Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs Frankston City Council chief executive Phil Cantillon said the council was “very concerned”. It had become aware of the activities two weeks ago and had visited the site to demand works cease, he said.In a statement on the council’s Facebook page, Cantillon said a planning enforcement letter and building order to stop work were issued to the landowner on Monday.Gene Neill at Docklands in 2015.Credit: Joe Armao“Council has no record of what vegetation has been removed or what is being constructed, however, it is now apparent a significant area of vegetation has been cleared and a seawall (and potential retaining walls) are being erected,” the post just after 6pm said.“If the stop work order is breached, council will be forced to consider further action which may include prosecution.”But when asked if he had received the order on Monday evening, Neill said: “I have not heard anything.”Property records show that Neill bought the Frankston South beachside home – just off the Nepean Highway – for $9.25 million in December.Neill said it was unclear where the boundary between his home and the shoreline was and surveyors would soon assess it – but the vegetation cleared was not on public land.“That’s my property that vegetation,” he said.Neill said the “the only pushback” had come from Edbrooke, whom he called a “clown”.“All we’re doing is securing our property from more landslides,” Neill said.The council said that works in sensitive coastal environments required rigorous studies. “All works and structures undertaken on coastal and marine public (Crown) land require consent from the state government, as well as planning and building permits where required.”The Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action was contacted for comment.Neill said the seawall work was “very professional”.Loading“There’s nothing dodgy about what we’ve done. It’ll be the best wall on the peninsula here,” he said.Neill denied a wider clearing that allowed access to the water’s edge was for a boat ramp. Instead, he said it was for construction site access and would be turned into stairs once complete.“I don’t want to do this … It’s gonna cost me $400,000 for the wall, and it’s gonna cost me $400,000 in legal fees,” Neill said.“I’m expecting it to end up in court because I know it’s happened to our neighbours.”Although he was sceptical about whether the council had the will to spend ratepayers’ money on legal proceedings, Neill was confident he had a strong case.“If they let everyone else do it along here, I’ve got to be able to do it,” he said.Edbrooke said Neill’s construction works were unacceptable, even though they were not on a main stretch of sand.“It’s not the prettiest part of the beach, but it’s part of the beach that people use to go fishing, walking their dogs, snorkelling – all that kind of stuff,” he said.“It’s still public beach, and it’s a beautiful part of Frankston.”LoadingHowever, Neill dismissed the criticism as coming “from the left-wing people that are supporting the local MP that is pushing this”.“They’re happy for the land to erode to the stage where people’s houses will fall down,” he said.“They won’t do anything about it. So I have to. I don’t have a choice. My house is at risk.”Neill made headlines a decade ago when the City of Melbourne told him his $7 million motor yacht was “illegally parked” at Docklands’ New Quay mooring.On Monday, he said that the dispute over his beach construction was now starting to gain traction, too.“It’s starting to get bigger than God’s undies,” he said.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.
