Stalemate between the Body Corp and Chorus of my apartment building in Grafton, Auckland.

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Stalemate between the Body Corp and Chorus of my apartment building in Grafton, Auckland.

HellraiserNZ

110 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#198932 28-Jul-2016 15:44

Hi guys,

A few weeks ago I got a little card in the post saying hooray fibre is available on your street. I live in Grafton near the Auckland Hospital in Auckland CBD in a 5 floor apartment block. Up until then there was this little patch of residential area that would not get UFB until June 2018 according to Chorus, then slowly some ISPs started to report on their address searches that I could get fibre. And then the aforementioned card came in the mail and the chorus fibre map also reported that fibre is available.

The problem now is, there is a stalemate between the body corporate, building manager and Chorus. As I mentioned some ISPs had reported UFB being available, people in the apartment building had been ordering fibre which got Chorus to come and have a look to install it. The plans proposed by Chorus, two of them I believe were not acceptable to the building manager and therefore the body corporate. Chorus wanted to run cabling in the apartment building corridors, create holes in the roof in front of apartment doors and breach the firewall to get the fibre in the apartment. Totally understandable I guess with the reported ineptitude and shoddy work done on some UFB installs. The body corporate wants to use the existing CAT5 cabling that runs through the building to provide fibre into every apartment but Chorus apparently has said no they can't do that. There isn't a space in the building for everyone who wants fibre to store the ONT/box in one place either. So, its basically at a stalemate.

I did get in touch with Chorus over this and they said contact the building manager and body corporate and ask them what they want in terms of installation and let the ISP know when you order, that to be honest is rubbish and would achieve nothing.

I guess it is worthy of noting that there is a Wifi internet service available which reportedly offers speeds similar to UFB over WiFi. I have not used this but I hear from tenants its fast but slows down a lot during peak. Also, I currently have a VDSL connection through WXC on a 2 year contract due to expire in October therefore I want to hopefully do something about it until then :) Speeds are about 26 mbps down and 4 mbps up MAX.

Do you guys have any ideas on how to tackle this or get the wheels in motion or even have any suggestions on installation ideas for MDUs and apartments?

Thanks!

1 | 2

6019 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1600229 28-Jul-2016 15:44

Hello... Our robot found some keywords in your post, so here is an automated reply with some important things to note regarding broadband speeds.

If you are posting regarding DSL speeds please check that

you have reset your modem and router
your PC (or other PCs in your LAN) is not downloading large files when you are testing - you are not being throttled by your ISP due to going over the monthly cap
your tests are always done on an ethernet connection to the router - do not use wireless for testing
you read this topic and follow the instructions there.

Make sure you provide information for other users to help you. If you have not already done it, please EDIT your post and add this now:

Your ISP and plan
Type of connection (ADSL, ADSL2, VDSL)
Your modem DSL stats (do not worry about posting Speedtest, we need sync rate, attenuation and noise margin)
Your general location (or street)
If you are rural or urban
If you know your connection is to an exchange, cabinet or conklin
If your connection is to a ULL or wholesale service
If you have done an isolation test as per the link above

Most of the problems with speed are likely to be related to internal wiring issues. Read this discussion to find out more about this. Your ISP is not intentionally slowing you down today (unless you are on a managed plan). Also if this is the school holidays it's likely you will notice slower than usual speed due to more users online.

A master splitter is required for VDSL2 and in most cases will improve speeds on DSL connections. Regular disconnections can be a monitored alarm or a set top box trying to connect. If there's an alarm connected to your line even if you don't have an alarm contract it may still try to connect so it's worth checking.

I recommend you read these two blog posts:

I am the Geekzone Robot and I am here to help. I am from the Internet. I do not interact. Do not expect other replies from me.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1600310 28-Jul-2016 18:29

Existing structured cabling isn't a solution. What Chorus are proposing is their standard process that's done in hundreds of buildings.

You won't get speeds similar to UFB over wireless unless you're talking dedicated P2P links. Expect maybe 30Mbps on a shared product.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1600317 28-Jul-2016 18:54

If I were the building owner i'd be doing everything I could to get the UFB installed. The free installations will not last forever and UFB would make apartments more attractive to rent.

However, being Auckland, they are going to rent it for a fortune anyway so I'd say you'll just have to move if you want UFB.

mattwnz

20165 posts

Uber Geek

#1600319 28-Jul-2016 19:03

Who owns your apartment, and all the other ones? Or is the building manager the owner, and you just rent? Or is the building manager just employed to look after the building. Is the body corporate subcontracted out to a third party, or is the body corporate run by the owners?

