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.
Test your broadband speed
Follow us on X for the latest broadband news 
They can move them to my road.
If the snobs don’t want them, we will allow Bt6 to bring them here,
Typical NIMBYs
“…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.
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.
“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.
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.
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,
Good decision. Get it all replaced with proper FTTP, no bulky street cabinets needed anywhere!
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…..
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.
“I also thought part of the idea was not to have overlapping areas of fibre based services”
Cite?
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
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.
CB – Why should people be limited to one ISP?
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
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
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.
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.
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 – 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.
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.
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.
”
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
So how about VM offering a wholesale service to give a choice of ISP?
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
‘market-based approach’ means where the ISPs think their customers will pay for it.
“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?
Posh W@nkers. Send the cabinets to my street please. Being in the Midlands, I suppose we’ll have to wait bleedin’ ages!
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.
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!
A market-based approach was precisely how BT started the ADSL rollout as well, I’d note.
Maybe there are more important things in life, like maybe getting one (a life that is)…
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).
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.
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.
Are there any pics available of the the cabinets in use here or any other location?
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.
At the moment returns from sticking money in a bond look better and that should not be the case.
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!
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.
They did consult – the ISPs.
How do the ISPs know???
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?