A precinct structure plan decides how much of your land you can actually sell. Everything else follows from that. The plan fixes where the arterial road runs, where the waterway corridor sits, where the school goes and how much unencumbered open space comes off the top. What is left is your net developable area, and net developable area is the number the levies are charged against and the number your lot yield comes out of.
The planning authority holds most of the inputs. The Victorian Planning Authority (or a council acting as planning authority) draws the plan, the Minister for Planning approves it into the planning scheme, and the schedule to the Urban Growth Zone (UGZ) turns it into the rules a permit gets assessed against. Your town planner reads the plan and tells you what the land can carry. Your civil engineer and surveyor tell you what the encumbered land really costs you once drainage and levels are tested. Those two answers, together, are your feasibility.
Figures, levy rates and programme stages in this guide were current at the time of writing in August 2026, and Victorian contribution rates are indexed annually on 1 July. The linked primary sources are where to confirm the current position before you rely on a number.
What is a precinct structure plan?
A precinct structure plan is a long-term land use and infrastructure plan that has to exist before non-urban land inside Melbourne’s Urban Growth Boundary can be developed for urban purposes. According to the Victorian planning practice note on the urban growth zone, “a precinct structure plan is a long-term strategic plan that describes how a precinct will be developed. A precinct structure plan must be prepared before non-urban land can be developed for urban purposes using the UGZ.”
The Victorian Planning Authority describes the content as covering “the preferred locations of residential and employment land and infrastructure”, together with “guidance for transport and parking, urban design, heritage and character, open spaces and integrated water management” (Precinct Structure Plan (PSP) 2.0 programme).
The history matters for how the system behaves. On the same Victorian Planning Authority page: “Melbourne’s growth corridors were created in 2005 and the area within the Urban Growth Boundary was rezoned as the Urban Growth Zone (UGZ) to facilitate the transition to urban land. The PSP process was introduced in 2006 to better coordinate the various organisations and decisions involved in strategic planning for land zoned UGZ.”
For a developer, the practical translation is blunt. Land in the Urban Growth Zone without an approved precinct structure plan is land you cannot yet develop, on any timetable you control. Land inside an approved plan is developable, but on terms someone else has already written.
Why does the plan decide your yield rather than the zone?
Because the zone by itself does nothing. The practice note is explicit: “The application of the UGZ does not, by itself, allow urban use and development to proceed. A precinct structure plan must be prepared and applied to the land before this can occur.”
The urban growth zone runs in two parts. Part A of the zone applies when no precinct structure plan applies to the land, and Part B applies once a plan is incorporated. Part B is where the useful provisions sit. The practice note describes Part B as designed to “provide certainty about the nature of future development”, “reduce the number of development approvals needed once a precinct structure plan applies”, “remove notice requirements and third-party review rights from planning permit applications for proposals that are generally in accordance with the plan”, and “ensure that permits granted for urban development are generally in accordance with the plan”.
So the plan is doing two jobs at once. It constrains you, and it protects you. The constraint is that your subdivision has to look broadly like the picture the authority drew. The protection is that if it does, objectors generally cannot hold you up at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
How does a precinct structure plan get legal force?
Through a planning scheme amendment, which is the same process as any other change to a Victorian planning scheme, with two extra steps.
First, the plan is brought into the scheme as an incorporated document. The practice note states: “The UGZ requires a precinct structure plan to be incorporated in the planning scheme before urban development generally in accordance with the plan can commence. The detailed use and development provisions required to implement the precinct structure plan must be set out in the schedule to the zone.” As an incorporated document, the plan “must be listed in the schedule to clause 72.04”.
Second, a schedule to the Urban Growth Zone (UGZ) is written for that precinct. Per the practice note, “a schedule is required for each precinct structure plan. If there is more than one schedule, each schedule must be given a number.” That schedule is where the tailored rules live, and it is generally the document a planner will want to read line by line before you exchange on the land.
The amendment itself follows the ordinary route: “These actions require a planning scheme amendment, and the exhibition, submission, adoption and approval requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 will apply.” There is also a consistency test on the planning authority. The practice note notes that where an amendment proposes to incorporate or change a plan, “the planning authority must also demonstrate that the plan or any changes to it are in accordance with any applicable precinct structure plan guidelines approved by the Minister for Planning.”
