Scholars have recently signaled that the 100 Resilient Cities network may be facilitating a new understanding of resilience, which is being operationalised into urban strategy. Resilient Melbourne, for example, strongly suggests that urban resilience responses could be moving from a focus on engineering resilience to socio-ecological resilience. This indicates that it is possible that the social-ecological resilience perspective could be emerging as a new frame for environmental and urban policy. In Melbourne, the city’s recently renewed metropolitan planning framework, Plan Melbourne Refresh, now highlights resilience as an area of principal strategic priority for, as far as we understand, the first time.  The Resilient Melbourne strategy is cross referenced (albeit once directly) in the implementation plan for the metro strategy, and a number of its actions feature either directly or in concept in the plan.  This paper will consider whether these resonances represent cross fertilisations or merely cross references.  These tangencies and contacts may be auguries of wider institutional policy convergence (or conflict) that deserves attention in applied planning scholarship.