A Kenilworth household may be forced to pull down a two metre high garden fence after planners refused a planning appeal.

The fence had already been put up at the Elizabeth Way home when Warwick District Council refused a retrospective application last November.

And an appeal, lodged against the decision in January, has now been refused by planning inspectors.

Speaking to councillors last November, Paul Homer said he and his wife and spent a lot of money renovating the property and the fence was needed "to provide privacy and security" in replacing a dead hedge in the back garden.

In the appeal statement the owners said the fence had no impact on the "setting of Elizabeth Way, as viewed from Castle Hill," adding "the area in front of the fencing is typically heavily parked, meaning that open views of the boundary fencing are limited".

The couple had also planted a tree and some climbing plants to help 'soften' its appearance.

And whilst the owners said they would stain or paint the fence to further reduce its impact, the appeal was dismissed.

The planning inspector, Mr M. Woodward, said the fence was "an incongruous addition" to the cul-de-sac due to its length and height.

Having visited the site Mr Woodward said: "It is not the enclosure of the garden I find objectionable per se but, rather, it is the combination of the fence's overall length and height, and its resultant monotonous and oppressive appearance in the street.

"Despite the parking of several vehicles in front of the fence on my site visit, it was still readily visible.

"Consequently, even if I was to accept the appellant's assertion that this is a common occurrence, it does not significantly reduce the prominence of the fence in the street."

And whilst he did say that the fence would provide privacy, as well as reducing "the risk of injury from pedestrians inadvertently falling into the lower lying garden" he said a better solution was possible.

"I find in this case that there may be other ways to provide sufficient privacy and security which address the shortcomings of this scheme without harming the character and appearance of the area," he added.

"Alternative fencing designs and/or appropriate planting schemes do not appear to have been explored in detail. As a result, these considerations do not outweigh the harm I have identified."