What are the precinct structure planning guidelines?
The current document is the Precinct Structure Planning Guidelines: New Communities in Victoria, published by the Victorian Planning Authority in October 2021. The guidelines page describes their purpose as “to provide the framework for preparing Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs) that guarantee quality outcomes while also being flexible, responsive and supportive of innovation”, built on the 20-minute neighbourhood principle from Plan Melbourne 2017-2050.
They run to four parts. Part 1 sets the social and policy context. Part 2 covers the preparation process. Part 3 sets out general principles and performance targets. Part 4 is the Practitioner’s Toolbox, a set of guidance notes that the Victorian Planning Authority updates on its own cycle, with later additions including integrated water management guidance from July 2024 and infrastructure and development staging guidance from February 2025.
The performance targets in Part 3 are worth attention because they are what the authority measures a draft plan against, and by extension what shapes the density, lot mix and open space split you inherit.
There is also a process reform programme, described by the Victorian Planning Authority as setting “aspirational targets including streamlining PSP preparation into a lean 2-year process and optimising the PSP product to embrace innovation, deliver government policy and co-design the next generation of PSPs”. Whether the two-year target is being met on any given precinct is a question for the authority running your plan, not something to assume.
What does “generally in accordance” actually get you?
It gets you the removal of public notice and third-party appeal rights on the matters the plan deals with, which on a greenfield subdivision can be worth many months.
The Victorian Planning Authority describes it this way in its generally in accordance guidance: “A crucial component of the Urban Growth Zone (UGZ) is the requirement that planning applications be ‘generally in accordance’ with the corresponding Precinct Structure Plan (PSP). The requirement is part of a flexible and responsive assessment framework that reduces red tape and streamlines planning applications that align with the intention of the accompanying PSP.” The same page adds that applications that are generally in accordance “also waive third party notice requirements and appeal rights, allowing for a more streamlined development process”.
The trap is the boundary of the concept. “Generally in accordance” is a judgement, not a checklist, and it is made by the responsible authority. A subdivision that moves a connector road alignment by a few metres to avoid a levels problem may well still be generally in accordance. A subdivision that deletes a local park, or converts a designated employment parcel to residential lots, probably is not, and once you fall outside the test you are back in the notice and appeal system with the timeline that implies. That timing difference is a real line in a development cashflow model, not a footnote.
Where are new precinct structure plans being prepared?
Victoria has committed to a ten-year greenfield programme. The Planning Victoria page on a 10-year plan for Melbourne’s greenfields, last updated 21 January 2026, states: “We are planning for future housing in our newest suburbs with 27 new Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs) that will be better sequenced and coordinated with infrastructure delivery.”
On scale, the same page states: “This 10-year plan will provide a framework for industry to plan for 180,000 homes”, and describes the commitment as “the longest commitment to a concrete greenfield planning program the Victorian Government has ever made, enabling industry and government agencies to plan and invest with certainty.”
The 27 plans are grouped into three horizons:
- Horizon 1: “Plans under preparation in 2024/25, targeted completion by end of 2028”, covering six residential and four employment plans.
- Horizon 2: “Plans to commence between 2025/26 and 2028/29, with completion by 2033”, covering six residential and six employment plans.
- Horizon 3: “Plans to commence between 2029/30 and 2033/34”, covering eight residential and four employment plans.
Two features of the programme could matter a great deal to a land banking position.
The first is staging. The page states: “Staging provisions will be included in future PSPs as required to ensure infrastructure delivery keeps pace with development and land can be adequately serviced when it is released.” A staging provision is a control on when your parcel can come forward, independent of when you would like it to. If you are underwriting a holding period, the staging provisions in the draft plan are the document that sets it, not your own assumptions about absorption.
The second is retrospective review. The same page states that government “will also review existing Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs) that are not yet fully developed to understand opportunities for increasing the number and types of homes where there is sufficient planned infrastructure (transport, schools and community facilities) to support them.” For a site inside an older approved plan, that could cut either way. More permitted yield may be possible on serviced land. It also means the plan you underwrote is not necessarily the plan you build to.
