Plans for a £3 million makeover of an arcade that has been a destination for families for more than 40 years have been blocked.

Jimmy G’s in The Promenade, Leysdown, was set to bring adventure golf, augmented reality darts, and a four-storey soft play area to the seaside.

But Swale council has turned down the plans which also include a show bar and sun terrace restaurant that would have offered live entertainment.

The authority refused the proposals which Godden Gaming submitted in January as the new building would “overshadow and overbear” a home in Grove Avenue, which backs onto the arcade.

It added that there was “insufficient information” on the impact on ecology. There was also an “absence of a surface water drainage strategy” the council argued.

This was despite Leysdown Parish Council being in favour of the revamp which it said would “benefit the community”.

The parish council backed the plans as long the proposals were followed “exactly” and that the environmental health report was taken into account and enforced – which included a request for lighting and noise pollution reports.

How the front of the building would have changed if the plans had been approved

The building, run by Godden Gaming, has been an amusement centre since 1983.

It says the revamp would make the arcade “a year-round attraction to the people of Swale”.

A Godden Gaming spokesman told KentOnline that the firm is “hugely disappointed” by the council’s “draconian timescales”.

Swale council says its decision notice sets out the reasons for refusal but adds it is “keen” to work with the company to deliver the proposals.

Godden Gaming says it will resubmit an application “at great cost”, with the further reports that have been requested.

The spokesman said: “The anti-business nature of their current decision, which displays a complete lack of understanding of the time pressures involved in running seasonal businesses has questioned our appetite to further our investments in Leysdown thus risking the creation of over 30 jobs.

“We would like to thank the many councillors who supported our application and hopefully by providing the reports as requested the planning department can process a renewed application without further hindrance.

“This will occur after the Summer season so that we can focus on delivering fun for all the family at Jimmy G’s Amusements including our new ice cream parlour ‘Sorbetto @ Jimmy G’s Amusements’ and then turn to delivering a smooth application that Swale Borough Council can support.”

The company has six amusement centres nationwide including two in Kent – Jimmy G’s and Palace Amusements in Ramsgate.

Cllr Tara Noe, who represents Sheppey East on Swale council, welcomed the plans in March.

She told KentOnline previously: “Jimmy G’s is already a popular spot, drawing tourists and locals.

“A refurbishment will add energy and excitement to the area, offering an even bigger reason for people to visit Leysdown.

“It is a great investment, not just in a business, but in this holiday destination.”

The plans included making way for the extension at the back and side of the arcade. A single-storey boarded-up building would have been demolished.

The existing outdoor rides would then be brought inside and housed in the new extension.

The car park was set to be extended too, with an additional 52 spaces – taking the total to 299. Fourteen of those would have been for Blue Badge holders and 26 EV charging points.

Find out about planning applications that affect you at the Public Notice Portal.

A Swale council spokesman said: “As the Local Planning Authority, we need to consider a number of factors when determining a planning application.

“In this case the key factors included appearance, impact on neighbouring occupiers, noise, ecology and surface water drainage.

“A full assessment of each is available in the officer report in the application on our planning portal.

“The decision notice sets out the reasons for refusal, and in this case, the impact of the proposal on the living conditions of nearby residents, local ecology and surface water management were the council’s key concerns, so we were unable to support the application on this basis.

“Should the applicant wish to address the reasons for refusal, we are keen to work with them in order to find an acceptable solution.”