Frankston
I have been reading many posts on this forum for a while and grand_dad, you attach that quote "According to the Valuer General..." on the majority of your posts about Frankston which if fair enough.
However, it comes down to affordability and your risk profile. Investing in Frankston is more affordable then investing in a blue chip suburb like South Yarra but if you can afford to invest in the later, then most people would be. Especially if you can buy a house in a market that is close to its trough (Exhibit A).
In terms of subdivisions and development you can have a look at areas like Clayton, Chadstone, Hughesdale, Ashwood etc. and there are plenty of large blocks of land with both subdivision potential and development potential. Obviously, these areas are more expensive than Frankston. Developers who have the money know that they can make more money with the same effort/resources in many other areas prior to venturing out to Frankston.
My mate bought in Frankston over a year ago and has yet to see any growth. Another bought a unit in Chadstone at the same time (circa June 2012) and growth has been exceptional. Further he is actually positively geared and has been from the start. (Who said there positive gearing didn't exist except in regional areas?)
There will always be a stigma associated with Frankston, and it is irrelevant whether it is incorrect or not as even the council says it exists and turns many people off. At the end of the day it is all in the numbers. If Frankston starts rising, then all of us who are anti-Frankston will have egg on our face, but that will be okay because we are investing in blue-chip areas and will be fine in the long run. People have been speculating about Frankston for a long time now, perhaps all of this will allow the values to start growing or that stigma will continue and the majority of those with the adequate funds will stick to the blue-chip suburbs