Regional precincts also feature in the programme, with estimated homes capacity listed for projects including Shepparton South East (2,500), Bannockburn South East (5,000), East of Aberline (4,000), Ballarat North (6,000) and Merrimu (6,800), alongside a Parwan employment precinct with no homes and around 1,500 jobs.
What does a precinct structure plan cost you?
Four separate charges tend to attach to greenfield land inside an approved plan, and they stack. Two are levied per net developable hectare or per hectare, one is a percentage of land or land value, and one is capped per dwelling. Getting the interaction right is where feasibilities most often go wrong, and it is worth having your lawyer and accountant confirm which charges bind your specific parcel and when they fall due, because the amounts are material and the timing drives your peak funding.
How much is the infrastructure contributions plan levy?
An infrastructure contributions plan sits in the planning scheme as a schedule to clause 45.11, the Infrastructure Contributions Overlay, and charges a standard levy set by the Minister, plus in some precincts a supplementary levy. Planning Victoria defines the standard levy as “a single levy that includes a community and recreation construction levy and a transport construction levy”, and the supplementary levy as “a non-standard levy for infrastructure on the basis of topographical, geographical, environmental or other physical constraints”.
All levies are expressed per net developable hectare, and Planning Victoria states that “standard levy rates are indexed on 1 July each year”. The published infrastructure contributions rates for residential development are:
| Standard levy, residential | 2024-25 | 2025-26 | 2026-27 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Community and recreation construction | $109,088 | $115,453 | $119,682 |
| Transport construction | $147,562 | $150,295 | $155,579 |
| Total per net developable hectare | $256,650 | $265,748 | $275,261 |
For commercial and industrial development, the community and recreation construction levy is nil and the transport construction levy carries the whole amount, at $155,579 per net developable hectare for 2026-27, up from $150,295 in 2025-26.
The supplementary levy is the volatile one. Planning Victoria states that “a supplementary levy amount is set by the planning authority based on the estimated cost of the ‘non-standard’ infrastructure or costs”. Where a precinct has a difficult waterway, significant earthworks or an unusual bridge, the supplementary levy is where that lands, and it is precinct-specific. The current amount lives in the actual infrastructure contributions plan schedule, and the trap is assuming it at zero.
Separately, a capped community infrastructure levy applies per dwelling. Planning Victoria states that “section 46L (1)(a) and (1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act sets a maximum levy for community infrastructure”, and publishes the maximum as $1,590 per dwelling for 2026-27, up from $1,530 in 2025-26 and $1,450 in 2024-25.
Older precincts may still sit under a development contributions plan rather than an infrastructure contributions plan. The two systems calculate differently, so which one applies to your parcel is a question worth resolving early rather than at feasibility sign-off.
How much is the growth areas infrastructure contribution?
The growth areas infrastructure contribution is a separate state charge on land in Melbourne’s designated growth areas, and it sits on top of the infrastructure contributions plan levy rather than replacing it.
The State Revenue Office publishes the current growth areas infrastructure contribution rates as $122,260 per hectare for type A land and $145,220 per hectare for types B-1, B-2 and C land in 2026-27, up from $118,830 and $141,150 respectively in 2025-26. The rates are indexed annually with the consumer price index.
What triggers the charge is set by statute. Section 201RA of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) provides that “a GAIC event means any of the following: (a) the issue of a statement of compliance relating to a plan of subdivision of land in the contribution area; (b) the making of an application for a building permit to carry out building work on land in the contribution area; (c) the occurrence of a dutiable transaction relating to land in the contribution area”, excluding excluded events (section 201RA on AustLII).
Three points a developer generally has to work through with their lawyer.
The first is that the liability attaches to the first of those events to occur. Acquiring the land can be the trigger, not the subdivision. On a site bought as raw land inside the contribution area, the charge may crystallise at settlement, well before any revenue exists to meet it.
The second is that a building permit application only triggers the charge above a threshold. The State Revenue Office publishes the growth areas infrastructure contribution threshold for excluded building as increasing to $1,528,532 for 2026-27, from $1,485,650 (changes taking effect on 1 July 2026).
