Minocqua apartment complex wins approval

The Oneida County Planning and Development Committee has approved a conditional use permit for a new apartment development on Minocqua’s west side — a decision that paves the way for 112 additional housing units in a region grappling with an affordable housing shortage.

The project, Aspen Grove Minocqua, will be built on 10 acres and will include seven two-story buildings, each housing 16 apartments. Developer Matt Ritchie of N & J Investments LLC owns the property and submitted the application earlier this year. 

The town of Minocqua had previously recommended approval.

While the development has been welcomed by those concerned about housing availability, it has prompted pointed concerns from the neighboring Wildwood Wildlife Park Zoo and Safari. The zoo’s owners and directors — Judy, Duane, and Shawn Domaszek — have warned the project poses both security and safety risks to their business.

The Domaszeks had previously submitted a letter to the town’s plan commission outlining their concerns, and repeated them during last week’s meeting. Central to their request was a secure barrier along the shared property line.

Their proposal includes an eight-foot berm on zoo property, topped with a double-staggered arrangement of six-foot evergreen trees. The zoo will pay for the berm and trees; however, they also wanted the apartment property to install an eight-foot secure perimeter black chain-link fence enhanced with black-winged privacy slats.

Ultimately, the committee felt that burden to the developer wasn’t necessary, given a new landscaping plan.

Safety and liability concerns

Judy Domaszek told the committee that the influx of more than 300 residents living in close proximity to the zoo raised serious concerns about unauthorized access to the zoo ground. 

“This is not a hypothetical issue,” she said. “We have already experienced trespassing and property damage despite the fact that the housing project is still in its early stages.” 

The most effective and responsible course of action to protect all the parties and to ensure public safety would be to install a proper secure fence along the shared property line, Domaszek said.

She noted the zoo is licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture and must follow strict requirements under the Animal Welfare Act.

“That act mandates that the licensed facility maintains secure perimeters to prevent intrusions,” she said. “If an incident involves unauthorized entry, we cannot and will not risk our business license or the safety of our guests, staff and animals due to an adjacent development that does not prioritize perimeter security. A secure fence is a necessary and reasonable request to protect both parties and ensure that safety regulatory compliance remains intact.”

However, John Wagman of Weld Riley, representing N & J Investments, said various statutes cited by the zoo owners concern agricultural fencing and do not apply to this situation.

“They’re [the zoo] governed and regulated by the U.S. Wildlife and U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding animals and actually have to contain their own animals, not us helping them contain their wild animals,” Wagman said. “There are buffer zones already put into effect. They’re going to be putting natural plantings in order to delineate that property line as was recommended and requested by staff.”

Ritchie’s updated plan calls for approximately 103 new trees on the west property line, seven to 10 feet high and spaced 10 to 15 feet apart.

Domaszek had other concerns. The zoo draws more than 225,000 visitors in its six-month operational season, generating over $21 million in spending for the Minocqua area, according to Travel Wisconsin statistics, Domaszek said. She said one of its signature attractions — a tram ride — would be harmed if the apartment complex is visible from the route.

“It is an immersive experience where you see the animals free roaming across the pastures, now only to come to a slight turn and see the big huge apartment complex looking at you,” she said. “This presence of the unsightly and unnatural building site directly adjacent would significantly detract from the experience. The visual intrusion will break the sense of immersion and we will have substantial loss of business revenue.”

Tony Pharo, executive director of the Oneida County Economic Development Corporation, urged the committee to weigh the county’s urgent housing needs.

“We just did a housing study and we need about 1,400 apartments and houses in Oneida County to help with service industries and to move the economy forward,” Pharo said. “Any way that we can have policy move the needle is something we need for service industries and the aging population of the area.”

Supervisor Billy Fried acknowledged the public perception that the committee might be favoring the project but said the goal was to address all concerns.

“There’s some perception by people out there that, ‘oh, you’re so much in favor of this that you’re just going to let this plow through,’” Fried said. “I’d like to think not. If I owned a business and something went next door and I didn’t like it, I would build a fence myself to protect my property. I can see where they’re coming from, but I think the developer, if he’s willing to do the landscape plan as proposed, I’d be OK with supporting the CUP.”

Committee chairman Scott Holewinski pointed to existing trees and planned new trees, as well as the planned berm. 

“I don’t think it’s going to hurt the enjoyment of the people who go there to see the animals,” he said. 

Zoning director Karl Jennrich said the Wisconsin Department of Transportation has told the county the project will require a new access permit, a traffic study, and possibly highway modifications.

However unlikely, any costs associated with those requirements and modifications could conceivably derail the project, so Jennrich said the county would not issue the permit until Ritchie signs an agreement with the DOT.

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.