Broadband News

BT forced to move 20 street-side cabinets in Muswell Hill

BT has been forced to move 20 of the new street-side cabinets used to provide the fibre-to-the-cabinet based broadband service in Muswell Hill. Local residents in a conservation area complained about the location and size of the boxes and Haringey Council has stated that 20 of these boxes broke planning laws and will need to be moved. All the boxes installed in the area are also to be painted black so they blend better with existing street furniture.

"As Muswell Hill is a pilot area, and Next Generation Access is a new technology we are still learning lessons from the deployment of these cabinets, and are constantly evolving their design and specification, in co-operation with local authorities.

"However, it is important to note that thanks to the deployment of this technology, residents of Muswell Hill will be amongst the first in the country to benefit from access to super-fast fibre broadband services."

BT Statement

A new location has been found for three quarters of the cabinets which are to be moved. It is usually mobile phone masts that throw up complaints from residents not wanting them to be sited near their home, but presumably those who complained are happy to receive a poorer broadband service due to the cabinets being placed less optimally.

Comments

They can move them to my road.

  • Sandgrounder
  • over 8 years ago

If the snobs don't want them, we will allow Bt6 to bring them here,
Typical NIMBYs

  • zyborg47
  • over 8 years ago

"...super-fast fibre broadband services..." It's not fibre though is it!? No more fibre than Virgin Media's Hybrid fibre-coaxial network and with Virgin Media already available in Muswell Hill there is already a super-fast broadband service available so it's no surprise that people object to another.

  • timmay
  • over 8 years ago

Tbh I'm impressed that they care enough about their area to complain. I'm even more impressed that their council took it seriously and worked on their behalf.

Better than my council who sort of listen then ignore you and go ahead anyway.

  • AndrueC
  • over 8 years ago

"presumably those who complained are happy to receive a poorer broadband service"

Presumably the author of this post actually thinks that everyone in the country is so desperate for 40 meg broadband that they are happy for providers to ignore planning regulations to achieve it?

As far as I'm aware, that area already gets 11 meg (actual) speeds with ADSL2, and "up to" 20 meg broadband from Virgin, so I would presume that many would prefer to have what they already have rather than screwing up the area with ugly boxes.

  • michaell
  • over 8 years ago

Ugliness is everywhere; buildings, poles and bollards, street lights, railings, bus shelters, modern phones boxes ...everywhere. I don't know what these boxes looked like but i might understand the objection. We should be more proud of design and not focus solely on the function.

  • bosie
  • over 8 years ago

it does make you lol....this is tyipical of this country....moan moan moan bla bla bla wee dont have fast enough broadband....then when new systems are put into place there are complaints as regards to the imposing street cabs.......some people are never happy,

  • djfunkdup
  • over 8 years ago

Good decision. Get it all replaced with proper FTTP, no bulky street cabinets needed anywhere!

  • JNeuhoff
  • over 8 years ago

re:jneuhoff

u need to waken up m8 and join the reality of the real world....FTTP is not going to happen on a wider scale of things...just be happy that FTTC is starting to get implomented on a wider scale.....

  • djfunkdup
  • over 8 years ago

Having a Virgin Cabinet outside my house and discovering how versatile it is, with people congregating around it, sitting on it in the early hours and even decorating it with thier own designs. A real pleasure, something that should be appreciated by all.

  • woltonpd
  • over 8 years ago

A perfect example of where paying the potential broadband tax is stupid as obviously not everyone wants fibre.

I also thought part of the idea was not to have overlapping areas of fibre based services, if this area already has Virgin services why were BT cabinets installed (another attempt to poach customers??)

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

"I also thought part of the idea was not to have overlapping areas of fibre based services"

Cite?

  • Dawn_Falcon
  • over 8 years ago

They don't look that bad to me, a little tall perhaps...

http://www.currybet.net/cbet_blog/2009/09/muswell_hill_fibre_trial.php

  • mishminx
  • over 8 years ago

Why wouldn't they want to poach customers? Its called competition. AFAIK there is no idea of non overlapping fibre areas. Your trying to tell me that BT won't go where Virgin already are? How does that make any sense.

  • GMAN99
  • over 8 years ago

CB - Why should people be limited to one ISP?

  • Somerset
  • over 8 years ago

Just like a small village near where I live. Orange/Vodaphone want to put a 3G mast into the Village but had to stop due to the usual processes, so they pulled out. That was 3 years ago now there is a campaign to get 3G into the area by the very same people because they can not get Mobile Broadband.
You have to laugh

  • Pigmaster
  • over 8 years ago

FTTP would mean new wiring to each property, possibly road works to repair collapsed ducting, especially as roots from hedges, shrubs may have invaded ducting stopping the blowing of fibre.

