1) BT are telling the Council what they can and will upgrade. There does not seem to be a dialogue where the Council can go back and say 'no don't go there, go here'.
2) The coverage map is very clearly put together by identifying cabinets, drawing a zone around them where 24Mbps can be provided with certainty and then joining up the circles.
1) Is absolutely correct. BT have agreed to hit a certain level of coverage, the council have agreed to this. BT know how they plan on reaching this level of coverage. The council could've said they would micromanage BT, however they would have had to accept a lower level of coverage in return.
I will repeat that the council agreed it would be this way. BT didn't just lay down the law on this and would've agreed to provide a lower level of coverage had the council told them to. The council would've requested that BT serve as many homes as possible and left to them how to achieve this.
2) Yep. Virtually impossible to do it any other way. Obviously the coverage is approximate but to calculate coverage down to the premises would've cost way too much and taken way too much time. This time and money is better spent actually deploying.
Unsure why you're saying that the latter results in crazy situations - it doesn't. The way the copper network was built results in these 'crazy situations', not how the coverage map is made. That just reflects the reality of the copper network.
BT will not be installing new cabinets and will not be using pole mounted cabinets and linking them with fibre - its either a) too hard or b) too expensive or c) both.
The answer is B). Could be done, would cost too much and result in lower overall coverage. The agreed coverage level given the budget probably doesn't account for building new cabinets every km across a 5km cable run, building new fibre twins for those, and then provisioning them with fibre backhaul and power.
It sucks but this is in no way amazing, it makes perfect sense. To serve your 300 premises would've soaked up funds that would've provisioned I can safely say well over 1,000 premises nearer existing cabinets. It's a no-brainer from the point of view of both council and BT. Would it be reasonable to expect upwards of 1,000 premises to go without to serve you guys?
Again, rubbish but they did what they could with the resources available.