The third is deferral. The charge can generally be deferred to the next event, paid in stages, or met through a work-in-kind agreement with the Minister for Planning, in each case subject to approval. Deferral is not free. The State Revenue Office publishes the interest payable on deferred growth areas infrastructure contribution as increasing from 5.0871 per cent to 5.6063 per cent from 1 July 2026, calculated daily on the ten-year bond rate basis. On a multi-million dollar liability held across a long staged delivery, that is a real line in your land holding costs, and it compounds against a revenue stream that arrives in tranches.
A work-in-kind agreement is the other lever. Under such an agreement the liable person agrees to provide land or state infrastructure works instead of a cash payment, to meet all or part of the liability. Whether one is available and whether it improves your position is a project-specific question that turns on what state infrastructure your precinct actually needs and what you are equipped to build.
Does windfall gains tax apply to land in the contribution area?
Generally not, and the mechanism is worth understanding because it is an exclusion rather than an exemption.
Section 3 of the Windfall Gains Tax Act 2021 (Vic) defines “excluded rezoning” to include “a rezoning that causes land to be brought within the contribution area within the meaning of section 201RC of the Planning and Environment Act 1987” and “the first rezoning of land that was in the contribution area within the meaning of section 201RC of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 immediately before that rezoning” (section 3 on AustLII). Because a windfall gains tax event is defined as a rezoning other than an excluded rezoning, those rezonings are not taxing events at all.
The State Revenue Office states the position more plainly, that “rezonings to and from the urban growth zone (UGZ) within the growth areas infrastructure contribution (GAIC) area are excluded from windfall gains tax” (windfall gains tax exemptions and exclusions).
The practical read is that the growth areas infrastructure contribution and windfall gains tax are broadly alternatives rather than a double charge, and which one bites depends on where the land sits relative to the contribution area. Whether your particular rezoning falls inside the exclusion is a question for your lawyer on the actual rezoning history of the title, not something to infer from a map. Our windfall gains tax guide covers how the tax works where the exclusion does not apply.
How does the public open space contribution work?
Under section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988 (Vic), a council may require a subdivider to set aside land for public open space, or pay a percentage of site value, or both, “being a percentage set by the Council not exceeding 5 per cent” (section 18 on AustLII). Where a cash amount is required, the Act provides that “the amount must be paid before the Council issues its statement of compliance”, with the timing before that point at the applicant’s discretion.
Two mechanics tend to catch people out.
Section 18(5) provides that “a public open space requirement may be made only once in respect of any of the land to be subdivided”, which matters on multi-stage subdivisions where the same parent parcel is cut repeatedly.
More importantly for precinct land, section 18 applies only where a requirement is not specified in the planning scheme, and section 18(1AB) switches it off entirely for a parcel covered by an approved infrastructure contributions plan where the open space land is provided as part of the plan’s land component, or where “a land equalisation amount (within the meaning of section 46GF of the Planning and Environment Act 1987) will be imposed under the approved infrastructure contributions plan to pay for any land to be set aside for public open space under the plan”. In other words, inside an infrastructure contributions plan precinct, the open space obligation is usually being handled through the plan’s land component and equalisation mechanism, not as a separate five per cent charge. Double-counting it in a feasibility overstates cost. Ignoring the land equalisation amount understates it.
For the rest of Victoria, where no schedule to clause 53.01 of the Victoria Planning Provisions specifies an amount, section 18 remains the fallback. Our Victorian subdivision guide covers the statement of compliance sequence these payments hang off.
Worked example: what a precinct structure plan does to a 20 hectare parcel
The figures below are illustrative. Rates are the published 2026-27 amounts, and the site assumptions are stated so you can substitute your own.
Assumptions. A 20.00 hectare parcel inside an approved precinct structure plan, in an infrastructure contributions plan precinct, on type B land for growth areas infrastructure contribution purposes. The plan takes 2.20 hectares as encumbered land (a waterway corridor, drainage reserve and transmission easement) and 1.30 hectares for arterial road widening and a connector road reserve. Unencumbered public open space is assumed at 5 per cent of net developable area, local streets and reserves at 25 per cent, and an average lot size of 400 square metres. No supplementary levy is assumed.
