THE prosperity of a rural winery was in the hands of civic chiefs last week when owners asked permission to expand their business.

Exton Wine owners want to build a detached two-storey building with a basement with associated access, car parking and landscaping for use as a wine retailer at Allens Farm Lane located within the South Downs National Park.

The basement, which would be built into the natural drop in land level, would house an entertainment area, bar and office, with a kitchen and staff area above. The first floor would be used for accommodation.

The agent, Sati Panesar, asked the committee to show support for the "prosperous rural economy" as the applicant, Malcolm Issac pleaded with councillors to grant him permission.

"Our aim is to produce the best sparkling wine I the country, not the most," Mr Issac said. "It's not open to the public, it's for invited guests only. If we're trying to reach the top of the market we need to have the right premises, not a tea hut. This is absolutely vital to the future of the vineyard. The future of its prosperity is in your hands."

Architect Ian Adam-Smith denied claims the design looked like a pastiche French chateau and instead was based largely on existing local buildings.

Nineteen objections were received which cited issue with the narrow country lanes which some claim would be unsuitable to allow for the increase in traffic the developed site would ensue. People also raised concerns with the building's visual impact on the environment - one of the reasons officers recommended refusing the application, on the basis of the scale of the proposed site.

David Frere-Cook told the meeting on Thursday (July 23) the plans were a "very real concern" and that traffic would increase "phenomenally".

"My own wall has been hit twice in the past six months alone," he said. "This is completely out of character with any other building."

Cllr David McLean voiced his concern with the design, adding: "We're not in the middle of the champagne region in France."

Applicants were unable to persuade councillors from the officers recommendation and voted to refuse the plans, eight to one.