A bridge linking Malta and Gozo will cost some €1 billion and take four years to complete, according to the Chinese company’s feasibility study seen by The Sunday Times of Malta.

The study is proposing to open the overpass to traffic by 2020, but serious questions remain on the funding of this bridge, which has a design life of 100 years.

The €4 million study, dated March 2014, was carried out for free by China Communications Construction Company following a memorandum of understanding signed with the government in June 2013. The government is examining the outcome of this study, which it has not yet endorsed, and is awaiting further studies from CCCC on the environmental sustainability of the bridge.

The promise to connect the two islands – separated by a 25-minute ferry ride – through a bridge or a tunnel has been highly controversial with vociferous arguments presented by those for and against.

The government is conducting its own separate, independent studies on the feasibility of a bridge or tunnel.

The CCCC study presents the government with four alternatives to choose from, with just one proposing to cut across Comino. The company is recommending Option D, which has a total length of 8.8km with a traffic capacity of a single two-lane carriageway and two motorcycle lanes.

In this option the alignment begins at the southeast of Gozo, crosses the channel along the east of Comino, where the water depth is shallow, lands at the north tip of Malta and then connects to Marfa Road via local roads.

The total estimated investment cost is about €800m, but this excludes taxes, duties and financial expenditure.

The Gozo ferry takes 25 minutes. Photo: Paul Spiteri Lucas

The advantages of this option, according to this study, mean first and foremost that there will be no encroachment on Comino.

Other benefits are: the shallow water depth at the bridge location (deepest 29m) leads to less difficulties when it comes to construction; it is far from the ferry route and the seaplane landing areas; the construction cost is relatively low; and it has superior aesthetics.

If the government cannot afford to fund the bridge’s repurchase or compensation it will have to pay by giving CCCC land of equivalent value – for primary or secondary development

The disadvantages listed conclude that: the navigation channel is skewed to the bridge; a larger navigation span is required; its alignment passes the marine protection zone; and it slightly encroaches on the submerged pipelines area.

Apart from “some physical loss of marine habitat” from the construction works, other ecological impacts may lead to water quality deterioration from pier dredging, construction site run-off, wastewater and “accidental spillage of works’ site chemicals”.

The study lists a number of measures to mitigate and minimise the ecological impact, but last July, during his visit to China, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat had asked CCCC to invest more thought in the bridge’s environmental sustainability.

The study lists several investment models. The first is for the government to foot the bill and for CCCC to undertake the project design and construction.

It is also willing to help the government obtain international competitive financing.

Another option is for CCCC to finance and construct the bridge with the government liable for the total cost “together with a reasonable return”.

The third option is for CCCC to finance the entire project and collect tolls from road users to get back its costs. In this case, the government would have supervisory and regulatory authority.

When the concession period expires the project will be transferred back to the government at no cost.

To secure a reasonable return, CCCC says it may require a minimum traffic volume guarantee and if this is not met the government will have to make up for the shortfall.

A contentious proposal put forward is that if the government cannot afford to fund the bridge’s repurchase or compensation it will have to pay CCCC by giving it “land of equivalent value” – for primary or secondary development.

The debate to link the two islands with a quicker and more reliable mode of transport than the ferry has been raging for decades. The idea is to promote Gozo’s socioeconomic development, reduce travelling time and improve investment in the sister island, but many believe a bridge or tunnel will only mar its unique characteristics.

In 1972, the then newly elected Labour Party had carried out a feasibility study, which concluded that building a bridge was possible but it would have negative environmental affects.

A seaplane that had started operating between Valletta and Mġarr, Gozo, was suspended, and similarly, a helicopter service ceased operations in 2006.