Road District”; (2) Create a new Planned Development Zoning District (PDD) to be called “Heyday Germantown.” The proposal passed the Plan Commission on Sept. 14, 2026 by a vote of 7-0.
Highlights from the meeting:
-Nearly 100 neighbors atteneded the meeting and stayed until the final vote. Many took the podium during the public speaking portion and relayed their concerns, which followed a similar tone of reservations of a dense population, built on bedrock which spurred talk of more flooding, and a development that – even with proposed trails and greenspace – would hinder the rural feel of the community.
-Of the 24 people who spoke at the meeting, 20 were against the development.
-“When you overturn the 2050 plan, it sets a dangerous precedent and it changes the plan for a developer and it undermines the entire planning process that originally designated this parcel to be preserved and it’s a natural corridor and uh it’s a site. It also sets the president that no green space in Germantown is safe because of what’s been happening here in the last couple years.”
-“I’m against outofstate ownership, private equity firms buying up Wisconsin properties, and I hope the board members will listen to their constituents instead of the big pockets of HeyDay.”
-“Does Germantown want to exist long term? Do we want young people and families to move here or are we catering exclusively to older wealthier residents?”
-“The reason we have a lot of flooding is because we’ve developed we’ve overdeveloped wetlands. And the natural ability of wetlands to reduce flooding has been overlooked but because of these projects that claim there will be management of that.”
-“As President Soderberg reminded citizens at the last planning commission meeting, the board has every right to reszone and approve new development. That may be, but at what cost to the village?”
-“I would appreciate understanding what special circumstances are being considered for this reasonzoning request that so drastically deviates from the 2050 plan. It is no secret from what we’ve heard at this meeting and prior meetings that revenue for the village is the primary motivator. But are you listening at all to your citizens and especially the neighbors directly next to or in adjacent quiet subdivisions of this proposed massive development? We’ve strongly stated our concerns about quality of life, potential property damage from the blasting of bedrock, increased traffic, the sheer scope of the proposed development, and on and on. This would not just be a reasonzoning. This would be a fundamental and largecale change to this very special part of the village.”
Members of the Village board spoke directly:
Trustee Jan Miller – “So these residents that keep coming have great ideas and we should listen to them.”
Trustee Scott Hefle – “24 people spoke tonight. 20 were against and four were for it. In addition to that, in the last six weeks, I’ve kept track over 70 emails, texts, calls, etc. have come from residents. A lot to me personally, and two people out of 70 said that they were in favor of this. Some of these people I represent, some of them know me through the community. It doesn’t matter. 70 people said no and two people said yes. That’s a pretty big statistical number of people that don’t want it.”
Trustee Jim Stout – “I cannot ignore all of the feelings and the facts and the concerns of so many people. I do not understand why the developer has not pulled their application months ago, packed their bags, and gone home because they’re not wanted. This is the wrong project for the wrong village. My solution is being the farmer that I am, 10 7-acre homesteads for families to raise their kids and have their own gardens, raise their own food.”
Trustee Patrick Kaiser – “This is a terrible idea. I don’t understand why it is that it is being proposed as a godscent to the location as if that land is so barren and desolate that thank God they came with this proposal. It’s great land. As Trusty Stout mentioned, beautiful farmland. I’m sure there are plenty possible opportunities. We’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole here. Why not look at the land and see what it is good for and then try and promote that rather than try and find something that maybe is lucrative for some individuals, but it just does not work for the area. Uh, I’m sure that if people were more realistic with what the property actually is and represents that there would be plenty of ideas and opportunities. But unfortunately, this kind of a project is not at all welcomed in this area. So, I also will be a vote no vote.”
Village president Bob Soderberg – “I‘ve been talking to the taxpayers and they want this project. I ran on a position of being open for business, being businessminded and welcoming smart development in our community. I like this. We’ve been working with a developer for the last year and a half. It they’ve made a lot of different changes. they’ve partnered with the trustees in terms of they listened and they’ve made changes um with this project. It’s uh I believe it’s going to protect the taxpayers. It’s going to increase our tax base by lessening the tax burden on all of us that to make our community more affordable.Â
The final vote:
Voting in favor of the development were Village president Bob Soderberg and Trustee Robert Warren. Voting against were Trustees Scott Hefle, Jolene Pieper, Jan Miller, Meg Cutts, Jim Stout, and Patrick Kaiser. Trustee Terri Kaminski was absent.
After the meeting Trustee Hefle said, “Once in a while, you gotta listen to the rest. That’s our job, but we also have to look out for the people, which rarely happens in this world of ours. You gotta listen to the people, whether you believe they’re right or not. You can’t ignore 50, 60, 70 people saying this is wrong and 3 people saying it’s great. I can’t ignore that so as you know, trying to be accountable in government is difficult but you gotta try.”
