THE decision by the HIgh Court this week in favour of developer Renewable Energy Systems to build a wind farm at Den Brook Valley between Spreyton and North Tawton could still be challenged by those opposing the controversial scheme.

Judge Frances Patterson QC rejected, on all ten grounds, the challenge by the Den Brook Judicial Review Group, who have been fighting the scheme for five years.

The dispute over plans for the nine, 120-metre (390ft) turbine farm between Bow, North Tawton and Spreyton began in 2005, when RES first submitted its plans.

The decision has come as a huge disappointment for the DBJRG, who have fought, mainly on the grounds of noise and 'poor design.'

The application, which was originally turned down by West Devon Borough Council, attracted more than 3,000 letters of objections, including those of Devon County Council, Dartmoor National Park and local parish councils.

However, RES say the 18MW Den Brook, nine turbine wind farm will generate significant amounts of clean, renewable electricity as well as bringing local benefits in the form of a £36,000 a year community fund for the lifetime of the wind farm. The fund is to be spent by the local community on local projects.

Helen Hall, project manager for the wind farm, said: 'We are really pleased that a line has finally been drawn, at the highest level, under any doubts about this wind farm. The project has been given planning consent twice after two detailed public inquiries and has also been the subject of two High Court challenges.

'Today's decision proves that RES has been thorough and responsible in the development and design of this wind farm, to minimise any potential impacts on local people and the environment, while ensuring that it will generate significant amounts of clean, green electricity.

'We are relieved that we can now move on and build the wind farm.'

Construction on the wind farm is expected to begin during 2011 and to last for approximately 12 months.

RES say they will, where these services and supplies are available, employ local companies for the construction and operation of the wind farm.

Short to medium-term jobs will be created during the construction period.

They also said they will be looking for local and regional businesses that can provide the people, services and materials in civil engineering, haulage, concreting, security, electrical skills, etc.

RES said it will bring additional benefits to other businesses in the area, such as hoteliers.

Mike Hulme, a spokesman for DBJRG and who lives at Coxmoor near Spreyton, told the Times that the overall judgement 'given the strength, validity and merit in the public interest of our case' was disappointing.

However, he said that DBJRG have yet to examine the detail and there are 21 days in which to appeal the judgement, during which 'we will be closely scrutinising the small print'.

Mr Hulme, who has spearheaded a campaign against the development since 2006, said: 'The new Government seemingly remains intent to massively increase the numbers of onshore wind farms.

'Our grounds appealing the Den Brook decision also challenged further nationwide developments of wind farms too close to people's homes, where the likelihood of unrelenting noise pollution and potential for long term damage to people's health and wellbeing is significantly increased. Our case has attracted a great deal of interest and support nationwide.

'There is now a widespread and worldwide call for minimum separation distances of at least 1,500 metres — the huge 120 metres high turbines proposed for Den Brook are less than 800 metres from the nearest households.

'No doubt RES are relieved by the judgement.

'Unfortunately, concerns remain and are further exacerbated by RES on the one hand saying there will be "no noise nuisance" and now asking the local authority to accept a means of dealing with the requirements of the noise condition which actually permits more noise than the planning inspector allowed for in his decision.'

Given RES's previous noise assessments, and the 'somewhat unpredictable' nature of potential noise problems, one might understandably be a 'tad wary', he said.

'We simply don't accept that it's reasonable to expect more families to join the ranks of those already having their lives devastated by wind turbine generated noise pollution without any workable form of redress.'