IMO if all the owners of the apartments agree to it, there shouldn't be a problem.

If you are renting, well that is just one of the downsides, and I would put pressure on the landlord to do something about it. Essentially they can get it done for free ATM, so not providing fibre when it is available in surrounding buildings, makes the apartment worth less IMO. It could be a good reason to move.

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

A pity that easements can't be forced on a property to allow essential services to be added unimpeded .

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1600351 28-Jul-2016 21:16

There are some law changes in the pipeline to help out in situations like this. Not sure when it will go through.

The government wants to make its UFB target and situations like this are wasting time and resources and blocking uptake.

The law will have a sunset clause....basically after the target was supposed to have been met.

UFB access law changes

(They could have fixed this up front and permanently by defining UFB is essential infrastructure like water or phone line, but they elected not to. Property rights ya know. )

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Darren0

70 posts

Master Geek

#1600372 28-Jul-2016 22:08

Linuxluver:

There are some law changes in the pipeline to help out in situations like this. Not sure when it will go through.

The government wants to make its UFB target and situations like this are wasting time and resources and blocking uptake.

The law will have a sunset clause....basically after the target was supposed to have been met.

UFB access law changes

(They could have fixed this up front and permanently by defining UFB is essential infrastructure like water or phone line, but they elected not to. Property rights ya know. )

Won't help his scenario. Those changes are basically tackling Right of Ways / Shared Access, not MDUs really. Visual examples of the changes.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1600445 29-Jul-2016 07:34

mattwnz:

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

This would not be possible in most apartment builds, and also depends how the structured cabling was deployed. A typical modern build over the past 10 years or so is cat5e or cat6 from each apartment to a building riser aggregated every ~2-3 floors in the riser and 25pr to the comms room. This is totally unsuitable for any such deployments.

Using cat5e/cat6 internally in a building was something proposed by CFH but never really went beyond this. There are so many downfalls of such a solution that the decision to not actually use any deployments of this was a very smart one. For all it's downfalls UFB is probably the best FTTH deployment in the world - and if you start messing with things you end up like Australia with a NBN network using a huge range of technologies that is nothing but a slow motion train wreck.

There are buildings in Auckland where UFB is being denied consent because of existing agreements between a provider who provides inbuilding services. Is your building one of these?

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1600449 29-Jul-2016 07:56

sbiddle:

mattwnz:

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

This would not be possible in most apartment builds, and also depends how the structured cabling was deployed. A typical modern build over the past 10 years or so is cat5e or cat6 from each apartment to a building riser aggregated every ~2-3 floors in the riser and 25pr to the comms room. This is totally unsuitable for any such deployments.

Using cat5e/cat6 internally in a building was something proposed by CFH but never really went beyond this. There are so many downfalls of such a solution that the decision to not actually use any deployments of this was a very smart one. For all it's downfalls UFB is probably the best FTTH deployment in the world - and if you start messing with things you end up like Australia with a NBN network using a huge range of technologies that is nothing but a slow motion train wreck.

There are buildings in Auckland where UFB is being denied consent because of existing agreements between a provider who provides inbuilding services. Is your building one of these?

One of the drawbacks of apartment buildings: retro-fitting new technology. Ideally, there would be a full manhole / shaft rising through the building and a conduit across the floors (under or over) for future distribution. But how could they know this in the 1950s, 60s or 70s? Another way to do it is run the conduit up the side of the building externally....and modify a window or port at each level. Not easy...and would take commitment from the body corporate.

I guess it's just one of those things you keep in mind when you buy or rent an apartment. (I'd never buy one....but happy to rent).

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1600454 29-Jul-2016 08:09

Linuxluver:

sbiddle:

mattwnz:

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

This would not be possible in most apartment builds, and also depends how the structured cabling was deployed. A typical modern build over the past 10 years or so is cat5e or cat6 from each apartment to a building riser aggregated every ~2-3 floors in the riser and 25pr to the comms room. This is totally unsuitable for any such deployments.

Using cat5e/cat6 internally in a building was something proposed by CFH but never really went beyond this. There are so many downfalls of such a solution that the decision to not actually use any deployments of this was a very smart one. For all it's downfalls UFB is probably the best FTTH deployment in the world - and if you start messing with things you end up like Australia with a NBN network using a huge range of technologies that is nothing but a slow motion train wreck.

