I respectfully disagree with Councilor George's conclusions regarding the Emerson Avenue wind turbine project and the Gloucester Zoning Ordinance criteria. First, Section 5.22.3(c) clearly states that the location must minimize "adverse visual" impacts. The City Council certainly had visual impacts in mind, or they would not have approved including the word "visual."

Additionally, the applicant has not met all the criteria, because they are unable to meet the setback requirements. They are seeking an exception to the current law. If they truly met all the criteria, a waiver would not be necessary.

Setback requirements are the primary method recommended by turbine manufacturers for mitigating risk to the public. There are recent accident reports of blade pieces being thrown for distances well over 300 feet from wind turbines. At the site under consideration, boat traffic in the Annisquam is within 280 feet, the Keyspan property is within 50 feet, and the Pathways for Children play area is within 350 feet.

This site is inappropriate for a wind turbine. Imagine the devastating effect it would have on tourism in Gloucester if someone is struck while sailing their boat in the Parade of Lights. It is simply not worth the risk.