Net developable area.
| Line | Hectares |
|---|---|
| Gross site area | 20.00 |
| Less encumbered land | (2.20) |
| Less arterial and connector road reserve | (1.30) |
| Net developable area | 16.50 |
Lot yield. Net developable area of 16.50 hectares is 165,000 square metres. Less 5 per cent unencumbered public open space (8,250 square metres) leaves 156,750 square metres. Less 25 per cent for local streets and reserves (39,187.5 square metres) leaves 117,562.5 square metres of saleable lot area. At 400 square metres per lot, that is 293 lots.
Contributions.
| Charge | Basis | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| Infrastructure contributions plan standard levy | 16.50 net developable hectares at $275,261 | $4,541,807 |
| Growth areas infrastructure contribution | 20.00 hectares at $145,220 | $2,904,400 |
| Total | $7,446,207 |
That is $15,501 per lot for the infrastructure contributions plan levy and $9,913 per lot for the growth areas infrastructure contribution, or $25,414 per lot combined, before the capped community infrastructure levy of $1,590 per dwelling, before any supplementary levy, and before the land equalisation amount.
Second scenario: the waterway corridor is wider than assumed. Change one input. Detailed flood modelling during the permit stage pushes the encumbered waterway corridor from 2.20 to 3.70 hectares, an extra 1.50 hectares. Everything else holds.
Net developable area falls to 15.00 hectares, or 150,000 square metres. Less 5 per cent open space (7,500 square metres) leaves 142,500 square metres. Less 25 per cent for streets (35,625 square metres) leaves 106,875 square metres, or 267 lots at 400 square metres.
The infrastructure contributions plan levy falls to $4,128,915 (15.00 hectares at $275,261) because it is charged on net developable area. The growth areas infrastructure contribution is unchanged at $2,904,400 because the land area has not changed. Total contributions of $7,033,315 across 267 lots is $26,342 per lot, against $25,414 before.
So 1.50 hectares of extra encumbered land costs 26 lots of revenue and raises the contribution cost of every remaining lot by $928. The reason the per-lot cost goes up while the total goes down is the growth areas infrastructure contribution: it is charged on land area, so it does not shrink when your developable area does. That asymmetry is arguably the most useful thing to understand about greenfield contribution modelling in Victoria.
What is the Train and Tram Zone Activity Centres Program?
The activity centres programme is the established-areas counterpart to precinct structure planning, and by 2026 it is largely in place. Planning Victoria states that the programme “aims to encourage more than 300,000 new homes to be built around Melbourne’s train and tram lines, jobs and services by 2051”, and that “plans for 58 of these centres have now been finalised, while plans for the two proposed train and tram zones in Inner Melbourne are being finalised” (about the program, last updated 22 July 2026).
The sequence, per Planning Victoria’s page on how the plans were made:
- “The plans for 10 activity centres that were part of the pilot program were finalised in April 2025.”
- “The plans for the 25 centres in Stage 1 were finalised on 31 March 2026.”
- “The plans for the 23 centres in Stage 2 were finalised on 22 July 2026.”
- “The plans for the 2 centres in Inner Melbourne are being finalised.”
The pilot centres were Broadmeadows, Camberwell Junction, Chadstone, Epping, Frankston, Moorabbin, Niddrie (Keilor Road), North Essendon, Preston (High Street) and Ringwood.
Planning Victoria is direct about the delivery model: “We’re not acquiring land as part of this program. We’re introducing clear planning controls to allow the right housing to be built in the right places”, and “most new homes in activity centres will be built by private developers and landowners.” It also sets expectations on pace: “We expect development to occur gradually, over the next 20 to 30 years.”
That last line is the honest signal. A gazetted control is capacity, not demand. The controls create the entitlement envelope. Whether a given site is feasible inside that envelope is still a function of land price, construction cost and end value, and a plan that permits eight storeys does not make eight storeys stack.
How do the core and catchment controls work?
