The rumours are true, finally Brisbane’s approach to low-medium density housing is changing. Brisbane City Council has progressed its “More Homes, Sooner” amendment for the Low-medium density residential zone following public consultation earlier in 2026.

This has understandably attracted attention. For property owners, a smaller minimum lot size raises questions about subdivision potential, property value and what future development might look like in established suburbs.

From a town planning perspective, though, the 120m² figure needs context.

The proposal does not mean every Low-medium density residential property can be divided into 120m² lots. It is part of a broader change to the LMR zone that would treat different locations differently and introduce specific controls for how small-lot housing is designed.

What are the current rules?

Under the current Brisbane City Plan, the Low-medium density residential, or LMR, zone provides for a variety of low to medium density dwelling types.

It currently contains three precincts:

• 2 storey mix
• 2 or 3 storey mix
• Up to 3 storeys.

The existing City Plan already supports different forms of housing across these precincts. Depending on the precinct and site, that can include dwelling houses, dual occupancies, row houses and low-rise multiple dwellings.

Small lots are also not new to Brisbane.

Under the current Subdivision code, the applicable minimum lot size varies according to the zone and precinct. The existing small-lot provisions include minimums of 260m² in parts of the LMR zone and 180m² in the Up to 3 storeys precinct, subject to the relevant circumstances and dimensional requirements.

Importantly, the City Plan does not look at land area alone. Its subdivision controls also deal with minimum dimensions, frontage, lot width and access.

That principle remains important when considering Council’s proposed 120m² lots.

So what is Council proposing?

Council proposes combining the existing 2 or 3 storey mix and Up to 3 storeys precincts into a new “3 or 4 storey mix zone precinct”.

Within that proposed precinct, the type of development Council seeks would depend partly on whether a property is within a “Key Location”.

Key Locations generally relate to land near centres and qualifying high-frequency public transport.

Council proposes focusing more apartment and multiple dwelling development within Key Locations, while supporting more small-lot housing outside Key Locations.

That distinction is central to understanding the proposed changes.

This isn’t simply a citywide reduction in minimum lot size.

Where does the 120m² lot come in?

Outside Key Locations, Council proposes allowing a minimum lot size of 120m² where the relevant design and built-form criteria can be satisfied at subdivision stage.

The proposed small-lot controls include:

• Houses up to 3 storeys and 11.5m
• A 120m² minimum lot size where the relevant criteria are met
• 55% total site cover for lots below 180m²
• A maximum impervious area of 70%
• Changes to setbacks and built-to-boundary walls
• Narrower driveway crossovers to provide more room for street trees and on-street parking.

This gives us a better idea of what Council is trying to achieve.

The proposal isn’t simply about squeezing a conventional Brisbane house onto a much smaller block. It is intended to facilitate different forms of housing, including narrow houses and terrace-style development.

Does a 600m² block mean five 120m² lots?

No. This is probably the most important point for property owners.

A minimum lot size is not the same as a guaranteed development yield.

Dividing 600m² by 120m² might produce five on a calculator, but planning and subdivision do not work that way.

You need to consider the shape and dimensions of the parent property, frontage, vehicle access, servicing, easements, stormwater and how usable building sites can actually be created.

The current City Plan already demonstrates this approach. Its Subdivision code requires residential lots to be capable of accommodating appropriate internal access ways and driveways, in addition to meeting applicable lot dimensions.

The proposed amendment would change the small-lot framework, but it would not remove the need to create functional residential lots.

Who could benefit?

The proposal could be particularly interesting for owners of larger LMR properties outside Key Locations.

Sites with a wide frontage, regular shape and straightforward access may have opportunities that are difficult to achieve under the current planning controls.

It could also open another development model for some sites.

Instead of choosing between a conventional subdivision and a townhouse or apartment development, owners and developers may have greater scope to consider individually titled narrow houses or terrace-style housing.

For buyers, that could provide another option between an apartment and a conventional detached house on a larger block.

We see merit in that. Brisbane’s current LMR zone already exists to provide a variety of low to medium density dwelling types. The proposed small-lot provisions would take that principle further by allowing a more compact form of housing in selected locations.

What are the potential benefits?

The main benefit is housing choice.

Not every household needs a large block. Smaller freehold lots could suit people who want their own house but don’t want the maintenance, cost or land associated with a conventional Brisbane property.

There is also an efficiency argument. Where appropriate infrastructure and services already exist, accommodating additional households within established areas can make better use of that infrastructure.

Council’s broader housing strategy is based on concentrating additional housing in locations with access to transport, shops and services rather than relying solely on outward expansion.

For some existing owners, the changes could also create development potential that isn’t currently available.

But that won’t apply to every property.

What concerns us about 120m² lots?

A 120m² residential lot is small.

