 
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
1 edit | Why can't they bury them? Why can't these be put in a pit with a plate over them? | |
|
 | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Why can they bury them? said by RideRed  :Why can't these be put in a pit with a plate over them? Cost. Plain and simple. | |
|
| | dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| Re: Why can they bury them? said by moonpuppy :said by RideRed :Why can't these be put in a pit with a plate over them? Cost. Plain and simple. It's not "plain and simple" cost; you people sure have a way of beating a dead strawman.
RT's need to be accessed on a pretty regular basis- exactly how would you accomplish this with it buried underground? Keep in mind you'd need access all sides of the cabinet with room to work, while also keeping it protected from the elements and accessable even when there's a foot of snow on the ground, and providing for airflow for the fans in the Summer.
In order to do this, you'd need a very large hole... and then there'd be complaints about the 10 x 10 x 10 foot hole being dug in someone's yard. | |
|
| | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Why can they bury them? said by dynodb :It's not "plain and simple" cost; you people sure have a way of beating a dead strawman. RT's need to be accessed on a pretty regular basis- exactly how would you accomplish this with it buried underground? Keep in mind you'd need access all sides of the cabinet with room to work, while also keeping it protected from the elements and accessable even when there's a foot of snow on the ground, and providing for airflow for the fans in the Summer. In order to do this, you'd need a very large hole... and then there'd be complaints about the 10 x 10 x 10 foot hole being dug in someone's yard. So tell me then how can Verizon do FIOS without those boxes? I have it in my neighborhood and nothing that big is in my area and the cable junctions are smaller than the in-ground feed points for electrical service.
Thank you for proving my point. It would cost more to submerge the RT than do do it above ground.
ATT is trying to get off doing this the easy way. They either need more thought or a better plan. Until the higher ups have one of these on their property, then they need to be more attentive to the citizens they deploy to.  | |
|
| | | | dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| Re: Why can they bury them? FIOS, IPTV and cable broadband are completely different technologies with different infrastructure- you can't compare them.
Yes, it would be possible to put RT's underground, and yes it would be more expensive... but more importantly it's not terribly practical, especially considering the drawbacks (access to the RT, flooding, snow, etc) and that the only benefit is aesthetics.
Seriously, I doubt it even would occur to the telcos to put them underground. The company I work for has over 10,000 RTs and I've not once even heard the possibility of them being installed underground even mentioned, much less considered. | |
|
| | | | | 
Clemcon
@ameritech.net | Re: Why can they bury them? ATT in Michigan has several first generation RTs that are underground with very good access from ground level. 2nd generation units are all above ground in brick buildings/huts while the newest units are housed in above ground cabinets. | |
|
| | | 
ArgMeMatey
join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI
·AT&T Midwest
| said by dynodb :RT's need to be accessed on a pretty regular basis- exactly how would you accomplish this with it buried underground? ... In order to do this, you'd need a very large hole... and then there'd be complaints about the 10 x 10 x 10 foot hole being dug in someone's yard. Like he said, cost. Many people would give them a long term lease on a 10'x10' patch with an access hatch and landscaping, for a price! Not easy, not convenient, but if it didn't cost so much why wouldn't they avoid the aggravation?
Electric utilities can put entire substations underground if so ordered, but they usually can charge ratepayers instead of having to worry about being profitable.
AT&T also could have run fiber direct to homes, but they decided to try this instead because it's cheaper.
When people say "It's just not practical" they often mean "That would cost too much."
--
USNG:16TDN2870 Find your Lat-Long: Geocoder | |
|
| | | | 
rec9140
Provoice just DO it
join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
| Re: Why can they bury them? said by ArgMeMatey :
In order to do this, you'd need a very large hole... and then there'd be complaints about the 10 x 10 x 10 foot hole being dug in someone's yard.
Like he said, cost. Many people would give them a long term lease on a 10'x10' patch with an access hatch and landscaping, for a price! Not easy, not convenient, but if it didn't cost so much why wouldn't they avoid the aggravation?
ATTENTION VZ:
I will give you all the space you want to put in any kind of equipment in my yard you want.
No lease, no strings, just BRING THE FIOS ON!
So long as I get Fios DATA I don't care. Less I have to mow.
Oh... no need to worry there won't be any landscaping around it either unless VZ is doing it an plans on keeping it up. Droughts smoughts.... grass dies, it will grow a again.