One option could be to installer smaller cabinets with support for a more limited number of lines

  • andrew
  • thinkbroadband staff
  • over 8 years ago

So.. they're quite happy to have virgin cabs, which are (a) more numerous (you need 2/3 per street), and (b) in many cases larger and more intrusive than an FTTC cab. Presumably because it gives them their fix of I'm an X Factor B List Celebrity every week. But not FTTC, because they can't see any immediate advantage.

It's not like it's a leafy village.. it's a suburb of London. Traffic does way more damage than a couple of boxes.

  • TonyHoyle
  • over 8 years ago

For a reasonable size comparison try http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2610/4036999821_84cd2c248d.jpg - it's not Muswell Hill but you have two cabs along the same wall so can see the difference.

  • TonyHoyle
  • over 8 years ago

On that picture people need to bear in mind the perspective issue, that image almost makes the cabinet look bigger on purpose.

http://img258.imageshack.us/i/img4921y.jpg/
http://img523.imageshack.us/i/img4926a.jpg/
http://e.gg/7974182

  • andrew
  • thinkbroadband staff
  • over 8 years ago

andrew - Smaller cabs are not a realistic option. Not all of the equipment scales down well, so you're looking at much the same cost for a small number of homes *and* digging up the roads to lay new lines, in many cases.

  • Dawn_Falcon
  • over 8 years ago

Where I live in Covent Garden, the streets have been completely dug up one by one for the past year or so allowing Thames Water to replace old pipes. There was also another project going on to renovate Long Acre so the roads were dug up again. Still no fibre was laid, not even Virgin took the opportunity. It's a shame we can't organise things a bit better.

  • bosie
  • over 8 years ago

Living in a conservation area where all our cabinets are underground with the grey Post office covers worries me. However most people in our street aren't moaning pensioners and should be able to persuade the council otherwise when BT get round to the job.

  • Capn
  • over 8 years ago

"
Living in a conservation area where all our cabinets are underground "

please tell me more as in over 20yrs i have never seen a underground cab !

your cab is i would say some streets away and you have just not seen it.

your "grey post office covers" are just foot way boxes ie jf4 ect

  • btbert
  • over 8 years ago

QUOTE""I also thought part of the idea was not to have overlapping areas of fibre based services"

Cite?"

Disscussed numerous times in the forums, an example from a staff member....

http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/general/t/3652289-re-digital-britain-another-hidden-tax.html

Probably best to read the whole thread and search similar ones for similar reports.

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

quote"Why wouldn't they want to poach customers? Its called competition. AFAIK there is no idea of non overlapping fibre areas. Your trying to tell me that BT won't go where Virgin already are? How does that make any sense."

It doesnt make sense, i even insisted there would be overlap and competition, numerous times in the forums though people said that is not the case. A single example ive linked to above, if you search out threads about FTTC and the 50p tax you will find other posts saying there wont be more several fibre services in a area.

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

I said here more than one service would happen...
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/general/t/3652139-re-digital-britain-another-hidden-tax.html
The reply here...
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/general/t/3652289-re-digital-britain-another-hidden-tax.html
was it would not. So no change, haves will again have choice, have nots again will not.

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

So how about VM offering a wholesale service to give a choice of ISP?

  • Somerset
  • over 8 years ago

Under your plan, certainly Carpet since you're opposed to expanding the networks...

And no, BT have always made it plain that they were using a market-based approach for FTTH/C

  • Dawn_Falcon
  • over 8 years ago

quote"So how about VM offering a wholesale service to give a choice of ISP?"

That is one possibility though i dont see how that comes into the arguement about cabinets in an area.

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

quote"Under your plan, certainly Carpet since you're opposed to expanding the networks..."

Have never said that, expansion to areas of a service where they dont want it though is pointless

quote"And no, BT have always made it plain that they were using a market-based approach for FTTH/C"

Exactly as i suspected then.

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

'market-based approach' means where the ISPs think their customers will pay for it.

  • Somerset
  • over 8 years ago

"So how about VM offering a wholesale service to give a choice of ISP? "

You mean like H2O Networks Fibrecity vision/dream/illusion in Bournemouth? You probably don't, do you :)

Conceptually it would actually make sense, the last mile connectivity is a natural monopoly, and indeed who needs N duplicated competing sets of kit and backhaul in half our exchanges, all chasing each other to provide the cheapest service, while other exchanges have no choice at all.

How did we get here?