The plans generally split each centre into a core and a surrounding catchment, with two new tools doing the work.
Planning Victoria states: “The majority of train and tram zone activity centre plans include a ‘core’ and a ‘catchment’ area. Some have an ‘inner’ and ‘outer’ catchment area.” The core is “the central part of the train and tram zone activity centre, closest to public transport, jobs and services”, and the catchment is “the surrounding area within approximately 10 minutes’ walk of the core (around 800 metres).”
The published height expectations are:
| Area | Indicative height |
|---|---|
| Core | ”Various heights between six and 16 storeys in most centres, with potential for taller heights in some places in the larger centres” |
| Inner catchment | ”Up to four storeys, and up to six storeys on blocks larger than 1000m2” |
| Outer catchment | ”Up to three storeys, and up to four storeys on blocks larger than 1000m2” |
The two instruments are new. Planning Victoria describes “a new Built Form Overlay (BFO)” that has “been developed to make planning controls in activity centre ‘cores’ clearer and more consistent across Melbourne”, and “the new Housing Choice and Transport Zone (HCTZ)” developed “to enable a diversity of housing in the catchments, and other well-serviced locations with convenient access to public transport, jobs and services.”
For an infill developer, the assessment pathway is the commercially significant part. Planning Victoria states that “if an application meets the ‘deemed to comply’ standards within the BFO, it cannot be refused a permit on the basis of those standards”, and that “applications for most new buildings within the BFO are not subject to a public notice period. This means council does not need to notify nearby landowners about the planning application, or consider objections.”
There are two qualifications on that, both stated on the same page. The exemption does not override other notice triggers: “If notice and review is required under another part of the planning scheme, those provisions will continue to apply.” And in the catchments the position is different: “In residential catchment areas, such as where the Housing Choice and Transport Zone (HCTZ) has been applied, notice and review requirements are dependent on the provisions of the residential development codes. In most cases, notice requirements remain.”
Note also that the block size threshold in the catchment is a site amalgamation question in disguise. Where the Housing Choice and Transport Zone (HCTZ) allows more height above 1,000 square metres and a minimum frontage, the difference between two adjoining titles and one consolidated title can be two extra storeys. As gazetted in one Stage 1 amendment, the zone permitted up to 13.5 metres or four storeys on sites under 1,000 square metres and up to 21.5 metres or six storeys on larger sites meeting a 20 metre minimum frontage in the higher of two sub-zones. The specific numbers vary by centre and sub-zone, so the schedule for your centre is the document that governs, not a general table.
Is this the same as the Activity Centre Zone?
No. The Activity Centre Zone is an older and separate tool, and the current train and tram zone programme uses the Built Form Overlay (BFO) and the Housing Choice and Transport Zone (HCTZ) instead.
Planning Victoria describes the Activity Centre Zone (ACZ) as “the preferred tool to guide and facilitate land use planning in activity centres”, “developed specifically for application at activity centres in metropolitan Melbourne”, applying “across a whole activity centre”. It can also be used “for larger regional cities that demonstrate distinct ‘CBD’-type functions and have completed a structure plan.”
Where a council has applied an Activity Centre Zone through its own structure planning, that control still governs. Where a centre falls inside the state programme, the newer overlay and zone are the operative tools. If you are buying in a centre, working out which of these applies to your title, and whether the two interact, is a first-hour question for your town planner.
Does an activity centre plan carry contributions like a precinct structure plan?
Generally not in the same form. The growth areas infrastructure contribution applies to land in the contribution area, which is greenfield growth area land. Infrastructure contributions plans are largely a greenfield instrument, applied through the Infrastructure Contributions Overlay.
Infill development in an established activity centre is more likely to face a development contributions plan levy where the council has one, open space obligations under clause 53.01 of the Victoria Planning Provisions or section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988 (Vic), and the ordinary cost of servicing upgrades negotiated with the relevant authorities. Where those obligations are secured by agreement, that is often through a section 173 agreement registered on title.
The cost base differs in kind rather than only in size. Greenfield contributions are largely knowable in advance from published rates. Infill obligations are more often negotiated, more variable between councils, and harder to pin down at the offer stage.