Need space for a self supproting tower...NO PROBLEM. Now there will be some strings attached to that one. I need 5-6 spaces at about 50-60 ft. for some antennas and we have a deal.
Just cut the whiners off! | |
|
| | | | |
| 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Something I read said that technically they can, but the cost is significantly more.... | |
|
| 
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | What's wrong with a little landscaping around these boxes? A few shrubs to help blend them into the landscape can't be that cost probative. | |
|
| |
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA | Re: Why can't they bury them? Because according to some articles they're ending up in people's front yards, like a monolith from 2001. | |
|
| | | 
gpidock
Premium
join:2006-12-01
Columbus, OH
| Re: Why can't they bury them? said by RideRed :Because according to some articles they're ending up in people's front yards, like a monolith from 2001. That's exactly what they look like. They are around my town and I've seen them right in people's front yards in a few places. If they can be placed under ground than AT&T should have to do so. | |
|
| | | |
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
1 edit | Re: Why can't they bury them? Even if they don't bury them everywhere, they can same themselves from political grief if they were a bit more sensitive not to the city, but to local residents. Bury it where it may impact the value of people's homes, but don't when they're located on city thoroughfares or commercial properites where the looks don't have quite the stunning impact.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
idjk
@sprintlink.net
| Re: Why can't they bury them? If they put them it what is called 'CEV' controlled environment vault (kinda of like a old bomb shelter or a 8x8x12 room about 12-15 feet down).
There is still a fair sized box up top about 4x6x 2 feet high that has the locked door access to ladder and the a/c unit and blower for 'controlled environment'- can't be to hot or damp.
But because of the expense these are usually only put at industrial parks or entrance to very large neighborhoods, they usually have fiber meet points for mux's and still have above ground cross boxes around the area that are not much smaller that these boxes. | |
|
| | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: Why can't they bury them? What about a box that could hydraulically lift itself out of the ground for access? That MUST be cheaper than building a giant underground bunker. | |
|
| | | | | | | | JazzJRabbit
join:2003-09-27
Wheaton, IL | Re: Why can't they bury them? Good solution but still more expensive than just putting one in the neighborhood and there are other potential problems. I'm not an expert in any way, but I would imagine there would be heat and humidity issues if you place it underground. | |
|
| | | | | | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
 ·Charter Pipeline
| That was my thought. I was thinking not hydraulic but work-gear jack. The maintenance worker could connect a truck-powered portable electric motor to the jack socket. Hook it up, flip the switch and watch it rise out of the ground.
Ventilation and drainage might be a challenge but I'd rather have a ground-level grate in my front yard than a puke green monolith. | |
|
| 
koma3504
Advocate
Premium
join:2004-06-22
North Richland Hills, TX
1 edit | said by RideRed :Why can't these be put in a pit with a plate over them? said by moonpuppy :said by RideRed :Why can't these be put in a pit with a plate over them? Cost. Plain and simple. As mentioned it's cost.
Not sure on the exact figures but i was told the diffrence is like.
$100,000 for above ground R.T. versus A million to put it underground.
I'll agree underground would help keep the R.T. cooler so it doesnt overheat as easy.
--
† Koma †
If YOu Don't Think It's Possable!! It's Acually A Reality!! The best way to predict the future is to invent it. Alan Kay!!
Ya Don't Know The signal Till Ya Ride It!!
Voice Break's There's Trouble!! | |
|
| |
| | 
jsinaiko
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Chicago, IL
1 edit | Re: Why can't they bury them? Like the cable vaults on my block that the Comcrap guys go into all the time.
Right.
--
Illegitimati non carborundum
| |
|
| wstwrdho
join:2007-03-15
Riverton, UT
| Don't want to bury them in any area with a real winter.
It goes like ....... customer outage Feb 1st.
Tech is dispatched.
Opens lid.
solid Ice.
Here comes the repair army. Dump trucks, backhoes, service trucks everywhere. Total mayhem, destruction of property.