  • c_j_
  • over 8 years ago

Posh [email protected] Send the cabinets to my street please. Being in the Midlands, I suppose we'll have to wait bleedin' ages!

  • robthemod
  • over 8 years ago

HaringAy council are a bunch of *****, they should spend more time looking after the kids in their area who need help, not a bunch of posh gits. Google "haringey cockups" to see what i mean. Bunch of fecking tossers.
Aaaah, thats better.

  • stoneys-nutz
  • over 8 years ago

quote"And no, BT have always made it plain that they were using a market-based approach for FTTH/C"

"Exactly as i suspected then."

Eek... a business using a market-based approach that will result in break-even or maybe even a profit, how nasty of them...

Lets turn BT into a charity... that way the business plans people wish from BT can be achieved and there are no share holders to keep happy...
Your bill can now be renamed a donation and gift aid will return the VAT from the Treasury to BT for investment. Our digital britain problems are solved!

  • themanstan
  • over 8 years ago

A market-based approach was precisely how BT started the ADSL rollout as well, I'd note.

  • Dawn_Falcon
  • over 8 years ago

Maybe there are more important things in life, like maybe getting one (a life that is)...

  • brush-head
  • over 8 years ago

quote"quote"And no, BT have always made it plain that they were using a market-based approach for FTTH/C"

"Exactly as i suspected then."

Eek... a business using a market-based approach that will result in break-even or maybe even a profit, how nasty of them..."

Wow talk about leaping to the defence and missing the point

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

CB are we talking about BT abusing their market position? Well, I would if you'd proposed installing fibre nationally in the 1980s, providing first class infrastructure and then getting blown out by the government (Lab/Con doesn't matter, they're all cretins when it comes to long term infrastructure investment).

  • themanstan
  • over 8 years ago

^^^ No idea what you are talking about, i think you should re-read the thread and what i was discussing with others. It was previously suggested areas would not overlap, this area i think already has Virgin 50Mb services so why BT cabinets were there in the first place if the idea was areas wont overlap is anyones guess

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

Ah... the non-competition model that has been mooted, with localised monopolies. Somewhat unfair, as that would mean that VM is able to leverage its entirely low cost maximum population density model. Leaving the areas where they didn't cable up (when they where NTL and Telewest which ran out of money) and the low population density areas which cost more. Um... will BT be subsidised for operating that model... er, nope... so market forces come in, so it's compete in the high population density low cost areas for best return on investment.

  • themanstan
  • over 8 years ago

I'd take 40/10 over 50/1.5 any day.

Especially as I know I can get a service that doesn't have DPI/an ISP that hunts pirates.

By the sounds of CB (market-based stuff), little villages are destined to never get this, so my parents will be stuck on a BT based 8Mb package until 2011, then 24Mb for the rest of eternity.

  • otester
  • over 8 years ago

Are there any pics available of the the cabinets in use here or any other location?

  • Dorcots
  • over 8 years ago

quote"so market forces come in, so it's compete in the high population density low cost areas for best return on investment."

Exactly,the country will still be a mish mash of haves and have nots, some areas will see choice others wont. Smaller areas neither BT or Virgin or anyone will be rushing to enable as obviously making a profit comes first (and rightly so).

  • CARPETBURN
  • over 8 years ago

I'd be happy for there to be localised monopolies if they were regulated properly. That would incentivise rollout, say give 3-5 years exclusive service to whichever company is prepared to invest in fibre to whichever village/small town. Then open to competition.
I'm in a small village just outside Oxford, so would love to have fibre. It's all down to OFCOM/gov in my view, they need to provide a guarantee of return in high cost areas.

  • themanstan
  • over 8 years ago

At the moment returns from sticking money in a bond look better and that should not be the case.

  • themanstan
  • over 8 years ago

Instead of just picking areas for special treatment, why do BT not consult and then install higher-speed services where they are most wanted, particularly in areas which have little or no broadband availability. The miserable people of Muswell Hill should have the special services removed forthwith!

  • martinaj
  • over 7 years ago

It's about test areas where they have diagnostic equipment, local engineers, etc. - this means a few areas "get lucky". Remote areas with low broadband availability don't make good testbeds.

I'd imagine that they WILL pick another area in future rather than muswell hill, but I can see why they wouldn't want to disrupt their trial more than necessary.

  • Dawn_Falcon
  • over 7 years ago

They did consult - the ISPs.

How do the ISPs know???

  • Somerset
  • over 7 years ago

Does anyone know if there was a resolution to this problem. Can Muswell Hill residents get the service in the so called "Conservation Area" again?

  • pbroido
  • over 7 years ago

Post a comment

Login Register