PEOPLE power triumphed as residents won the battle to stop a development they feel would put the lives of children in danger.

People in Sturminster Marshall are celebrating after East Dorset District Council's planning committee refused permission for a new pharmacy to be built in the village after those living nearby said it would only be a matter of time before an accident happened.

Linda White, of High Street, said: "This part of the street is very busy and leads into the narrowest part of the High Street.

"There is no pavement available on one side, meaning that school children and other vulnerable members of our community have to walk in the road or keep crossing the road at this narrow point.

"I believe it is an accident waiting to happen and this shop on this particular site will mean even more cars and make it even worse."

The committee heard that lorries and buses regularly have problems passing through the village, which is on a busy through route, and sometimes drivers have to stop to find people to move their cars in order to get past.

Around 40 per cent of pupils at the village school come from outside Sturminster Marshall and so are driven to and from the site, making traffic problems particularly bad at school dropping off and picking up times.

The application, by Poole-based developer Birchmere Ltd, was for permission to convert a vacant industrial building off the High Street into a pharmacy.

The land is designated in the local development plan for employment and was recommended for approval by planning officers.

Cllr Victor Redpath said: "This is already an industrial unit and I don't think a shop would create much more traffic.

"I think that this is a good application to make the village more sustainable."

Most councillors agreed with residents' concerns on traffic issues and fears were also raised that once permission had been granted for change of use from industrial to retail there would be no way to guarantee that what would be there would be a pharmacy.

Cllr Ann Warman said: "On this council we are here to represent the people and the people obviously do not want this."

The committee voted by eight to four in favour of turning down the application, with one abstention.