Victoria’s 10-Year Plan for Melbourne’s Greenfields: From Land Release to Housing Delivery
What the latest update means for Melbourne’s growth corridors, infrastructure and the future of greenfield investment
Victoria’s housing debate is often framed around one simple question:
Does Melbourne have enough land?
The latest update to the Victorian Government’s 10-Year Plan for Melbourne’s Greenfields suggests that the more important question is becoming:
Can we turn the right land into homes, at the right time, with the infrastructure needed to support them?
Updated on 3 September 2026, the plan continues to provide a framework for approximately 180,000 homes across 27 new greenfield precinct structure plans (PSPs) over the next decade. More importantly, the Government is now placing greater emphasis on sequencing, infrastructure coordination, unlocking constrained zoned land and making better use of existing PSPs.
This represents an important evolution in the way Melbourne’s greenfield growth should be understood.
From “land supply” to “effective housing supply”
Melbourne already has a substantial greenfield land pipeline.
The challenge is not simply the availability of land. It is the time and complexity required to move land through:
Strategic planning → PSP → zoning → infrastructure → subdivision → titles → housing delivery
The Government’s latest approach recognises this distinction.
Future PSPs will incorporate staging provisions where required, helping ensure that infrastructure delivery keeps pace with development and that land is adequately serviced when it is released.
This is an important shift.
A parcel of land being “planned for housing” does not necessarily mean that it is immediately capable of delivering housing.
For investors and developers, the relevant question is increasingly not simply:
“Is this land within a growth corridor?”
but:
“How far is this land from becoming development-ready?”
A more coordinated approach to infrastructure
Infrastructure has always been fundamental to greenfield development.
Roads, schools, community facilities, drainage, transport and other enabling infrastructure determine not only whether development can occur, but also when it can occur.
The updated Greenfields Plan places greater emphasis on coordinating land release with infrastructure capacity.
This is particularly important because Victoria’s current infrastructure contribution framework already requires developers to contribute toward infrastructure supporting new communities. For 2026–27, the standard residential Infrastructure Contributions Plan levy in Melbourne’s metropolitan greenfield growth areas is $275,261 per net developable hectare, before other applicable contributions and development costs.
The policy challenge is therefore not simply to increase developer contributions.
It is to ensure that:
Capital contributions translate into timely infrastructure delivery.
For the industry, greater infrastructure certainty can ultimately be more valuable than simply having more land released.
Unlocking land that is already zoned
One of the most interesting elements of the Government’s strategy is that it is not relying solely on new PSPs.
The Government has established a Greenfield Subdivision Concierge to help address projects where zoned greenfield land with a gazetted PSP has been delayed for six months or more.
The program allows councils or developers to seek government assistance in coordinating agencies and addressing issues that may be preventing subdivision from progressing.
This is an important signal.
It suggests that government increasingly recognises:
Housing supply is not created when land is zoned.
Housing supply is created when land can actually be delivered.
For the industry, this distinction matters enormously.
Existing PSPs may have more capacity
Another potentially significant development is the Government’s intention to review existing PSPs that are not yet fully developed.
Where sufficient infrastructure is planned or available — including transport, schools and community facilities — the Government will consider opportunities to increase:
- the number of homes; and
- the types of homes that can be delivered.
This creates an interesting potential source of additional housing supply without necessarily requiring completely new greenfield areas.
In other words:
The future of Melbourne’s housing supply may not depend only on expanding the urban footprint. It may also depend on using existing planned land more efficiently.
For landowners and developers, this creates an additional consideration:
development yield and housing diversity may become an increasingly important component of land value.
Three horizons — and three different investment strategies
The 27 new plans are being progressed across three horizons.
Horizon 1
Plans under preparation, with targeted completion by the end of 2028.
These include Devon Meadows, Cardinia Creek South Part 2, Casey Fields South and Melton East, among others.
Horizon 2
Plans commencing between 2025/26 and 2028/29, with completion targeted by 2033.
This includes Clyde South, Oakbank and Pakenham West, among others.
