The new site was previously rejected by the proponents and Tuggeranong residents.

While political parties, residents and the proponents hailed the relocation of the $1billion project as a victory yesterday, taxpayers may have to shell out more than $10million in compensation to the proponents.

Legislation fast-tracking the relocation will be introduced in the Assembly on Tuesday, and it is expected to be passed on Thursday will the full backing of the Government, Greens and Liberals.

The proponents were forced to explore alternative sites when it became clear the Greens and Liberals would thwart the project at the favoured site.

Both parties welcomed the new site and proclaimed it a victory for Tuggeranong residents.

A taskforce convened by the ACT Government to identify alternative sites for the project found the proponents' favoured site, which is 600m away from Macarthur and Fadden residents, was the most suitable, and a block 1km north-east of it that had previously been rejected was the next best.

Technical Real Estate director Andrew Campbell told The Canberra Times yesterday the new site was inferior, but he was willing to compromise to ensure the project went ahead.

He had written to the Government requesting it foot the bill for electricity, water, gas and telecommunications infrastructure the new site needed, which he estimated at more than $10million.

Last year the proponents rejected the site after the Land Development Agency identified concerns by Heritage ACT that the site could be rich in Aboriginal artefacts, and a heritage study would need to be done.

ActewAGL, part of the consortium behind the project, eventually decided against proceeding on the site due to concerns about the time and costs involved with the study. In August, after all artefacts had been removed and the land had been rezoned for industrial development, the Government auctioned the block but it was passed in. A spokeswoman for ActewAGL said yesterday the company had rejected the site because of the artefacts, and because it was smaller and too far away from electricity and gas.

Shortly before the auction, MrCampbell said the site was unsuitable because it was under a flight path and too close to the Monaro Highway.