The family have maintained that the fence needed to be so high to improve security for the children and dogHolly Morgan Senior Reporter and Twm Owen, Local Democracy Reporter
09:24, 18 Jun 2026
A bid to keep this fence at St Lawrence Road, Chepstow has been refused at appeal(Image: Local Democracy Reporting Service)
A family have been ordered to tear down their two-metre high fence in their front garden which they said was erected for privacy purposes and because they kept finding litter and dangerous items such as needles in their hedge.
So annoyed were the family over the council’s decision about their tall timber fence that they took the matter to ministers at Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW), but they’ve lost the case and now must take the fence down.
Sophie Daly, from Chepstow, had been told by Monmouthshire County Council that the fence, which she installed last year and which separates her front garden from the busy St Lawrence Road, was far too high and needed to be taken down.
Ms Daly lodged an appeal, arguing she needed the fence to be that high to improve security for her children and pet dog. She also said the timber fence needed to replace a boundary hedge because the hedge had attracted significant littering and items including needles.
In the PEDW hearing Ms Daly argued that the council, which rejected her application to retain the fence in November, had failed to give adequate consideration to the case she presented for keeping the fence at her St Lawrence Road home near the junction of the busy A48 and Heighbeech Roundabout.
In her appeal she stated: “Without the fence and gates it would not be possible for my children to play outside or for my dog to be exercised securely within our own property.”
Her appeal was dismissed by independent planning inspector G Hall, who upheld Monmouthshire County Council’s planning committee’s decision to refuse the application.
Despite acknowledging that “correspondence from medical and education professionals” supporting Ms Daly’s personal circumstances, safety and security concerns “carried significant weight”, the inspector backed the council’s position that the fence was visually unacceptable.
The inspector’s report concluded: “There is no substantive evidence before me to indicate that the appellant’s objectives in respect of safety and security could not be achieved through alternative boundary treatments or other measures that would be less visually intrusive and more consistent with the prevailing character of the area.
“In the overall planning balance, while I attach significant weight to the appellant’s personal circumstances, they do not outweigh the identified conflict with the development plan and national policy. I am therefore satisfied that it is proportionate and necessary to dismiss the appeal.”
The inspector determined the fence was incompatible with the area’s character, serving as a gateway to Chepstow, and stated they didn’t accept that painting it would change their judgment.
“By reason of its height, length and close-boarded form, the fence is visually dominant and incongruous in the street scene, eroding the established character of this gateway approach,” the report reads.
Comments are closed.