Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2008-04-07 13:06:29: When Verizon comes to install FiOS, we try to run their installers over with our cars for digging up our azaleas. When AT&T comes to install VDSL and IPTV, we're annoyed by the fact that they need to place a massive box in front of our homes. ..

prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2
reply to Bobcat79

Re: Utility easement

said by Bobcat79:

said by marigolds:

No they didn't.
"Gordon said the company did not plan any additional compensation other than filling the portion of her hillside mistakenly dug up and replanting vegetation. AT&T still plans to install one or two service boxes at the location."

That is far from fixed. They actually removed 2 feet of the front yard outside the easement.
What part of "filling the portion of her hillside mistakenly dug up and replanting vegetation" don't you understand?
I understand that she lost the vegetation that was there until the current vegetation grows back, that the integrity of the hill in rains is now ruined for good, and that the filled section in the very front of her house will look completely different from the rest for a good 20-30 years given the area where she lives.
Hence why I said "far from fixed".
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher

Bobcat79
Premium
join:2001-02-04


marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2
Put it another way... that's a region where the hills are mostly decomposed granite caps. You want to claim that the fill put in had the same hydrologic and geologic qualities as decomposed granite?
That AT&T actually went to the cost necessary to really make the damages whole again? Because if they did not, and they did not compensate the difference (and the article says no compensation was paid), then it is not fixed.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher

Bobcat79
Premium
join:2001-02-04
Since neither of us are there, neither of us knows.


KA3SGM
- -... ...- -
Premium
join:2006-01-17
West Chester, PA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Cricket Broadband
·Verizon FiOS
reply to cooperaaaron

Re: They should simply.....

said by cooperaaaron:

Plant some trees around these boxes. If they dig up the yard in front of your home, in keeping within the limits of the utility easements, they should make it look better, how much more will it cost for a few trees? they already dug the hole..
They could always take a lesson from the Cellular Telephone Industry with their towers designed to look like trees.

Just paint the cabinet a brown/olive drab and attach a bunch of fake branches to it.

It might be the biggest and ugliest Shrub in the neighborhood, but at least they could say that they made an effort to camouflage the damn thing.

Maybe you could negotiate with AT&T to install some nice colored lights on it as well during the Christmas Holiday season.
--
"Lithium is no longer available on credit"


a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
reply to marigolds

Re: who cares what they look like

ehh, no way jose. The boxes are known as VRADS, and its common knowledge on this site that AT&T's VRADS provide VDSL service which is split among TV and teh interwebs.


a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
reply to marigolds

Re: I want 100/100

read the article again. It states that AT&T's boxes provide TV and internet service.


a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY

2 edits
reply to asdfdfdfdfdfdf

Re: Utility easement

since when was phone service not essential/a utility?

-Sigh-
why don't you just go back to 400 Baud dialup? It's people like you who'll ultimately force us back into the Middle Ages. Don't like it? Dont buy it. Vote with your wallet. It's a capitalist society for a reason, bro.
Soon enough, AT&t will be forced to quit installing the "crappy" service, and will go for underground BPON.


a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
reply to KA3SGM

Re: They should simply.....

how's this for an idea?
go grab yourself a 300 baud modem while they last. plug 'er into the phone line. Bingo! you have teh interwebs, with absolutely no ugly boxes in the equation!

*/claps and cheers from the tree and greenback huggers club/*


asdfdfdfdfdf

@Level3.net
reply to a333

Re: Utility easement

"since when was phone service not essential/a utility?"

I'm not opposed to the idea of easements. Easements are a trade off. Everyone grants use of land so that everyone can benefit from universal build out of services. The benefits of infrastructure are spread around to everyone and everyone helps facilitate build out of that infrastructure. It's a fair trade.

In those instances where a company is actually providing a basic utility to everyone I don't have a problem with easements for those services. My point is if these companies want to start rolling out services that cherry pick and they don't want these new services viewed as utility services, because they want limited deployment in an unregulated environment, then why should these services be granted a utility's use of easements.

Surely there is a way to maintain utility easements without granting a company carte blanche simply because it provides phone service?

For example, these ugly boxes this article is talking about are for ATT U-verse. ATT especially wants to get into the video distribution business. ATT insists that it shouldn't be treated under the rules that cable is treated, for example universal deployment obligations. Why then should these U-verse boxes be granted space within utility easements?


cal

@wcom.net

big boxes

By law, in California the AT&T vrads are allowed in the public rights of way. Some cities don't have any documentation of the public rights of way but still permit the boxes wherever AT&T wants them by telling property owners that it is the city rights of way. The cities benefit from this procedure by getting property without condemnation and consent from the owner. AT&T benefits by getting an easement by adverse possession unknown to the property owner.

mattbrown

join:2008-04-05
Fork, MD

I would take it.

As long as its in the back of the house with the 2 AC units and Generator I would take it i mean its not that bad.

public right of way

Why would anyone willingly give up any part of their property to a city for a public right of way just so AT&T boxes could be placed there?


GNH
tolle causam
Premium
join:1999-12-20
Houston, TX
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Time Warner Cable

1 edit
reply to Tzale

Re: Somebody, punch her!

Tzale, wake up! you're having "pipe dreams," again. It was bad enough when you thought Ron Paul could win.

--edit--

Guess I better put a freakin' smiley in there. Here, use this one...

Scott_

join:2002-04-01
New Baltimore, MI
reply to Yay Boxes

Re: Boxes are fine...

... and I will be sure to do everything in my power to ruin said cacti if i ever have to work on said "eyesores".
People like you are morons

skrupowies

join:2002-08-22
Bristol, CT
reply to EPS4

Re: I want 100/100

said by EPS4:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the boxes are just for U-Verse...

You're wrong. The VRAD's provide both U-verse and high speed internet. If you were a DSL customer prior to U-verse (either from the CO directly or from some electronics) your line gets shifted to the VRAD for internet. In general your actual service improves some because the overhead is less (practically nonexistent) for VRAD based internet as compared to ADSL with PPPOE.