A waterfront mansion owner will get one last chance from Frankston City Council to remove a controversial beachside sea wall or face prosecution.
Gene Neill admitted to The Age in March that he had no permit to build in front of his $9.25 million Frankston South home, arguing it was impossible to get approval and a wall was needed immediately to stop erosion.
Gene Neill in front of the sea wall in March.Credit: Simon Schluter
The next day, he reversed course and said he would rip out his incomplete wall after public backlash surprised him.
Frankston City Council then said in April that it was devising a way to remediate the paused works with the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action.
Now, in another backflip, Neill told The Age on Monday that not only did he keep building the wall, but it was completed last month.
In a meeting on Monday night, councillors confidentially discussed enforcement action against the “unauthorised sea wall” near Olivers Hill.
On Tuesday, two sources with knowledge of the discussions, speaking anonymously because they were unauthorised to comment publicly, confirmed that the council had resolved to send a show-cause notice to Neill.
Should he provide an inadequate response and fail to remediate the works, the letter warns he could be prosecuted within 60 days.
Neill declined to comment on Tuesday when asked about the council’s latest move.
On Monday, he said he had recently sold his beachfront mansion, though this could not be independently verified.
Construction on the Frankston South beach on March 1.
In March, Neill said he had put aside $400,000 for legal fees if he was prosecuted over the wall, which he described as emergency works to fight erosion about 20 metres away that he claimed would impact his house by 2060.
The wall first attracted council attention in February, and more than 50 people reportedly complained to Frankston MP Paul Edbrooke’s office on the first weekend of March.
Neill defended pushing ahead with the project at the time, claiming all his neighbours had a wall to protect their properties.
“Everyone’s wall along the foreshore is illegal,” he said in March. “If they let everyone else do it along here, I’ve got to be able to do it.”
Neill insisted his project was “first class” and was required immediately because he couldn’t get home insurance.
Some vegetation was removed, and a ramp was created to give workers better access to the construction site, but Neill said a landslip caused some of the shoreline damage before he bought the home in December. He previously suggested it was unclear where the boundary between his property and Crown land was.
In a March statement, the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action described Neill’s works as illegal.
The paused seawall works in March.Credit: Simon Schluter
Edbrooke, the state MP, has also decried the coastal development as infringing on public land. He said in March that the beach in front of Neill’s home was “not the prettiest” but was still public and used for activities such as dog walking.
On Tuesday, Edbrooke said he fully supported action to tackle illegal structures on Frankston’s beaches.
“No one is above the rules, especially when our coastline, public safety and environmental integrity are at stake,” he said.
A department spokesperson said it had not provided approval for any privately funded sea walls on coastal Crown land at Olivers Hill.
“Frankston South beach is public land and should be accessible to all Victorians,” the statement said.
Frankston City Council was contacted but failed to respond by deadline.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.