Home » AT&T »Competition »Consumer News »Public Policy & Gov't »Video » Currently Reading:

AT&T Installs First of 495 U-verse Cabinets on the Streets of San Francisco

Phillip Dampier July 27, 2011 AT&T, Competition, Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't, Video 1 Comment

Groups like San Francisco Beautiful fear AT&T's U-verse cabinets will succumb to graffiti, like this one in nearby Oakland. For the group, U-verse cabinets on the sidewalk promote urban blight.

Construction of the first of nearly 500 four-foot-tall utility cabinets is scheduled to begin this morning by AT&T, eager to expand its U-verse fiber-to-the-neighborhood service in the city of San Francisco.

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted 6-5 last Tuesday to allow AT&T to begin building the metal cabinets, which hold the interface between the company’s fiber optic network and individual subscribers’ copper phone lines.

Mark Blakeman, AT&T’s vice president of external affairs, wasted no time announcing the location for the first box, to be situated on La Playa in Outer Richmond.  AT&T promises to launch U-verse service in the area within six months.

Most of the company’s initially-proposed 495 cabinets will be located on public sidewalks or other nearby rights-of-way.  Unlike San Francisco’s other utilities, AT&T will be able to install its boxes above-ground.  That has brought years of criticism from neighborhood groups who decry the cabinets are ugly, block the view of pedestrians and vehicle traffic, and are magnets for graffiti.

For groups like San Francisco Beautiful, it’s just the beginning.  AT&T’s longstanding goal is to install more than 700 boxes across the city’s landscape.

“It is going to put the blight of 726 utility boxes on our streets,” San Francisco Beautiful spokesperson Milo Hanke said. “Utility boxes from AT&T that are ugly and in most instances we still believe they are unnecessary; they should be on private property.”

AT&T will roll out its U-verse service in different parts of the city in segments, starting with the Richmond and Sunset Districts.

AT&T anticipates taking at least two years to complete the project across the city, but claims it remains open to bypassing neighborhoods that simply refuse to accept its boxes.  AT&T might not have a choice, considering the agreement they have with city officials.

Neighborhoods must be given time to provide input to city officials before permits are issued to AT&T.  If a city supervisor in a particular district doesn’t like the boxes, the “memorandum of understanding” grants the politician ultimate veto power over AT&T’s permit requests.  That means AT&T will be forced to do a lot of hand-holding public relations throughout the city to win support for their equipment.

That’s something AT&T is not used to in other states, where the company has won the right through deregulation to install its equipment cabinets anywhere it pleases, so long as they are located in a public right of way.  That has left a series of 4-6 foot tall boxes in the front yards of consumers in states like North Carolina, with absolutely no recourse.

AT&T will install its "compact model" cabinet within city limits, not the 6' tall boxes some homeowners in other states contend with.

In California, regulators can require utilities screen equipment with plants, maintain boxes to remove graffiti and correct noisy cabinet fans, and give property owners some input about where the often-unsightly boxes end up.  But those regulations are only as good as those willing to enforce them.

San Francisco Beautiful notes AT&T boxes in nearly Oakland are often covered in graffiti for extended periods, reducing property values and promoting neighborhood blight.

Hanke claims last week’s agreement violates a 2005 city order from the Department of Public Works mandating utilities put their equipment underground wherever possible.

“The supervisors fell victim to AT&T’s bluster,” said Hanke. “This benefits a private company at the public’s expense.”

AT&T’s Lance Kasselman told the San Francisco Chronicle it won’t go where it isn’t wanted.

“Obviously, those who clearly want it will get it first,” Kasselman told the newspaper. “People who want it or don’t want it, or have questions and concerns, should tell us on our website. We’ll meet with whoever wants to talk about it.”

With a close 6-5 vote, some city supervisors are well aware of the public minefield that awaits them in neighborhoods that despise AT&T’s equipment.  With opponents calling on citizens to complain, Supervisor Scott Wiener (Castro/Noe Valley/Diamond Heights) knew he needed to prepare.

“This morning, I did a yoga class to clear my head before writing a letter to neighborhood associations in my district,” Wiener told the Chronicle.  “I’m trying to make sure people understand what (Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors) vote means.”

http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KGO San Francisco ATT Utility Boxes 7-19-11.flv

KGO-TV in San Francisco covers the AT&T U-verse box controversy, and the Board of Supervisors’ decision to approve their installation.  (2 minutes)




Share

Other stories of interest:

  1. San Francisco Still in Stalemate With AT&T Over ‘Lawn Refrigerators’ for U-verse
  2. AT&T Technician Pepper Sprays Woman’s Small Dogs, Part of U-verse Launch Week in Chattanooga
  3. Cell Tower Politics: AT&T’s Alleged Cozy Connections With Civic Groups Upset Community
  4. AT&T U-verse Arrives in the Triad, But Savings Are Elusive As Rate Hikes Continue
  5. Another Weekend Spat: AT&T U-verse vs. Food Network: “It’s Not About the Money,” Scripps Claims

Currently there is 1 comment on this Article:

  1. [...] wires that thread through backyards.  Bonomo recognized the way AT&T does it attracts vandals and graffiti.  Verizon’s solution tries to hide the unsightly boxes in the canopy of neighborhood trees, [...]







Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

  • Scott: You're partly correct about a new access point or router helping them. The problem with consumer or lower quality wireless access points is they do...
  • txpatriot: I was just yanking your chain (and being an @$$)....
  • Phillip Dampier: I take your point, but honestly have not considered Panera Bread's Wi-Fi problems as part of the fight against broadband caps....
  • txpatriot: "You should not read into every story written here as an effort to prove some point." Of course not -- that's why the website is titled "Stop the C...
  • James R Curry: Hey Phillip, It's a thorny subject. There are a lot of coffee shops that set themselves up as places for people to come and meet and work and stud...
  • Phillip Dampier: I don't have any position to take regarding Panera. It's a free Wi-Fi service. If I go into Panera Bread, I am honestly there to buy their food, not t...
  • Alex Perrier: Another option is speed caps. i've experienced speeds of anywhere from 1 Mbit/s to 6 Mbit/s at Bell Wi-Fi hotspots. i think this is reasonable. Tho...
  • George Douglas: Cisco had nothing to do with this. Verizon Network Integration is the vendor. Gianato was told five days prior to the contract being signed that these...
  • Smith6612: True. All of the above works fine. Even then though, I don't think they need to spend money replacing their current gear with something from Meraki fo...
  • Tk: Perhaps Phillip is blaming the wireless phone company caps for this situation at Panera. "The problem has gotten even worse since wireless phone co...
  • txpatriot: Interesting situation. The commenters providing suggested solutions are even more interesting, but what I find MOST interesting is that, provided...
  • AP: No surprise here. Traditional TV has NOTHING on except for stupid reality shows and unfunny sitcoms. I do most of my TV watching online but for sports...

Your Account: