A Chesterfield beautician and hair dresser have been left distressed after a retrospective planning application for their business was rejected.
Alysha and Franco Carannante set up a hair salon and a beauty studio at their house at Staunton Close earlier this year.
But after applying for retrospective planning permission it was rejected by Chesterfield Borough Council on October 15 – a decision they are now appealing.
The couple have been left distressed after neighbours submitted 25 objection letters to the council about noise, lack of privacy and increased traffic at the housing estate.
Franco and Alysha, who is seven months pregnant, said: “The impact on our immediate family, friends and clients has been catastrophic. We just want to move on from all this and continue to raise our family in our home, whilst continuing our passion for our trade.
“We have loyal clients who have supported us throughout this process. We appreciate every single one of them so much. We have both been in the hair and beauty trade since we left school.”
The council rejected the application and the use of the outbuilding for hair dressing and beauty treatments considering it an over intensive use of the site.
Neighbour Mckenzie Aitken said: “It really has been horrendous since this business started. My bedroom is at the back of our house and their new building looks straight into my bedroom. It has made me feel so incredibly uncomfortable.
“I am unable to open my windows as the noise is so loud from the music, people and electricals. The amount of people that walk past the house and look directly into our house is such an invasion of privacy and I am made to feel so nervous.”
Local councillor Lisa Blakemore added: “We were given a record of how many clients had visited between Saturday 15th June and Saturday 10th August and the times in which they had been attending the property at number 44 and this also indicates that the hours of business are not as they have been stated within the planning application with the latest client leaving at 9.26pm.”
In a comment submitted to the planning application, an environmental officer said: “Due to the number and type of incidents that residents have reported to the police, Staunton Close has been discussed every week since mid-July at the multi-agency meeting.
“Incidents such as harassment, anti-social behaviour and verbal abuse are all under investigation. I am making you aware of this as Environmental Health work closely with partner agencies to resolve issues that have anti-social behaviour elements.”
The proposal received two support letters from clients, including a statement from Jan Walker, who said: “As a client of the business I wanted to write in support of this application, particularly in response to the vitriolic opposition that has been expressed. As a client I was asked not to park on the estate which I have respected and I believe talking to others they have also complied.
“The business premise is out of sight with no visual or audible impact on neighbours. I fail to see how people walking past one’s property has any detrimental effect on life postmen delivery drivers walking past etc are part of everyday life.”
Alysha and Franco said they asked all clients to park off-site. They added: “Not all people coming to our house are clients. It is an invasion of our privacy for neighbours to monitor who is coming or leaving our property especially at that hour.
“Our friends and family come all through the day to our home including our parents and grandparents who live on the same estate. Our studio closes at 7.30pm with clients who have an appointment at 7pm leaving the property around 8pm.
“One of the many reasons we moved to our home salon is for better quality of life/work-life balance our well-being and health. We are not the only people trading from home salons in Chesterfield.”
The council’s decision notice states the number of appointments and level of operation go beyond what is considered acceptable in a residential area.
This post was originally published on here
