Garden fence at Kenilworth home might have to be pulled down after councillors refused it planning permission

A new timber fence nearly two metres high around the rear garden of a Kenilworth home might have to be pulled down after councillors refused it planning permission.

Paul Homer urged members of this week’s [TUE] Warwick District Council planning committee to approve the scheme for his house in Elizabeth Way - a cul-de-sac off Castle Hill.

He told the meeting how he and his wife had spent a large amount of money refurbishing a rundown property and the hedge that had been replaced had partially died while other parts of it had fallen over part of the path.

Mr Homer said: “The key reason why we need this fence is to provide privacy and security in our home. Without a tall fence there would be a direct view into our lounge and rear garden from the adjacent public footpath which is some five to six feet higher.

“The fence will fade in colour over time and we are happy to paint it any colour you wish. If the fence has to be removed then new planting would take several years to grow and would be unlikely to flourish or survive due to the limited width of soil between the side of the footpath and the internal retaining wall.”

He added that there have been several letters of support which highlighted that the fence was an improvement on the previous situation.

There was also support from some councillors at the meeting.

Cllr Jan Matecki (Con, Budbrooke) said: “I actually find the fence quite appealing. I don't think it takes away from the street view. More often than not, when you have these kinds of boundaries they are often not well kept.

“I think this property is quite unique in its position and that is the problem. Surely the applicant has a right to privacy into his back garden, especially from people just walking past.”

But those views were contrary to those of planning officer Sandip Sahota who said: “It is recommended for refusal because it is considered to be out of character.

“It is an incongruous feature in a street scene that is predominantly open plan and due to its height and length it is considered to cause material harm and therefore it is recommended for refusal.

“On the whole, this is an open plan road. This would set a precedent for other properties in Elizabeth Way to have hard boundary treatments. If you approve, you are saying that the open plan nature is not important.”

The planning application was refused by seven votes to four.