Tourism development looming over Comino

A draft Strategic Plan for the Environment and Development (SPED) which is set to replace the Structure Plan approved in 1992, includes specific proposals for tourism development on “previously developed land in Comino”.

The document, which will serve as the general guide for planning decisions, foresees the development of an airstrip, a cruise liner terminal and a yacht marina in Gozo.

No such proposals were made in a similar document issued by the previous government in February 2012, which also included a commitment that “the government shall not amend the development boundaries approved in 2006”.

Instead, the new document proposes an appraisal of the 2006 development zone boundaries, to make way for minor adjustments.

These adjustments may include the addition of new parcels of land to the development zone and the exclusion of other parcels from the development zone.

Development on Comino

The new draft document ambiguously refers to the need to make “better use” of “previously developed land” in Comino for “tourism and recreation purposes”.

Sources at MEPA indicate that the intention of the new policy is to allow an extension of the existing hotel, which should be limited to within the boundaries of the existing hotel.

Another previously developed area in Comino is the former pig farm, located near the coastal gun battery on the side facing the Malta shore.

An application for the extension of the Comino Hotel was presented 15 years ago and suspended by MEPA in 2003, when the architect failed to submit the required documents within the legal timeframe.

In 2007, the hotel changed ownership after entrepreneurs Joseph Gasan and George Fenech bought a share in Kemmuna Ltd, which runs the Comino Hotel and bungalows on the island, by acquiring Ropes Services Ltd in November 2007, a company registered in the Isle of Man.


Ropes Services then proceeded to acquire 551,470 ordinary shares in Kemmuna Ltd, with the remaining 698,530 belonging to Mizzi Associated Enterprises, owned by property magnate Albert Mizzi.

One of the new objectives of the company is “to own, manage or administer the charter of yachts, boats and other vessels” and “to engage in property development” and to “demolish, construct and finish buildings whether of a residential or commercial nature”.

Subsequently the developers presented two reports to MEPA but no further progress was made on this application.

The local plan for Comino accords the island the status of Special Area of Conservation and nature reserve, and only allows developers to “upgrade” the existing tourist complex and hotel if it is “compatible with the sensitivity of the surrounding context”.

Other projects in Gozo, which get a specific mention in the new SPED, are the cruise liner terminal, a yacht marina, a new reverse osmosis plant and an airfield.

Ambiguously, the new SPED also refers to the need of “better links between Malta and Gozo.”

Tall buildings

Despite the government’s commitment in favour of high-rise development in specific areas, the document retains the observation made in the 2012 version of document, which expresses concern on the impact of tall buildings.

It also hints at the need to revise the policy, which permits penthouses on three storey buildings.

The draft document concludes that this policy has reduced potential for renewable energy infrastructure on adjoining properties as well as rainwater harvesting, thus contributing to flooding.

Changes in policy

The SPED also makes a direct reference to the need of providing a framework for the “spatial planning” of land reclamation” and to agri-tourism in the countryside.

The whole document will be submitted to a Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) before approval.

In part, the issue of the revised SPED document for public consultation before the approval of a number of planning policies and the choice of bidders for the land reclamation project addresses the criticism made by environmentalists that the government should first formulate its vision before changing specific policies.

But the inclusion of a number of controversial projects in the most important planning policy of all, could well ensure a fast-track approval of these projects in the future.