Once you fit a house, outdoor space, landscaping, bins, access, services and stormwater requirements onto the property, there isn’t much spare land.

Three-storey houses on narrow lots can also create privacy and overlooking issues if they aren’t designed properly.

Street design matters too. If every narrow property requires its own driveway and garage, the cumulative result can be a streetscape dominated by vehicle crossovers rather than trees, landscaping and usable kerb space.

Council appears to recognise these issues. The proposed 55% site cover and 70% impervious-area controls, together with narrower driveway crossovers and landscaping provisions, are intended to retain space around these smaller homes.

Whether those controls produce good outcomes will ultimately depend on the design of individual developments.

Our view is that 120m² can work on the right site, but the quality of the housing matters just as much as the number of lots created.

What about neighbours?

Existing homeowners in LMR areas may experience the changes differently.

If you own a development site, smaller lots may create an opportunity.

If you live next door, you may be more concerned about additional buildings, three-storey houses, privacy, parking, traffic or the loss of vegetation.

Both perspectives are reasonable. The planning question is whether additional housing can be accommodated while maintaining acceptable residential amenity and a reasonable relationship with existing homes.

Council’s proposal includes controls dealing with setbacks, site cover, landscaping and built form for this reason.

Could smaller lots make housing cheaper?

Possibly, but we wouldn’t assume that they will.

Using less land for each home can create housing at different price points. A compact house on 120m² of land may provide an alternative to buying a conventional house and block in the same general area.

But a smaller lot does not automatically mean an affordable home.

Construction costs, land prices, infrastructure charges, finance, servicing and developer margins all contribute to the final price.

There is also another side to the equation. If a property gains substantially greater development potential, the market may price some of that additional potential into the underlying land.

We therefore see this primarily as a housing supply and housing choice reform rather than a guarantee of cheaper housing.

Could the changes increase your property’s value?

Potentially, but this needs to be assessed property by property.

Development potential can affect land value.

If a site can realistically accommodate additional lots or dwellings under new planning controls, it may become more attractive to developers.

But theoretical yield is not the same as feasible yield.

A wide, regular property with good access may perform very differently from a similar-sized site with a narrow frontage, difficult slope, easements, flooding or servicing constraints.

That is why we wouldn’t recommend valuing a property by simply dividing its area by 120m².

First establish what can realistically be developed.

Then consider what that development potential might be worth.

Don’t forget overlays and neighbourhood plans

LMR zoning is only one part of the planning assessment.

Your property may also be affected by a neighbourhood plan or one or more City Plan overlays.

Those controls can influence what development can occur and how it needs to be designed.

The practical development potential of two properties with the same zoning and similar land areas can therefore be quite different.

This is another reason why the proposed 120m² minimum shouldn’t be treated as an automatic subdivision entitlement.

Are the 120m² rules in force now?

The proposed 120m² small-lot rules are not yet part of the operative Brisbane City Plan, but the amendment is now well advanced.

Public consultation finished in March 2026 and Council has completed its review of submissions. Council’s published timeline anticipates the amendment being adopted and becoming effective in City Plan in mid to late 2026.

At the time of writing, Council still formally lists the LMR design amendment as an “amendment in progress”, so property owners cannot yet rely on the proposed 120m² provisions as current development rights.

For owners of potentially affected LMR properties, however, this is no longer an early-stage planning proposal. The amendment is approaching the final stages of the statutory process.

If you are considering selling, buying or developing an LMR property, it makes sense to understand both the current City Plan controls and the proposed controls now. Once the amendment takes effect, the development potential of some properties could change.

What should you check if you own an LMR property?

If you think the proposed changes might affect your property, start with the site rather than the 120m² headline.

You need to establish your current zone and precinct, whether the proposed mapping changes your precinct, whether the property would be inside or outside a Key Location, and what overlays or neighbourhood plan provisions apply.

Then look at the physical property.

Frontage, dimensions, access, slope, easements, existing buildings and servicing can all influence what is achievable.

Council itself recommends checking the property’s zone, neighbourhood plan and overlays when researching development requirements.

Our view as town planners

We think there is a reasonable planning case for smaller freehold lots in selected parts of Brisbane.

There is a gap between the traditional detached house on a larger block and an apartment. Well-designed narrow houses and terrace-style development could provide another option.

The proposed 120m² minimum could also make some LMR sites more efficient to develop.

But 120m² shouldn’t become the number that drives every development decision.

The better question for a property owner is:

“Under the proposed changes, what can realistically be achieved on my particular site?”

For some owners, the answer could be substantially different from what the current City Plan allows.

For others, the proposed changes may make little practical difference.

Until the amendment takes effect, any assessment of the new 120m² opportunity remains an assessment of proposed planning controls, not an existing development right.

.