There are buildings in Auckland where UFB is being denied consent because of existing agreements between a provider who provides inbuilding services. Is your building one of these?

One of the drawbacks of apartment buildings: retro-fitting new technology. Ideally, there would be a full manhole / shaft rising through the building and a conduit across the floors (under or over) for future distribution. But how could they know this in the 1950s, 60s or 70s? Another way to do it is run the conduit up the side of the building externally....and modify a window or port at each level. Not easy...and would take commitment from the body corporate.

I guess it's just one of those things you keep in mind when you buy or rent an apartment. (I'd never buy one....but happy to rent).

The typical deployment model in most apartment buildings now is exactly as proposed by the OP in the top post.

Using a typical apartment building you'll find something similar to this -

- Cabinet is installed in the comms room / basement which contains inwards Chorus fibre and the splitter(s)

- Fibre runs up the riser from the cabinet to a BUDI fitted on each floor

- Fibre is run from the BUDI via the roofspace to the front of each apartment building. I've seen a few lately where cutting and then regibbing and plastering has been required to reinstate this.

- Fibre then penetrates the firewall above the apartment.

- Internal cabling inside the apartment is typically surface mount to the required point as there are basically no cost effective options in any apartments to hide the cable or run it inside wall cavaties.

It's then typically run in the roofspace in corridors to the entry

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1600480 29-Jul-2016 08:11

It's worth pointing out as well that MDU / apartment installs are not necessarily "free". Chorus have a fund for this, but a body corp may be required to contribute.

The actual residential install for the tenant will be free like all residential installs at present, but the network build may incur a cost to the body corp.

mail2mm

83 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1600573 29-Jul-2016 09:58

I live in a heritage (1923) apartment building in central Auckland. The physical appearance of the building is very important to the owners. Property owner's have a legitimate concern about how the installation of a utility will look and its affect on property value. We were approached by a company wishing to install a broadband wi-fi system serving the residents as an alternative to existing copper based service or fibre based UFB. The proposal was declined because we thought it represented too much of a compromise in terms of future services and locking residents into one retail service provider.

We wanted fibre but wanted it our way. Once we accepted that fibre to the individual units was the only solution Chorus was offering it was time to think creatively about how to get fibre into and throughout the seven-level building while hiding or at least minimising its effect on our heritage building.

Chorus was very good in the scoping, design and installation. Back and forth we went and when Chorus sometimes rejected a route as too hard we would reconsider or make it the path of least resistance by installing decorative ducting, hidden conduit or cable tray at our expense. Chorus has experience in penetrating fire walls and can make good such a penetration. In the end we got what we wanted, fibre broadband and a minimally compromised heritage building. It did cost us a modest to moderate amount of money in the end, our choice not a Chorus charge, but we felt it worthwhile. It was also an opportunity to tidy up some of the existing wiring in a 90+ year old building.

Your building is unlikely to get fibre UFB unless a case can be made to the owner's committee of the body corporate. If you are a tenant you must work through the property owner to approach the owner's committee. Who are the members of the owner's committee? Are they neighbours you might already have met or seen in the lobby? It won't hurt to bring along, in a figurative sense, the building manage and body corporate management company. They sometimes exert undue influence on the decision making so getting their support can be crucial. If not their support at least you learn why they object. It is a political and public relations process to get consent in a multi-unit development. It is not a technical problem of can it be done but rather how it will be done and building a consensus to proceed.

PS-Our entire building is reinforced concrete. A challenge for us and Chorus but all turned out well.

HellraiserNZ

110 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#1601568 31-Jul-2016 10:40

mattwnz:

Who owns your apartment, and all the other ones? Or is the building manager the owner, and you just rent? Or is the building manager just employed to look after the building. Is the body corporate subcontracted out to a third party, or is the body corporate run by the owners?

IMO if all the owners of the apartments agree to it, there shouldn't be a problem.

If you are renting, well that is just one of the downsides, and I would put pressure on the landlord to do something about it. Essentially they can get it done for free ATM, so not providing fibre when it is available in surrounding buildings, makes the apartment worth less IMO. It could be a good reason to move.

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

A pity that easements can't be forced on a property to allow essential services to be added unimpeded .

I was renting throughout all the questioning/back and forth but now I own the apartment. The body corporate employs the building manager and its a third party (Crockers).

As from below answers, using the CAT5 might not be viable but the building manager is convinced it is.

Thanks for your reply!