Article on broadbandreports.com saying why didn't the idiots put them above ground. | |
|
| | 
JamesPC
join:2005-10-12
Orange, CA | Re: Why can't they bury them? LOL...thats great "wstwrdho"....SO TRUE! | |
|
|
JamesPC
join:2005-10-12
Orange, CA | COST | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | downside to FiOS is that it isnt stock holder friendly, probally why ATT is going the VRAD route as it is more stockholder friendly.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| kt1g
join:2006-07-30
East Hartford, CT | Take VZ's example and do FTTH.
and give us the same package/price | |
|
fcisler
Premium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY
| My yard....PLEASE! Put one on my front yard!!! C'mon! Who else is going to volunteer?
Afterwards...i'm going to dig a trench, bury some schedule 40 PVC, and then call AT&T to hookup my cross-connect. Mmmm...fiber goodness 
Oh wait....i can't run fiber....hope it's less than 100m from home to AT&T, otherwise i may be stuck on their VDSL  | |
|
| waynemr
join:2002-01-28
Madison, WI
| Re: My yard....PLEASE! So you would allow AT&T to put one of those big boxes in your yard, which would drop your property values, potentially make your driveway/street more dangerous from obstructing the view... all so you could get:
- no increase in broadband speed
- no decrease in cost to TV viewing
- just one more option to view 200+ useless channels
Where is the benefit? | |
|
| |
fcisler
Premium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | Re: My yard....PLEASE! Oh...hold on...sorry
[/sarcasm off] | |
|
| | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: My yard....PLEASE! Splice into their power, and run your household AC off of it... they'll never know. | |
|
| | bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!!
Someone putting it on my yard is going to
#1 Pay Me
#2 Put it where I tell them
#3 Give me free unlimited service (Triple, Quad, Septuple pack) | |
|
| | |
See 10 replies to this post |
|
| |
gpidock
Premium
join:2006-12-01
Columbus, OH
| said by waynemr :- no increase in broadband speed - no decrease in cost to TV viewing - just one more option to view 200+ useless channels Where is the benefit? My words exactly! | |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Is this Really Eminent Domain? So AT&T is being granted the right to force a purchase of land from a property owner for use of said property?
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
AnonProxy
Proxy of Anon
Premium
join:2001-05-12
ß
| Zoning is the answer All a town would have to do is pass a local zoning ordinance/by-law, that prohibits said box or requires a lengthy special permitting process. Eminent domain ONLY grants the right to take the land, it does not grant the right of use, when a local authority can "reasonably restrict such use". | |
|
|
See 11 replies to this post |
|
Techie714
join:2005-08-02
Anaheim, CA
 ·ViaTalk
| NIMBY I find this kind of funny, first we constantly see articles about how the U.S. is WAY behind when it comes to BB. Then you have folks calling there U.S. reps saying dammit bring some type of BB to my neighborhood & do it NOW. Then when AT&T steps up they all say "Ummm, yea we cant have you install that big ugly box can't it just be done magically?". Crazy Americans! | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
| Snow Plow.... Imagine the boxes being constantly hit by cars and snowplows and my bob cat working on my own private property....
With that nice tall frame it will torque over nicely with a bumper...
Not that I am advocating the destruction of private property... | |
|
|
See 10 replies to this post |
|
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
xerxes3642
join:2006-02-24
Saint Charles, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| why are you suprised by AT&T's unwilliness to work with local communities. Everyone supported their new state/federal franchising that takes power away from locals that would deal with this sort of thing. You handed the emperor executive power in the name of lower prices...so now he gets to do what he wants. | |
|
| DMS1
join:2005-04-06
Carrollton, TX
| Re: why are you said by xerxes3642 :suprised by AT&T's unwilliness to work with local communities. Exactly - this is AT&T we are talking about. To paraphrase an old joke:
Q. What is the difference between AT&T and God.
A. God doesn't think he is AT&T. | |
|
| 
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL | Well Illinois hasn't handed it out just yet to my knowledge (but I have a sinking feeling it's right around the corner). | |
|
| bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Franchise laws do not nor have they ever covered the placement of VRAD's. They've been placing cabinets for decades | |
|
| | PeterCollins
join:2005-05-23
Geneva, IL
| Re: why are you yes, but these cabinets are for VIDEO. They have a right to do TELECOMMUNICATIONS upgrades, but they have to pull a franchise to offer VIDEO.
Ask yourself this... Would AT&T would be upgrading to this if they were not trying to offer VIDEO services? The answer is no. | |
|
| | | bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: why are you The VRAD only differs in that it offers faster DSL speeds. What AT&T does with it is another matter. | |
|
mikef1
Mike
join:2004-10-28
Littlestown, PA
| AT&T should pay I have seen it in my area where one (typically farmers) can make some cash by allowing a cellphone tower be put up on their property.
I don't see how this is that different.
AT&T should lease/rent the area the cabinet takes up from the property owner, but it should be up to the property owner to choose to allow it or not.
--
mike
HouseOfMike | |
|
| bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: AT&T should pay ATT pays for its right of ways. | |
|
GlennAllen
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| ROW? From what I've read, the existing boxes are in the rights-of-way, which is why ROWs are there. It's a package deal: want new infrastructure? live with the "signs" of it, don't want the boxes? don't get the new infrastructure (assuming what you want would really mean anything).
Landscaping can do wonders. | |
|
| 
Loker
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND
clubs:
| Re: ROW? said by GlennAllen :From what I've read, the existing boxes are in the rights-of-way, which is why ROWs are there. It's a package deal: want new infrastructure? live with the "signs" of it, don't want the boxes? don't get the new infrastructure (assuming what you want would really mean anything). Landscaping can do wonders. that would be a wonderful arguement if other providers weren't putting their boxes underground....there is no reason AT&T can't too...other than being cheap and wanting to be able to afford the turbo charger for the engine on the death star.
--
"While preceding your entrance with a grenade is a good tactic inQuake, it can lead to problems if attempted at work." -- C Hacking | |
|
| |
GlennAllen
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: ROW? Not an argument, either for or against--just an observation, that the typical "utility" company doesn't care that much about whether their "handi-work" is attractive or not, just "utilitarian" and up to "code" (and cost-efficient). Yes, they usually will choose the cheapest method (because they have thousands of monoliths to install). Yes, they do want the turbo-charger (Money "earned" is money wasted.).
I don't disagree with anything you've said. | |
|
| |
rick2g
@swbell.net
| that would be a wonderful arguement if other providers weren't putting their boxes underground.....
Not in San Antonio (ATTUverse area) they're not... the water table is too high there. Dig down 10-15 feet and you'll get flooded half the time. Not as bad as New Orleans, but they are sitting on top of one of the world's biggest aquifers there. | |
|
| 
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| said by GlennAllen :From what I've read, the existing boxes are in the rights-of-way, which is why ROWs are there. The existing boxes are in the ROW. The proposed bill would allow AT&T to place the boxes on private property outside the ROW and easements without the property owners consent. The owner must be compensated. There are no limitations in the bill, so, in theory, AT&T could demolish a house if they compensated the owner properly.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher | |
|
| |
GlennAllen
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: ROW? Is it theory or paranoia? And, no, I wouldn't vote for the bill either. Like I said, that's why ROWs exist. I just don't agree with the long-standing argument against the already installed cabinets regarding their being "unattractive". Sure, AT&T could do better, but I don't expect much from a company like that, where only the bottom line matters. It's not a good investment to antagonize one's customers. | |
|
odreian615
join:2006-01-18
Chicago, IL | Cant they just pay people to put these in there back yard 200-300 a month with free phone, internet, and video as long as the box is in their BACKYARD | |
|
| 
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | Re: Cant they just pay people to put these in there back yard versus FREE? i don't think they are going to take that route... | |
|
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| And how much does AT&T pay.... It has not been brought up yet, and it takes a lot of digging through the bill to get to it.
But, like most other eminent domain situations, the default payment for a provider to make to private property owners is $1 unless the property owner files a counterclaim with 20 days of notice. The provider can still continue with construction while the counterclaim is resolved. | |
|
markolenski
join:2002-10-01
Chula Vista, CA | In Milford Ct they are putting them on the power poles It looks even worse about 5 feet in the air. | |
|
| HyPeRbAnD
join:2006-01-07
Stow, MA
| Re: In Milford Ct they are putting them on the power poles said by markolenski :It looks even worse about 5 feet in the air. Like a refrigerator on the pole. I would hate to be near that pole when if ever got hit by car. | |
|
| | wstwrdho
join:2007-03-15
Riverton, UT | Re: In Milford Ct they are putting them on the power poles Hmmmmmmm ...... do you have a picture or maybe a link to a picture? Are these in a rear easement or are they in front? That's got to be a sight, what a monstrosity. | |
|
dcs2281
join:2004-09-14
Santa Clarita, CA
| Utility Right of Ways Most property deeds have a utility right of way built into them, or at least they do in California. That is why more and more communities are going private - in ours we limited the "Right of way" to the street, not any property. Just down the hill from us they have cable, electric and telephone cabinets scattered about the yards. Most of them can't put anything up around it since the utility folks did themselves a favor and had codes changed for safety reasons where they have to have adequate access around them for service. Most of the shrubs must be at least 8 ft from the cabinet. | |
|
| 
DSLTech
join:2000-12-30
San Jose, CA
| Re: Utility Right of Ways Hold on now. Are we really calling DSL equipment and service a utility?
