Controversial plans to convert a former care home in Fishponds into two giant shared houses have been refused.

A government planning inspector rejected the application for 19 bedsits at Chasefield House, Fishponds Road, on road safety grounds after ruling that cars leaving the site could reverse into pedestrians.

The developers bypassed Bristol City Council 's planning department, which is in special measures, and applied straight to the Planning Inspectorate for permission to turn the pair of semi-detached Victorian villas into 10- and nine-bedroom houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).

They would have been operated by Creative Independent Living, which provides housing and support for vulnerable people on behalf of the council's social services.

But the local authority, neighbours and Bristol Tree Forum objected to the proposals.

Now, a government planning inspector has agreed and refused consent.

In their decision, they wrote: "The proposal would not provide sufficient safe parking on site leading to increased pressure on street parking that already experiences high levels of parking stress and highway safety problems exacerbating those problems.

"In addition the inability to control parking in the front forecourt area would restrict the ability of cars to leave the application site in a forward gear.

"As a result, cars would need to reverse from the site onto the public highway.

"The lack of visibility into and out of the site may result in collision between cars and pedestrians."

Planning permission was refused in 2023 to turn the care home, which closed in January 2020, into shared supported accommodation with 19 beds, again on road safety grounds.

The site is where the A432 Downend Road and Staple Hill Road merge to become Fishponds Road.

The inspector's report said: "The council considers that the proposal would generate a requirement for seven parking spaces.

"The proposal only allows for the provision of two spaces on site and therefore the remaining five spaces would need to be accommodated on-street.

"However, I saw at my site visit that on-street parking is extremely limited.

"Much is restricted and, where it was not, there was very limited free space available.

"Indeed, I was unable to find space.

"While this is not determinative it reinforces my concerns regarding the reliance on street parking.

"Due to the lack of available on-street parking, this may lead to inconsiderate parking near the road junctions or parking on the pavement which is wide in this location to the detriment of highway users and exacerbating an already busy location where the evidence from the council reports a number of accidents."

It said motorists would also not know whether any parking in the forecourt was available before driving in because the view was obstructed by a large hedgerow above a small wall.

The report said: "If there were more than two vehicles parked, it is likely that a further car entering the site would be unable to pass through to exit the site from the second access and leave in a forward gear but would need to reverse out onto the road.

"The existing wall restricts visibility and although there is a wide pavement, there would be the potential for collision with vehicles and pedestrians.

"The proposal would provide 19 units of accommodation which would contribute to housing supply.

"Economic benefits would arise from the conversion of the premises and the introduction of residents into the area.

"These are significant benefits, however the harm to highway safety would be considerable.

"Consequently, the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits."