Bad press story of one IFSC apt block, the future ghetto?:)

More sensationalism in herald again, they seem to be painting a picture of apt blocks to be a future Ballymun!

I wonder if any of the Journalists proclaiming the end to the gap between renting and buying picked up on that paragraph, or will we instead be subjected to a week of copycat articles about junkies.

Another tick in the benefits of renting column though. If you find junkies in the lobby of your rented apartment building you can pack up move to a better place. If you own your apartment then you’re stuck, and junkies without trousers tend not to boost equity very much when it comes time to sell.


Snap! I was just about to make a comment on the crappy yield too.

1,300 is pretty good for a 2 bed in the IFSC.

What was the article about again?

I lived in the IFSC 4 years ago, and this kind of thing was going on then. Kids from nearby Sheriff Street and the like would climb over the railings, tailgate residents, use lost fobs, etc. to gain access to the apartment complexes. There is nothing too new in this.

If you think thats bad, there is a moderately expensive apartment block in Dublin where criminal youth walked into the underground car park TWICE in one month and set residents cars on fire :open_mouth:

Heres a snap I took on my phone of one occasion. Firemen with yellow oxygen tanks can be seen in bottom left entering burning car park.

Ah yes but whats the yield of these apartments :smiley:

Hmmmm… I a dismayed by all of this.

All of the above, are exactly the reasons why these developments should never have been designed the way they nor gated. You subdivide land, enclosing more and more spaces, making people afraid of people and this is what you get. Fear. The design of fear it’s a winner for a quick sale. Its all shortermisim. A specialty Irish Sport.

I have a theory based on the last 10 odd years of observations of apartment building. It goes like this.

As a selling point, developers like to have plenty of railings, gates etc. etc around their shiny new developments so the strapped for choice panicked buyers already on the path of fear (must buy, price rise, must buy…) see the place, and know that its;

  1. Location compromise
  2. Space Compromise
  3. Quality Compromise

Yet somehow the security features soothe somewhat the anxiety of a non local buyer, someone who might not even spend the majority of their day in the building and perhaps feelings of obligation to interface with existing community are too much with such time demands on their lifestyle as they promise to themselves they’ll be out of there in a few years with bit of equity to get them to where they think they need to go.

In contrast where you have BOOM buildings butted up against older terraced houses for example, note the lack of security features on the older stock. So why do the new developments need security features that are anything but humane?

The way in which the green spaces are continually fenced, railed, walled and barricaded around our urban space, how there are more pathways for cars than people continually cuts off social interaction and interaction with natural surroundings, nature (if you don’t have the common experience or knowledge, even science will tell you we need to be connected to enjoy a full quality of life, connected to nature universe to be our full selves).

**One example: Patients in hospitals fare much better if looking out a window at a park compared to those looking out a window at a carpark. **

Think about this, all those green spaces you pass buy in your car, on the bus. Those wide wide open, fenced in parks.

How many people do you see in them?? More people than those stuck in the traffic in the cars. I doubt it.

Nice observations OW … 535896271/

Open Windows wrote

Spot on! The words Gated Communities give me the creeps. I always think these words are a sort of metaphor for the social divisions that are allowed to form in Ireland today. We are going down a very dangerous road. It can’t be called advancement of civilization, but a massive backward step.

Are you suggesting that if they leave the doors to the apartment blocks in the IFSC open that the junkies won’t come in? :slight_smile:

This is just my point. Junkies are not the problem. We feel we need Gated Communities. The problem is that our society is fundamentally flawed. We are reluctant to tackle it until it rises up and bites our noose off. If you want a more detailed explanation, read the various submissions to the thread at

That’s not much use to anyone who has shelled out a massive amount of money for a dwelling who then find themselves warding off some of the sub-humans who populate Dublin’s environs. I know, that’s not very Christian of me.

Ironically enough, the last time I heard of the evils of gated communities was when I was studying Marxist Theory a few years back in NUIG (I was late signing up to the courses and got stuck with it).

I also recall a recent enough case in S.A of a prominent professer who was known for his anti-gated community outlook. I believe he was murdered during a burglary. Which is the problem isn’t it? You can try to be principled and adopt the progressive community-focused view, but ultimately your progressive views don’t save you from the mugger, the rapist, the vandal.

I live in essentially a ‘gated community’ - pretty secure apartment block if you count security by the number of locks. My neighbours were broken in to - while they were there - a couple of weeks ago. My car was vandalised a couple of weeks before that.

So no, I don’t think progressive views are the problem.

Ireland could learn from gated communities in South Africa where it perpetuated an unsustainable social hierarchy, or from the U.S. where Joe sixpack can go from watching the latest Fox TV crime report, hop in his Hummer in his attached garage and drive to work without ever seeing or God forbid talking with his neighbors. When neighbors are unseen, so are criminals.

But we seem to come up with other creative ways of abusing green space. CIE/FCC has their eyes on tearing up the green adjacent to Broadmeadows estuary to use for Dart parking (rather than do something sensible like roll out an integrated Bus/Dart ticketing and scheduling so most passengers needn’t drive the first 2-5 miles and park at the DART station)

Another nearby green belt would have a footpath/cycle path through it, but residents in certain walled-in estates didn’t want undesirables from the other side of the greenbelt to have easy access, never mind the fact that 99% of those who would use the path would be parents taking their children to a school in that “undesirable” neighborhood, taking another couple hundred cars off the road at rush hour.

I’m sure there are many other examples of green spaces being paved or public right of ways being fenced in to “keep out undesirables.” On a related topic, do you ever wonder why DART station toilets (or lack of) and other accessibility features (e.g. seats) are designed around the possibility of heroin addicts rather than the practical needs of real passengers with children? Yes as soon as the 20 something Dubliners reach 30 something and start having children, they’ll be on the road too.

Someone familiar with Irish planning laws once told me that it is illegal to have an unfenced (open) green space unless it’s illuminated at night. That’s right, shine a light so the criminal won’t have to carry a torch and attract attention to himself. Communities in the U.S. and U.K. have demonstrated decreases in vandalism when “security” lights were turned off. With laws like these, it’s no surprise that Ireland is further from its Kyoto target than countries that didn’t bother signing the thing.

Why do planning authorities always plan for the past? The theme song for the Celtic tiger years should be “Tear down paradise and put up a parking lot.”

Whats so special about that piece of green? Commuters parking their cars there is better than driving into town, isnt it?

It’s about a 20min walk from the dart station so by time commuters park, walk, pay for the dart and subject themselves to the uncertain service caused by leaves on tracks, rain and strikes, most rational commuters will choose to drive past the car park and drive in anyway. There isn’t anything particularly special about this designated greenspace, but if we set the precident, why not develop all greenspaces and use the money to buy a helicopter service for the few dozen commuters you’d take off the road with yet another car park?

There already is helicopter commuting in Dublin (based in Citywest). Im not totally against it but we should have some kind of carbon tax on it, so the country can at least benefit from the extravagance of the fools that use it.

This country needs pragmatism and not perfectionism. If there is a mucky old windswept patch of grass beside a Dart station, then it would be bizarre not to use it for park and ride. There are plenty more suitable places for parks on the edges of Dublin.

Who said they were? I said that your progressive views won’t save you from crime.

There are no gated communities here in the American or South African sense .i.e. armed guards at entry points and armed patrols within. Obviously this is due to the fact we don’t need them. Our murder, rape and burglarly (needlessly violent burglary in South Africa’s case) rates aren’t so high as to make people feel they need that level of protection. It’s not a nice way to live - if I want to live like that I’ll get a job in Saudi Arabia.

My point is this: Debating the evils or merits of gated communities needs to take account of reality. It may be terrible that our sense of community has been destroyed by poor planning, and that no one wants to get to know their neighbour, but whoever has bought an apartment and is suffering from persistent anti-social behaviour or worse doesn’t need a lecture on poor planning.

I live in a new development that has sprung up in the middle of nowhere and is bordering Finglas and Cabra. I know the area in general has been getting “fleeced” according to a local cop who came out when my girlfriend’s car was broken into to.

But what is your solution? That the apartments should never have been built at all? That they should have been built as several hundred bungalows or terraced houses instead? And if this had been done, would the local youth be now planting flowers and playing hopscotch instead of stoning the swans in the canal and stealing cars?

Gosh, this is news? I’m guessing this is very common. It was happening in our building at one point (Christchurch Place, which just happens to be near at least 2 methadone clinics and a drugs centre; I’m no NIMBY, but this does strike me as excessive).