How does a precinct structure plan affect timing and holding costs?
The plan sets your earliest possible start date, and in most cases that date is not yours to move.
Three timing questions tend to drive the model. Whether an approved plan exists over your land, or is in one of the three programme horizons and therefore years away. Whether the plan contains staging provisions that gate your parcel behind a servicing or infrastructure trigger. And whether the servicing authorities have capacity in the sequence the plan assumes, which is a separate question from whether the plan is approved.
Land held through a long precinct structure planning process accrues holding costs, land tax and, where the growth areas infrastructure contribution has been triggered and deferred, interest at the published rate. Little of that is typically recoverable from a buyer who is pricing off comparable englobo land, so the risk sits with the holder.
The Victorian Government has also been running parallel approval reform outside the precinct structure planning system. Our guide to Plan for Victoria and the Development Facilitation Program covers the alternative pathway that has applied to certain projects, which is a different route to a decision rather than a different set of controls.
What are the equivalents in other states?
Only Victoria uses the term “precinct structure plan” for a statutory greenfield instrument in the way described above. Other jurisdictions do the same job through different machinery, in some cases under the same name.
Western Australia uses precinct structure plans as a species of structure plan under State Planning Policy 7.2 Precinct Design, which the Western Australian Government states “was gazetted and became operational on 19 February 2021”. The policy “applies throughout Western Australia and provides guidance on the design, planning, assessment and implementation of precinct structure plans, local development plans, subdivision and development in areas identified as precincts”, and notes that “precinct structure plans are a type of structure plan and are a replacement for activity centre plans” (State Planning Policy 7.2). Structure plans themselves sit under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, with the Western Australian Planning Commission as lead authority.
Queensland does the closest equivalent through Priority Development Areas. Economic Development Queensland describes these as “parcels of land within Queensland, identified for specific accelerated development with a focus on delivering housing and facilitating economic growth”, declared by the Minister for Economic Development Queensland under the Economic Development Act 2012. Two instruments apply: an Interim Land Use Plan, “in place generally up to 12 months after the declaration”, and a Development Scheme, “the regulatory document that assists with planning, promoting, coordinating and regulating land development within a PDA” (about Priority Development Areas). A Provisional Priority Development Area is a shorter-lived version that “has effect for a period of three years”.
New South Wales does its precinct work largely through state environmental planning policies rather than incorporated precinct plans. The Transport Oriented Development Program is the clearest current example. The NSW Department of Planning states that the first stage “was implemented through introduction of new planning controls at Chapter 5 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021”, commencing 13 May 2024 and now applying to 25 precincts, with alternative council schemes implemented for 12 precincts. Within those areas, “a maximum height of 22m applies to residential flat buildings and 24 m for shop top housing”, “a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 2.5:1 applies to both residential flat buildings and shop top housing”, and 2 per cent of floor area must be affordable housing in perpetuity for developments with a minimum gross floor area of 2,000 square metres (Transport Oriented Development). Our NSW Transport Oriented Development guide covers that programme in detail.
South Australia has no separate precinct structure plan instrument. Rezoning happens by Code Amendment to the Planning and Design Code, which the state describes as “a statutory instrument under the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016, for the purposes of development assessment and related matters within South Australia”, with a code amendment being “a proposal to change the policies, rules, or mapping within the Code” (code amendments). Infrastructure delivery sits in a separate infrastructure schemes mechanism.
For Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory, growth area planning generally runs through the ordinary planning scheme amendment or territory plan variation process rather than a distinct precinct instrument, so the question for a developer there is usually about the amendment pathway rather than about which precinct plan applies.
What is the New Zealand position?
New Zealand is mid-way through replacing its resource management system, so the answer changes depending on when you read it.
The Ministry for the Environment states that “the Government is replacing the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) with a new planning system”, with the Planning Bill and Natural Environment Bill introduced on 9 December 2025. The Ministry states that “Parliament’s Environment Committee completed its scrutiny of the Bills in July 2026” and that “the Government aims to pass the Bills into law in 2026” (resource management reform).