Horizon 3
Plans commencing between 2029/30 and 2033/34, including Mambourin East, Melton West and Werribee Junction.
This creates something particularly valuable for long-term investors:
Greater visibility over the future land supply pipeline.
But visibility should not be confused with immediate development readiness.
A Horizon 3 site may have significant long-term strategic value, but it carries a very different capital profile, holding period and execution risk from a project that is already within an active PSP and has infrastructure pathways established.
What does this mean for greenfield investment?
We believe the evolution of Victoria’s policy framework points to a broader change in how greenfield land should be assessed.
Historically, greenfield investment often focused heavily on:
Location + Land Price + Future Planning Uplift
Going forward, we believe the investment framework needs to become more comprehensive:
Strategic Location
Is the land positioned within a sustainable population and employment growth corridor?
Planning Position
What is the current PSP and zoning status?
Infrastructure Readiness
What infrastructure is required, who is responsible for delivering it, and when?
Time-to-Development
How long could it realistically take to reach subdivision and titles?
Housing Yield
What number and types of homes can ultimately be delivered?
Execution Capability
Can the development team navigate planning, infrastructure, civil works, approvals and delivery?
Exit Liquidity
Who will ultimately buy the finished land or housing product?
The result is a more nuanced concept of land value.
The “delivery premium”
We believe an important distinction is emerging between:
Land with development potential
and
Land with a credible pathway to development.
The second may increasingly command what we would describe as a:
“Delivery Premium.”
Two parcels may appear similar on a map.
But if one has:
- clearer planning certainty,
- stronger infrastructure commitments,
- shorter time-to-market,
- better housing yield,
- stronger developer capability,
then the economic value of the two assets can be fundamentally different.
This does not mean that long-term land banking becomes irrelevant.
Quite the opposite.
Strategic land with strong long-term positioning can remain highly valuable.
But the strongest model may increasingly be:
Strategic Land Bank + Planning Visibility + Infrastructure Alignment + Delivery Capability
rather than passive land ownership alone.
Greenfield housing as infrastructure
Perhaps the most important message from the latest policy direction is that greenfield housing should not be viewed simply as a property product.
New communities require:
Greenfield development is therefore closely connected to the broader infrastructure and economic growth of Melbourne.
- roads,
- schools,
- parks,
- utilities,
- transport,
- community facilities,
- employment,
- and, ultimately, homes.
The Victorian Government’s broader housing strategy continues to target 70% of new homes in established areas and 30% in greenfield areas, while the Greenfields Plan provides a framework for approximately 180,000 additional homes in Melbourne’s newest suburbs.
This creates an interesting balance:
Established areas → more infill and higher-density housing
Growth areas → new communities and new housing supply
Both are necessary.
What should investors watch from here?
For us, the most important question is no longer simply:
“How much greenfield land does Melbourne have?”
Instead, we should be asking:
“How much land can realistically become housing, and how quickly?”
That leads to a new investment hierarchy:
The closer an asset is to the end of this chain — while still maintaining attractive risk-adjusted returns — the more tangible its pathway to value creation becomes.
Our view
The latest 10-Year Plan for Melbourne’s Greenfields is not simply a plan to release more land.
It is increasingly a framework for managing the delivery of housing supply.
And that distinction matters.
For developers, it means greater emphasis on execution.
For governments, it means infrastructure and planning coordination.
For investors, it means looking beyond land scarcity and focusing on time, infrastructure, planning certainty and delivery capability.
And for Melbourne, the ultimate measure of success will not be how many hectares are planned.
It will be:
How many homes are actually delivered — and how effectively those new communities are connected to the infrastructure, jobs and services that make them liveable.
At ORENS Capital, we believe this reinforces a broader investment principle:
The future of greenfield investment is not simply about owning land.
It is about investing in the process that turns land into housing.
Contact us
info@orenscapital.com.au
Disclaimer: This article is general information only and does not constitute financial advice. It does not take into account any personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Information is intended for wholesale clients only. Prospective investors should seek independent professional advice before making any investment decisions.
