This may be one of the stranger complaints about our infamous usps. However from what others have said about them. You might understand the issue.
Several attempts to resolve the issue of carriers DRIVING on the right of way causing tracks to be worn in the grass. Whether or not this is done inside the fence. Example only. Or between the fence and curb is not the issue. According to them this is only a concern if the lawn is "newly seeded." They seem not to care not only if someone falls in the tracks. Remarks implying if you see the tracks then do not walk in them. Is missing the point.
Responses also said "Lettercarriers are expected to cross lawns while making deliveries if thecustomers do not object and there are no particular hazards to thecarrier.in most cases, delivery can be made more quickly whencarriers are permitted to cross lawns, especially in suburbandevelopments. Normally, the passage of one person a day does noinjury to a mature lawn. We are pleased to report that many of ourcustomers recognize the savings potential in such cumulative shortcuts and permit their carriers to travel the most direct route fromstop to stop. ThePostal Service, however, follows the written requests of the resident or home ownerwho object to this common practice. Upon receipt of a written requestfrom the current resident or the home owner the carrier will beinstructed to comply with their request to not cross their lawn todeliver the mail." How that does not make people in the suburbs upset. Gee, if you live in the suburbs your lawn isn't worth not driving on it. After all you are in the suburbs.in case you are wondering.in the neighberhod there is nothing requiring carriers to DRIVE on grass.
They also say " Lettercarriers are expected to cross lawns while making deliveries if thecustomers do not object and there are no particular hazards to thecarrier.in most cases, delivery can be made more quickly whencarriers are permitted to cross lawns, especially in suburbandevelopments. Normally, the passage of one person a day does noinjury to a mature lawn." Oneof the bigger issues for me with the reply is Your case has beeninvestigated and a solution has been provided to you. If not tomuch work. Will you inform me where the solution is? I don'tsee any. Whether or not many see crossing (which one hopes meanswalking NOT DRIVING across lawns is a moot point. What about thosewho do not like this. From the response. They seem not to matter. Iguess needs of many outweighs the needs of the few. Further from thereply there seems no problem for the postal system to not requirecarriers to use the drive of walkway. That would really put a wear onshoes. Wouldn't it. Ialso wonder if the damages caused by letting carriers drive on lawnscan be vandalism. Do they not do damage to lawns when driving on it. Whether or not they do it one time or fifty. Then again this isfederal government service.
Verysoon Washington is going to receive letters on this until somethingis done. The permitting drivers to drive on lawns unlike it seemsfrom you. Is something needing a stop put to.
Foryou to say you expect carriers to cross lawns sounds much like youendorse them doing damage to lawns. From the attitude in theresponses you sent. If they damage property so be it. We have noright to complain do we."
Wherein the reply is acknowledgment they were to take my response as thewritten demand to stop driving on the lawn?!! I also stand by thestatement the last time this happened at no time was I informed therequest is required to be written! Notice, again DRIVE not walking was told. Guess they can't read.
I guess if they receive notice to stop DRIVING on the lawn. That would be all needed. However, their attitude of the damage done to the grass is one of the issues. Another is should DRIVING on the lawn not be encouraged in the first place? Right now as many locations as possible are being contacted to get carriers from DRIVING on grass to stop for everyone.
0 comments