Commission housing—commonly known as public or social housing—refers to government-subsidised homes provided to low-income or vulnerable individuals and families.
These properties are usually owned by the state government (previously under the Housing Commission of Victoria) and are either directly managed or administered through registered community housing providers.
Primarily constructed between the 1950s and 1980s, commission homes were built in substantial clusters across various Melbourne suburbs.
They range in form from modest walk-up apartment blocks to large-scale high-rise towers, and were intended to address housing shortages and provide stable accommodation for those in need.

Do Commission Homes Affect Property Values?
In many cases, yes—high concentrations of commission housing can soften local real estate values. Here’s why:
- Perception & Stigma: Areas with dense public housing can carry a reputation for crime or social issues, even if not entirely accurate. This discourages homebuyers seeking stable, owner-occupier communities.
- Visual Impact: Older commission properties are often dated and uniform in design, reducing overall street appeal.
- Investor Risk: These suburbs may offer higher rental yields, but often come with tenant reliability concerns, potential property damage, and longer vacancy periods. Some lenders also view them as higher risk, tightening finance conditions.
- Slower Capital Growth: With fewer owner-occupiers and limited private renovations, these suburbs tend to see less capital growth and slower gentrification.
That said, inner-city suburbs with public housing—such as Collingwood or Fitzroy—may still perform well due to land scarcity and strong demand. And where government-led renewal is underway, long-term uplift is possible.
Suburbs with the Highest Public Housing in Melbourne
While public housing represents just 2.5% of housing stock nationwide, some Melbourne suburbs have significantly higher concentrations:
| Suburb | Approx. % Public Housing | Key Notes |
| Heidelberg West | 25.7% | Ex-Olympic Village, high welfare reliance, urban renewal underway |
| Flemington | 24% | High-rise towers, major redevelopment planned |
| Braybrook | 16.3% | Ongoing regeneration, high social disadvantage |
| Bellfield | 14.7% | Low-income demographic, mixed housing stock |
| Collingwood | 14.4% | Inner-city, gentrifying with rising values |
| Fitzroy | 14.2% | Vibrant but mixed, under redevelopment |
| Broadmeadows | 13% | Dispersed housing, ongoing challenges |
| Hampton East | 11.6% | Lower crime, stock upgrades planned |
| Carlton | ~11% | Iconic towers near uni/hospital precincts |
| Kensington | 9.8% | City-fringe with a diverse housing mix |
If you’re considering investing near public housing zones, assess the percentage of public stock, demographic trends, and redevelopment plans—these can heavily influence future capital gains or vacancy risk.








