BT street furniture - what is reasonable/legal
Discussion
There are odd locations on our housing estate that keep growing enormous BT boxes and apparatus. What used to be fairly unobtrusive green suitcases can now in some instances be huge and present a reasonable hazard or obstruction. There have been a couple at junctions which have blocked sightlines, and here's this monstrosity where they actually planted a telecom mast as well.
'm sure the Roads and Streetworks act has always allowed for utilities to have street furniture and utility boxes in the highway but it's getting beyond a joke. Just look at how narrow the path is now (on the way to a school/shops as well). As a side issue I reckon in this instance it also encourages landlords to ignore the overgrown boundaries beyond it, they have got a perfect excuse if you challenge them that they are narrowing the footway.
So what constitutes legal/resonable for these things? Is a 25% reduction in pedestrian width acceptable?
'm sure the Roads and Streetworks act has always allowed for utilities to have street furniture and utility boxes in the highway but it's getting beyond a joke. Just look at how narrow the path is now (on the way to a school/shops as well). As a side issue I reckon in this instance it also encourages landlords to ignore the overgrown boundaries beyond it, they have got a perfect excuse if you challenge them that they are narrowing the footway.
So what constitutes legal/resonable for these things? Is a 25% reduction in pedestrian width acceptable?
Well the little old lady with the tartan shoping trolley in the distance had to wait for a time while a gaggle of dog walkers went past. Surely it's not unreasonable that pedestrians can pass either way on a pavement without being made to wait or walk in the gutter?
Agreed the overgrowth is as big an impediment but what are the owners of that going to point to when challenged?
And yes it may be trivial to you because you're not a little old lady with a tartan shopping trolley, but if we eliminated threads on Pistonheads because the subject matter was trivial to the majority of us it would be pretty f
king barren around here!
Agreed the overgrowth is as big an impediment but what are the owners of that going to point to when challenged?
And yes it may be trivial to you because you're not a little old lady with a tartan shopping trolley, but if we eliminated threads on Pistonheads because the subject matter was trivial to the majority of us it would be pretty f
king barren around here!
esxste said:
Why do you care?
Why do you care to post here twice? In fact why is anyone adding to this if they think its trivial? Of course its bleeding trivial. Over on other forums right now there are threads running about headlamp masks for the continent, indicator bulbs for a Ginetta and buying a £50 4 cylinder Vauxhall Omega. Feel free to jog on there telling them their little bits of thread and a thousand like them are trivial too.
Its a casual query to anyone familiar with the RASWA by an occasional visitor and even less occasional poster. If you spend the day waiting for a bell to ping every time a thread pops up so you can chime in and make people look like a t
t thats great and well done you.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff