No internet in the new development area - DigiNetz law?

Telekom wanted to lay fiber optic under the street, but roughly 2 years after the rest of the development. As a result, it became the local provider who was forced to step in at short notice.

That sounds very much like a tall tale to me.

If the person developing your construction area is not completely incompetent, someone will lay an internet line into the street.

To my knowledge, the first provider who expresses interest can carry out the expansion - but has one year to do so. "Traditionally," Telekom tends to call itself the leaseholder on suspicion / in advance – even if it is purely out of fear of competition just so no competitor gets a foothold; if the hunting ground is not profitable, the implementation is simply delayed. Therefore, this reservation has an "expiration date" so that competitors cannot be held back indefinitely. Some smaller competitors are, however, more agile and quickly snap up new construction areas. That city utilities (Stadtwerke), for example, get involved, I have so far only experienced in commercial areas. There, there is often a circular to the companies with the tenor "once one hundred and fifty of you have signed, we will start building." The timing is then calculated quite accurately as to when - usually a little over a year later - the supply can be taken up.

Just take a look at the law and put it on the developer’s desk.

DigiNetzG §77i

(7) In the course of construction work wholly or partially financed by public funds for the provision of transport services, whose initially planned duration exceeds eight weeks, it must be ensured that suitable passive network infrastructures, equipped with fiber optic cables, are laid as needed to enable the operation of a digital high-speed network by private operators of public telecommunications networks. In the context of the development of new residential areas, it must always be ensured that suitable passive network infrastructures, equipped with fiber optic cables, are laid.

This is extremely important to me. I have already selected previous rental properties based on the availability of broadband internet. In times of home office, this can decide jobs in the future. We no longer allow anyone to work from home without proof of a minimum speed.

Just take a look at the law and put it in front of the developer.

DigiNetzG §77i

This is extremely important to me. I have already selected previous rental properties based on the availability of broadband internet.
In times of home office, this can decide the job in the future. We no longer allow anyone to work from home without proof of a minimum speed.

The paragraph really gives hope. I have also read that the following happens if the municipality does not implement the law: nothing
A violation is apparently not sanctioned.
I will continue to stay on it and then report.

The paragraph really gives hope. I also read that the following happens if the municipality does not implement the law: Nothing

The law is nonsense in this respect, because although municipalities develop building areas, they regularly (i.e. exceptions are hardly worth mentioning) do not operate communication networks. If the municipality were to register with the BNetzA as wanting to become a fiber optic provider, it would be told that it is not an authorized network operator at all. So typical nonsense from politicians who do not know their own competences. In practice, it goes like this: the municipality carries out a development plan procedure, Telekom finds out as a public telecommunications operator and considers whether the hunting ground is worthwhile for them. Here the market economy comes into play, i.e. the missing demand is their own fault: the cat bites its own tail exactly where the (potential) property buyer is waiting for fast internet - because it only comes when he orders it. If your neighbors in this building area also decide to wait, then you can pass the time by betting whether Godot or Saint Nevercomes first. The municipality only has to ensure that fiber optics are taken into account - it does not have to find a network operator who wants to lay any. And it does not have to lay any itself and later sell them to a network operator (this would be opposed by municipal economic law). Here once again one hand does not know what the other (does not) do. All amateurs ;-(

I believe the correct term for this law is: "Breitbandausbauverhinderungsgesetz"

The local authority told me the following procedure: All providers are contacted. (In this case, the construction area with about 75 building plots was too small for Telekom (praise to the headquarters in Bonn)

Grants (of which there are theoretically plenty of well-stocked funds) cannot be applied for (as a municipality), because the average speed is simply too high!! (unfortunately) ... (it's my fault: 500MBit/s with Vodafone +250MBit/s via Telekom)

And of course, the city/municipality etc. had (would have had) the opportunity to lay empty conduits as part of the development (super expensive special). But mostly this is not done. It costs a solid approx. 1€ per m² in additional development fees :confused:

If it weren't so sad, it would be funny. My first 5 books about stories with telecommunications providers are already full, but new stories come in every day.

The law is nonsense in this respect, because although municipalities develop building areas, they regularly (i.e. exceptions are hardly worth mentioning) do not operate communication networks. If the municipality were to register with the BNetzA as wishing to become a fiber optic provider, they would be told that they are not an approved network operator at all. So typical nonsense from politicians who do not know their own competencies.

Sorry, but this is typical 11ant pub talk again, culminating in the supposed incompetence of unknown third parties.

The law talks about passive communication infrastructure. That means, in case of doubt, the municipality has to lay in a fiber optic cable, nothing more. That does not make one a network operator or provider by any means.

Practically, the municipality tenders the fiber optic supply, just like the sewer system or road construction, or has a framework contract for it.
If no one can be found for this, they have to lay fiber themselves, see above.

The paragraph really gives hope. I also read that the following happens if the municipality does not implement the law: nothing
A violation will probably not be sanctioned.

The paragraph at least opens up the (promising) legal path.

Heads of departments and mayors also do not like it when it is publicly shown how they violate federal laws.