HellraiserNZ

110 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#1601569 31-Jul-2016 10:42

sbiddle:

mattwnz:

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

This would not be possible in most apartment builds, and also depends how the structured cabling was deployed. A typical modern build over the past 10 years or so is cat5e or cat6 from each apartment to a building riser aggregated every ~2-3 floors in the riser and 25pr to the comms room. This is totally unsuitable for any such deployments.

Using cat5e/cat6 internally in a building was something proposed by CFH but never really went beyond this. There are so many downfalls of such a solution that the decision to not actually use any deployments of this was a very smart one. For all it's downfalls UFB is probably the best FTTH deployment in the world - and if you start messing with things you end up like Australia with a NBN network using a huge range of technologies that is nothing but a slow motion train wreck.

There are buildings in Auckland where UFB is being denied consent because of existing agreements between a provider who provides inbuilding services. Is your building one of these?

Thanks mate for the explanation of why CAT5 isnt viable.

Im not sure about the existing provider agreements. As far as I was aware anyone who rented or was living in an apartment can go with whatever internet provider. I was with orcon, then flip and now WXC (Scammed into 24 mo, changed to vodafone half way through)

HellraiserNZ

110 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#1601570 31-Jul-2016 10:45

sbiddle:

Linuxluver:

sbiddle:

mattwnz:

Are they able to pull the fibre in, by tying it to the old cat5 network cables. Or didn't they have any empty conduits installed when the building was constructed, as I would have expected that it would been expected that fibre would be coming eventually.

This would not be possible in most apartment builds, and also depends how the structured cabling was deployed. A typical modern build over the past 10 years or so is cat5e or cat6 from each apartment to a building riser aggregated every ~2-3 floors in the riser and 25pr to the comms room. This is totally unsuitable for any such deployments.

Using cat5e/cat6 internally in a building was something proposed by CFH but never really went beyond this. There are so many downfalls of such a solution that the decision to not actually use any deployments of this was a very smart one. For all it's downfalls UFB is probably the best FTTH deployment in the world - and if you start messing with things you end up like Australia with a NBN network using a huge range of technologies that is nothing but a slow motion train wreck.

There are buildings in Auckland where UFB is being denied consent because of existing agreements between a provider who provides inbuilding services. Is your building one of these?

One of the drawbacks of apartment buildings: retro-fitting new technology. Ideally, there would be a full manhole / shaft rising through the building and a conduit across the floors (under or over) for future distribution. But how could they know this in the 1950s, 60s or 70s? Another way to do it is run the conduit up the side of the building externally....and modify a window or port at each level. Not easy...and would take commitment from the body corporate.

I guess it's just one of those things you keep in mind when you buy or rent an apartment. (I'd never buy one....but happy to rent).

The typical deployment model in most apartment buildings now is exactly as proposed by the OP in the top post.

Using a typical apartment building you'll find something similar to this -

- Cabinet is installed in the comms room / basement which contains inwards Chorus fibre and the splitter(s)

- Fibre runs up the riser from the cabinet to a BUDI fitted on each floor

- Fibre is run from the BUDI via the roofspace to the front of each apartment building. I've seen a few lately where cutting and then regibbing and plastering has been required to reinstate this.

- Fibre then penetrates the firewall above the apartment.

- Internal cabling inside the apartment is typically surface mount to the required point as there are basically no cost effective options in any apartments to hide the cable or run it inside wall cavaties.

It's then typically run in the roofspace in corridors to the entry

Thanks for confirming! Is it possible to get non-low-level chorus tech and draw up a plan which could compromise or if even not compromise make it look aesthetically pleasing. It just fear of the unknown and obviously talking about cutting hole here and penetrating the firewall etc may not be best way to pitch it.

I will definitely debate it when during the building AGM with body corporate in November.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1601571 31-Jul-2016 10:46

HellraiserNZ:

As from below answers, using the CAT5 might not be viable but the building manager is convinced it is.

While they're still got this mentality your install will be going nowhere. An ONT to each apartment is the only logical method of deployment and the only method that is being used.

One of the biggest issues with the proposal (and it was only that, a proposal by CFH) to use existing structured cabling was how to deal with a) voice and b) RF over fibre based video. While it's unlikely we'll ever see RF over fibre now the network had to be built to support it. If you use existing structured cabling back to an managed aggregation switch to deliver services you'd have no ability to deliver voice and data unless CPE based VoIP was used. Providers have got their preference for ONT or CPE based VoIP so you can't force a particular model as their are pros and cons to both.

1 | 2