Waste recycling facilities which have been proposed for Fyshwick would be better placed in Hume, where there would be a smaller decline in surrounding property values, a new report has found.
An economic impact assessment prepared by DelosDelta found the reduction of Fyshwick land values if the facility was built in the suburb would mean the ACT would lose out on $7.2 million in tax revenue over a decade.
If the facility was built in Hume, the territory would lose out on $3.9 million in tax revenue, the report, commissioned by the Fyshwick Business Association, said.
Properties in the facility's high-impact zone - up to 500 metres from the facility's boundary - would immediately drop by at least 15 per cent in Fyshwick and potentially 10 per cent in Hume.
"The attraction of Fyshwick as a mixed-use commercial hub will lead to a persistent 15 per cent reduction in face rents, whereas in Hume the reduction might be 10 per cent," the report said.
The report estimated the one-off property value reduction in Fyshwick would be $24 million and $13 million in Hume.
Fyshwick's shift from industrial uses towards mixed-use commercial tenancies had seen property values increase, the report noted.
The report said the proximity of residential areas to Fyshwick, along with rich biodiversity at the Jerrabomberra Wetlands and shorelines of Lake Burley Griffin, meant the impact of a facility in the suburb would be greater than Hume.
"Without question, the impact most concerning for the Fyshwick site compared to the Hume site is the potential for offsite environmental and social impacts from potential impacts on the water table, odour generated and the release of industrial gases and dust affecting air quality," the report said.
"There are risk mitigation options, however the potential magnitude of these qualitative impacts suggests again that Hume is the better location on the balance of probabilities."
The report found the traffic impact of a new waste facility in Fyshwick would cost $16.7 million over 10 years, while the impact would cost $2.9 million in Hume over the same period.
"We note 97 per cent of [ACT residents] visit Fyshwick at least annually, suggesting any additional congestion in that environment has enormous potential for system wide traffic impacts," the report said.
Fyshwick Business Association president Rob Evans, who is the chief executive of Allbids, said the association commissioned the report to better understand the effect of a large-scale waste facility in Fyshwick.
"The evidence presented in this report shows that the ACT will be demonstrably better off if such facilities are located in Hume rather than Fyshwick, regardless of what large scale waste proposal it is," Mr Evans said.
"It is again loud and clear to us that the planning regime needs to change. We all know the government's stated intention is that such waste facilities be co-located in Hume, but the current planning laws don't support this."
Capital Recycling Solutions has proposed a waste sorting centre on Ipswich Street at a former Shell site. The facility would process 300,000 tonnes of waste a year, extracting recyclables from material otherwise destined for landfill.
City Services Minister Chris Steel said during the election campaign last year Labor had grave concerns about the Capital Recycling Solutions proposal in its current form.
The ACT Greens called during the campaign for a moratorium on waste facility approvals in Fyshwick until a review of planning rules in industrial zones was completed.
The Inner South Canberra Community Council had earlier called for a ban on future waste centres in Fyshwick after the ACT government accepted Capital Recycling Solution's environmental impact statement.
A development application for the site has been lodged, but a spokeswoman for the planning authority said the authority was waiting on more information from the proponent before it could be publicly notified.
In a separate proposal Hi-Quality Group wants to build a large-scale plant which would receive up to 1 million tonnes of waste and recycling material a year.
A development application has not yet been lodged.