And if we are giving this utility the "right of way", how many other companies that provide "utility" services can now gain the right of way?
And, if only one company can gain this "right of way" or "utility" status, then shouldnt that company be regulated heavily, and be forced to allow competition on its facilities?
Remember that these mega carriers have been lobbying hard to be seen less as monopolistic, government-helped-and-facilitated organizations, yet they turn around and want some kind of priviledge that only the government can exact in specific scenarios? | |
|
| | dcs2281
join:2004-09-14
Santa Clarita, CA
| Re: Utility Right of Ways One of the problems is utility right of ways is that as long as the cable, telephone, electric, and natural gas companies stay within the right of way there isn't much anyone can do about it. It would be nice if they tried to stay somewhat low profile with some of their equipment, but a good example is the new transformers the electric folks have been installing to replace some of the 30+ year ones. They were below ground, now some of them are appearing above ground. So the small 4' x 4' vent you used to have, that was level with the ground, is now an 8' x 8' dark green cabinet standing 4' above ground. They are citing the increased capacity for the larger size transformer. The same argument can be made for the telco's. Due to increased bandwidth needs, we are installing additional capacity. I do not agree with either one, it's just a way to get around the additional cost of burying it. The same thing could happen if the cable co. decided they needed a larger cabinet here, and then you would see their ugly cabinet as a tad fixture. | |
|
HyPeRbAnD
join:2006-01-07
Stow, MA | Another reason to go FTTH They wouldn't need as many of these cabinets. They could do 1 to 3 primary hubs per town depending on the size of the town. | |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| More fighting with AT&T over placement of Uverse equipment...except here in Ct.
»www.newstimeslive.com/news/story···=1042265
AT&T's ARROGANT response?
"Iadarola said when he contacted AT&T about this, senior counsel George Moreira told the city in a legal memo that the state Department of Public Works is in charge of AT&T and it doesn't give any city the right to control these installations. "
Welcome, to the new AT&T.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! | |
|
Jameson
10-8
Premium
join:2004-05-28
Fallbrook, CA
clubs: | I'll take one They can put one on my property if that means I can get something better than satellite internet. | |
|
JSM88
join:2000-12-20
Falls Church, VA
·Verizon FIOS
·RCN CABLE
| herf bait »news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-515644.html
I don't imagine AT&T would have much success (or ROI) anywhere folks knew how to take care of themselves. For all those cranks who say, "if you want the service than deal with it" you quite clearly miss the point. These folks have cable, they have broadband, and AT&T has not caused any kind of real price reduction anywhere they've gone in - they DON'T want the service.
Electronics are much easier to screw up than they are to fix - take someones property without their permission and face the consequences - it's one of the principles this nation was founded on (look up the boston tea party and the underlying issues if you're confused) | |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
| The better good....... I don't think that there is an argument that people NEED this additional speed. Although I could not live without my broadband internet, one does not need it to survive.
Water, Food, Shelter, Electricity, Phone (or cell), Clothes,
TV is free (not cable), Internet is free (NetZero) through dialup, to say that they are offering people a service they need, or bettering a service as a necessity, I cannot see here.
To say you need High Speeds for Work or Downloading junk, movies et al, or VOIP (POTS works), it is not viable. Those are wants not needs.
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... | |
|
GPershing
join:2007-02-06
San Francisco, CA
| Carriers The power of Eminent Domain - a grant from the government - was one of the original US justifications for classifying telegraph and then telephone as common carriers. Quid pro quo. If you take from the people, you must give back as well. »www.cybertelecom.org/notes/commo···rier.htm | |
|
|
|
|
Towns Fight AT&T Over Eminent Domain
·