You've left us no choice

Campaigners are furious that Worthing Council granted permission to build 875 new homes on countryside in west Durrington at a meeting held at the Assembly Hall, Stoke Abbott Road, on Friday night.Police were called to eject up to 20 environmental activists who stormed the stage where the development control committee was discussing the plans as the debate descended into chaos.

Campaigners are furious that 99 acres of countryside east of Titnore Lane and north of Fulbeck Avenue would be lost to the new community for homes, a library, health centre, and first and middle schools.They are angry the development would see up to 275 trees cut down in ancient woodland to widen Titnore Lane for greater access to the A27.Campaigners say they would do "whatever it takes" to stop trees being cleared.

John Clark, from pressure group Protect Our Woodland, said: "We have failed using the democratic process. Sadly, all I can see now, is a battle involving direct action without warning.If the development does go ahead, it won't be vandals who burn down children's play huts or graffiti artists who are remembered by future generations. It will be the names of each councillor that approved the decision as they are the real vandals of Durrington."

Audience members became angry when meeting chairman John Livermore called time on the allocated 15-minute period set aside for public questions.A slow clap rippled around the room as the meeting was suspended for 15 minutes while protesters with banners were removed from the hall. Police had earlier found two cartons of eggs hidden behind the building.

Paul Smith, 40, of Becket Road, Worthing, one of those thrown out, said afterwards: "I think it's disgraceful that they continued with this meeting and are not prepared to listen. We were not allowed to ask questions about Titnore woods, it is just absurd. The committee has not listened to the people of Worthing who have voiced their opposition to the plans." The council has received more than 1,000 complaints from residents in standard letters and petitions since the plans were announced. They have promised to plant an extra 500 trees nearby to compensate for the loss to protect wildlife including dormice and the grey-crested newt.

Around 2,000 metres of hedgerow would also be planted on the site to replace 500 metres to be cut down to clear space for new buildings. Objectors say the bid, which includes 220 low-cost houses, will recreate traffic chaos and anti-social behaviour seen in similar developments.

The 10-person committee finally agreed the plans with only one rejection after four hours' debate when all but a handful of the 150-strong audience had already left.

Councillor Ann Barlow, the council's executive member for housing, voiced support for the scheme, citing a desperate need for affordable accommodation in the town.

She said: "There are more than 2,200 households in the borough on the housing register. Of those, 880 are families with young children. In the last three months, 147 households have been in temporary accommodation. Tonight, 22 people are staying in bed and breakfast, 11 of those are children. That is the reality of what's happening in Worthing."

The council is under pressure to build 4,375 homes between 2006 and 2016 at a rate of 290 a year to meet government targets. The large scale of the development means the decision is likely to be called in by Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott.

James Appleton, the council's assistant director in charge of planning services, said laws were in place to prevent hundreds of families moving to the area from London to create "another Whitehawk", a notorious estate in Brighton.

"It is very important that we avoid the mistakes we have made before in terms of crime and disorder," he said.

Councillor James Doyle, shadow chairman of the development control committee, voted in favour of the plans on the condition that proposed health, leisure and community amenities were built on the site. He said: "We have seen what happens when you don't put community facilities into a new development from the start and it was very important to me that those were in place. We want to create a living community for people to manage their own lives." Afterwards, Councillor Livermore defended his decision to limit time for public questions.

He said: "I anticipated that we would have an interjection by the group who made a lot of noise early in the meeting.

"I came to the view that the sooner I allowed them to have their little demonstration and get it over with, the better it was for everyone concerned.Whatever I had done, whether I had allowed 30 minutes or an hour, it would not have been long enough. We had a long enough evening as it was."