Abstract: This paper presents some preliminary results from PhD research being undertaken which, more broadly, considers infrastructure costs associated with differing forms of urban development available to policy makers within Australia. It is thus a component of the ‘compact’ versus ‘dispersed’ city debate. The bulk of the international (mainly US) literature suggests that infrastructure (including road) costs for compact cities are generally less than for cities which are permitted to ‘sprawl’. A policy of urban consolidation has been effectively pursued in Sydney, the major component of the GMR, but less effectively in the Central Coast, the Lower Hunter and the Illawarra. A sample of sixteen recent and projected residential developments within the Greater Metropolitan Region (GMR) of NSW has been undertaken. Attributable costs of road construction, maintenance and use have been estimated from a variety of approaches and sources. The paper argues that, whilst greenfields road costs are expensive, it is not necessarily the case, unlike US cities, that there is substantial road capacity in inner city networks. Whilst there is support for the contention that road costs are higher in greenfields locations, road infrastructure provision for new housing in brownfields locations, if it continues to be pursued, may approach costs near or at the fringe. In particular, ‘leap-frogged’ fringe development will likely incur earlier and possibly higher capital costs than would otherwise be necessary and should be avoided. There are, of course, substantial policy and funding implications from this research.