We first posted on possibility of a Chinese trading hub in Athlone in Nov 2010, noting how the idea for the development managed to achieve some momentum through political networks. Interestingly, those networks were predominately Fianna Fail-centric and reeked of the ‘Galway tent’ mode of doing business, but are now a lot of less potent. Yesterday An Bord Pleanala gave planning permission for the first phase of the development – to include three major exhibition halls, nine minor ones and other facilities totalling 102,348sq m (1.1 million sq ft), as well as underground parking for more than 1,300 cars. There are a number of questions that the proposed development raises.
How big is the development?
Very big. The site is 337 acres. An Taisce estimates that development once complete will be 14 times the combined size of Liffey Valley and Blanchardstown shopping centres. It aims to attract 1.5 million international buyers and visitors annually when fully completed and employ up to 9,000 people. It would be one of the largest exhibition spaces in Europe. The main issue with regards to this size will be servicing – adequate utility and transport infrastructure to ensure smooth running; this is feasible with good planning though there are some site issues as discussed below.
Does it align with spatial planning policy?
Yes. Athlone is a gateway town in the National Spatial Strategy. This means it is designated as a preferred site for population growth and economic investment.
Will it happen?
The key issues here are finance, political and state backing, other local development, and external competition. If the project is going to be backed purely by Chinese capital looking for a spatial fix in Europe then the project is solely dependent on that finance being made available to fund the development. This seems, however, to be unlikely. Private investment is going to want to leverage finance and resources from the local and national state through in-kind provision of infrastructure and state aid to companies via IDA and others as with other FDI-backed ventures. The state, and its various agencies then, is going to need to decide whether it wants to provide matching monies to help seed the larger investment. Clearly local agencies are already backing the project with some resourcing. The developers are also likely to need other private investors to spread the risk and its not clear if such investors have already signed up or will need to be found.
Beyond the project site itself, as an international trading hub transport infrastructure is going to be key. Athlone is some distance from the two main international airports, Dublin and Shannon, and the travel to the site by coach/rail is a hindering factor for both the visitors and goods. The solution proposed locally, as we posted about previously, is the development of an airport near to Athlone. This has already been granted ‘strategic infrastructure’ status by An Bord Pleanala in Sept 2010. The same questions about finance and state backing arise with respect to this project, but the two developments do seem co-dependent.
There are other competing locations for such a Chinese trading hub, with other sites being explored in Britain and continental Europe. It is unlikely that there will be multiple such dedicated sites, so the consortium is going to have to convince investors that Athlone is the best location.
Is it the right location?
Athlone is a gateway town and it would be a fantastic development for the area if it happens. However, location and particularly transport connections are an issue. In a European context, Ireland is on the periphery of the continent and is dependent on air/sea for travel. Whilst other FDI has been able to thrive here with such dependencies, these companies are not solely reliant on massive, daily international flows of visitors and goods. That’s one of the reasons we do not already have a large, thriving, international exhibition sector. In an Irish context, it would make sense to locate the site nearer to already existing air/sea infrastructure. The obvious location would be Limerick/Shannon/Ennis where there is already an established international airport and sea port for container shipping. Clearly this will not suit the Athlone backers, but might be a determinate as to whether investors think the scheme is viable.
In my opinion, the Athlone project is largely a Field of Dreams idea that has managed to gain some momentum. Whether it materialises into the development envisaged is certainly not assured and there is a long way to go to make the dream a reality.
Rob Kitchin
Ireland after NAMA 
May 2, 2012 at 9:52 am
The government needs to be very careful (do they know how?) before getting involved with funding such a project. Morning Ireland discussed a similar Swedish scheme which collapsed as a result of a failure of private funding. In The Hague, a location much more central, adjacent to the largest shipping ports in Europe a similar, smaller, scheme went belly-up after receiving significant government funding. No chinese firms were interested in renting the space and the marble mall-type building complete with escallators etc remains empty. The reason seems pretty straightforward. Manufacturing is cheap in China, people who want cheap manufacturing go there or make contact by phone/email/local contacts(even Dragons Den contestants can manage that). Why would a Chinese maufacturer waste time and money coming here to sell what Europeans are quite happy to travel to China for?
May 2, 2012 at 3:02 pm
You’ve got it in one Deirdre.
A “Field of Dreams” indeed.
If it looks like a science fiction dream,it is a science fiction scheme.
The Martians will be landing in Athlone next..
May 3, 2012 at 12:35 am
I read a critical review of what went wrong with the Europe China Trade Centre (ECTC) project in The Hague. This should not be referred to as a similar, smaller, project. It is far smaller. The ECTC project was projected to employ up to 600 people. The Athlone project is believed to employ up to 9,000 people. The ECTC project is making a re-start after the site was bought earlier this year by Dubai-based Chinese investors. Still, after last year’s bankruptcy the City Council had lost 1.6 million Euro. The problem with this smaller project was not finding occupants. The main problem involved “nepotism, conflict of interest, mixed with mismanagement and abuse of power by incompetent public administrators and semi-state employees on a nixer”. One of the stumbling blocks was that seven Chinese backers were refused entry by the Dutch immigration services. That couldn’t happen here, right?