The replacement structure is closer to Victorian precinct planning in spirit than the current one. The Ministry describes each region having a combined plan containing “a regional spatial plan that sets the long-term strategic direction for growth and infrastructure”, “land-use plans that enable the use and development of land for each city or district in the region”, and “a natural environment plan”. The transition sequence is stated as councils notifying regional spatial plans “within 15 months of the Bills becoming law”, with land-use plans and natural environment plans notified “within nine months of regional spatial plan decisions”, and the transition ending “in 2028-2029 when all plans have been notified”.
Structure plans exist in New Zealand practice at district plan level rather than as a headline statutory instrument, and how they survive the transition is one of the open questions for anyone holding greenfield land. Our Resource Management Act reform guide tracks the replacement legislation in more detail.
What to ask your town planner
These are the questions that decide a precinct site on its own facts, and a planner who knows the precinct can answer them in an afternoon.
- Is my land inside an approved precinct structure plan, in a plan currently being prepared, or in one of the three ten-year programme horizons? If it is in a horizon, which one, and what is the stated commencement window?
- Which schedule to the Urban Growth Zone (UGZ) applies to my parcel, and what does it require that the plan itself does not make obvious?
- What does the plan designate across my title: encumbered land, arterial or connector road reserve, unencumbered public open space, school or community facility sites, and any conservation area? What is the resulting net developable area, and how confident is that figure before detailed design?
- Does the plan contain staging provisions that gate my parcel, and what are the triggers for release?
- What subdivision layout would fall outside “generally in accordance”, and how much design latitude do I actually have before notice and third-party appeal rights come back?
- Is there an approved infrastructure contributions plan over the precinct, or an older development contributions plan? Which one binds my parcel?
- Is a supplementary levy set for this precinct, and what is the current amount per net developable hectare?
- Is the public open space obligation handled through the infrastructure contributions plan land component and land equalisation amount, or as a separate contribution under clause 53.01 or section 18 of the Subdivision Act 1988 (Vic)?
- For an activity centre site: does the Built Form Overlay (BFO), the Housing Choice and Transport Zone (HCTZ), or an existing Activity Centre Zone (ACZ) apply, and which sub-precinct or sub-zone is my title in?
- What are the deemed to comply standards that would remove notice for my proposal, and what would I have to give up on the design to meet them?
- Would consolidating with the adjoining title move me above a site area or frontage threshold that changes the permitted height?
What to ask your civil engineer and surveyor
- What does the flood and drainage modelling say about the width of the waterway or drainage corridor across my land, and how much could that move between the plan and the permit?
- How much of the encumbered land is genuinely unusable, and how much could be counted toward open space or otherwise credited?
- What earthworks and retaining does the plan’s road and levels layout imply, and how does that compare with the assumption in my land price?
- What servicing capacity exists for the precinct in the sequence the plan assumes, and where are the known constraints?
What to ask your lawyer and accountant
- Has a growth areas infrastructure contribution event already occurred on this land, and is there an existing liability, deferral or work-in-kind agreement attached to the title?
- Will my acquisition itself be a dutiable transaction that triggers the contribution before I have any revenue, and if so, on what land area and at which rate type?
- What deferral or staged payment options may be available, what approval is required, and what would the interest cost be across my expected programme?
- Is the rezoning history of this title inside the windfall gains tax exclusion for the contribution area, or is a windfall gains tax liability in play?
- Which contribution obligations are being secured by a section 173 agreement on title, and what do those obligations bind a future purchaser to?
- How should the contributions be treated for tax and for trading stock purposes across the life of the project?
The short version
A precinct structure plan is the document that converts a hectare figure on a contract into a saleable lot count and a contribution bill. The net developable area it leaves you is the number both the infrastructure contributions plan levy and your yield are calculated from. The growth areas infrastructure contribution is charged on land area rather than net developable area, so it does not shrink when your developable land does, and that asymmetry is what makes encumbered land more expensive than it first looks.
In established areas, the activity centres programme has now put controls over 58 of 60 centres, with a deemed to comply pathway in the cores that removes notice for compliant proposals. That is capacity and process certainty. It is not a guarantee that a site stacks, and the schedule for your specific centre is the document that governs what you can build.