Unfinished house sits at O’Sullivan Beach, drawing ire of neighbour

This coastal house has sat unfinished for six years. A neighbour says it should be bulldozed but the owner says it’ll be finally done this year.

Twin beachside houses remain unfinished six years since construction started, angering a neighbour who claims they should never have been allowed and should be demolished.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman is also investigating a complaint by O’Sullivan Beach resident Kingsley Wellington over the role of the nation’s corporate regulator in subdivision of the Sunset Court block.

But the owner and developer says the properties will be finished within months.

Onkaparinga Council approved the Sunset Court ocean-facing townhouses in December 2014 with foundations poured nine months later, according to council records.

But the properties are unfinished and have been subject of multiple planning breaches, according to the council.

Mr Wellington, 90, who has terminal lung cancer and whose house faces the “monstrosity”, said the project was allowed despite an encumbrance that he said prohibited subdivisions.

“We believe the current construction needs to be demolished and the permission for subdivision removed.”

This house on Sunset Court, O'Sullivan's Beach has been under construction for six years. Picture: Renato Castello

His concern centres on ASIC assuming authority over encumbrances of the 18-block Sunset Bay estate in 2001 following the deregestration of the developer in 2001.

ASIC using powers under the Corporations Act consented to the owners of Lot 16 - now 3 and 3a - lodging a subdivision application.

A council officer approved the subdivision in October 2009, council records show.

The blocks were sold in 2013 to current owner Guang Xing Yuan.

But Mr Wellington believes ASIC acted beyond its authority in consenting to the subdivision application, which he said was in breach of encumbrances governing properties in the estate.

A copy of the memorandum of encumbrance attached to the title of the Sunset Court states that a property owner “shall not subdivide or resubdivide the land” but that the encumbrancee may from “time to time in its absolute discretion waive or release any of the terms” of the encumberance.

Mr Wellington said ASIC’s decision to consent to the subdivision opened a potential “Pandora’s box”.

The owner acknowledged the frustration with the pace of construction but said the buildings would be finished by the end of the year. Picture: Renato Castello

Mr Yuan acknowledged the frustration with the pace of construction but said the buildings would be finished by the end of the year.

He said he had had many “disasters” with two previous builders he had hired to do the work.

A council spokesman said the council had negotiated with Mr Yuan to rectify issues including incorrect finished floor heights, rubbish blowing from the site and damage to public infrastructure.

He said the council also issued approval breaches in July 2016, April 2019 and August 2019 and an “expiation for failure to provide mandatory notification of completed roof framing” in March 2019.

He said mediation in the Environment Resources and Development Court would allow works to recommence “with a view to remediate the breaches and complete construction.”

The council did not specify the nature of those breaches.

ASIC declined to comment but its website states that “if the encumbrance is over property in South Australia and does not include a specific clause that subdivision is allowed with the encumbrancee’s consent, then you may be eligible for dispensation from the Registrar-General and ASIC’s consent may not be required”.