Crawford County officials review comprehensive-plan survey, outline zoning options and next steps on wind and solar

County planning staff updated the Crawford County Commission on the county'wide comprehensive-plan survey and on preliminary zoning proposals for wind and solar at the commission's May 2025 meeting.

The survey mailings have been sent to 11,952 registered addresses in the county and, as of the meeting, the county had received about 1,014 online responses; staff said the goal is 10,000 total responses with a decision on any cutoff to be made after early July. "We're hoping to get 10,000 total responses," said Joshua Alvin, a county staff member overseeing the survey and outreach. Alvin said mailers were sent with expedited shipping, duplicates and nonresponsive addresses had been removed, and the average time to complete the survey was about 12 minutes.

The county's planning lead told commissioners a public work session with the Planning and Zoning board is planned next week (open to the public but not for public comment) and that a fuller update to the commission will follow after July. Alvin said fall public hearings are expected in September, October or November if the survey schedule holds. "When we have a idea of how the mailers are working, we can make a date definite for the ending of the survey," Alvin said.

Why it matters: the county is using survey results to shape its comprehensive plan and proposed zoning changes that would govern where and how wind turbines and solar farms can be sited. Those zoning rules could set limits on project size, setbacks, conditional-use permits, and enforcement mechanisms that the county says would be used to manage risk and public impacts.

What commissioners and staff described: Alvin outlined three broad zoning categories he will propose next month for county consideration: agricultural (which he said covers roughly 90% of county land outside municipalities), residential and general commercial. He also said staff will present alternative zoning approaches that either allow or restrict wind and solar and identified technical options the county could limit, including small domestic turbines (about 10 kilowatts), agricultural-scale turbines (around 60 kilowatts) and industrial-scale turbines (megawatt-range). He also described differences in turbine design (vertical vs. horizontal axis) and said the county can cap numbers per section (for example, limiting turbines per section of land) and apply conditional-use permitting and project-specific rules.

Alvin said the county will analyze legal options, including moratoria and risk-management measures, and that third-party inspectors and engineers are commonly used for large solar and wind projects because most counties do not have in-house technical inspectors. "Most of the time, when we do allow those types of alternative wind sources, they have some type of conditional use permits and project rules that we set forth as part of this," Alvin said.

Public comment highlighted concerns about environmental, health, safety and economic impacts. Jeff Murphy, identifying himself as a Crawford County resident, said transparency around who presents at meetings matters and called the turbine/solar question a "legacy issue" because installations last decades. "It is a legacy issue," Murphy said. Judy Prince of Bradley pressed for more public education, saying many residents do not understand what zoning means and should be given information as they answer the survey. "The public needs to be made aware sooner than later," Prince said.

Multiple public speakers raised decommissioning, bonding and enforcement as outstanding concerns: they asked whether the county holds bonds or decommissioning agreements for existing projects, whether a bond would survive a transfer of project ownership, and what the county could require from project developers to ensure cleanup and neighbor protections. County staff said the county has a decommissioning agreement and that performance bonds exist for current wind projects; staff also said they will check procedures for bond renewals and regulatory notice requirements through the insurance commissioner.

Survey integrity and outreach: Alvin said the survey platform tracks IP addresses and that a small proportion of responses show duplicate IPs; staff are reviewing full survey responses to judge integrity. If the mailers do not produce the expected response rate a more aggressive advertising push (radio, TV, interviews or targeted outreach) may be proposed; Alvin said he receives a daily report of new responses and will recommend next steps to the commission. He also offered to prepare a concise informational sheet for the county website explaining planning and zoning basics and the potential advantages and disadvantages of zoning for residents who want background while completing the survey.

Next steps and timeline: staff said they will present a draft zoning proposal for wind and solar next month and return to the commission after the July cutoff to decide whether to close the survey or extend it. If the county proceeds, fall public hearings would follow. Commissioners asked staff to provide the informational sheet within about a week for review and online posting.

What was not decided: the commission did not adopt any new zoning ordinance or moratorium at the meeting; the discussion was a staff update and public comment period. Any formal zoning changes would require future proposed text, public notice and formal action by the commission or planning and zoning board.

Ending: Commissioners and staff agreed to continue outreach and to schedule follow-up briefings; staff will provide the requested informational materials and a schedule for the draft zoning proposal ahead of the next meeting.