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 "Letter
carriers are expected to cross lawns while making deliveries if the
customers do not object and there are no particular hazards to the
carrier. In most cases, delivery can be made more quickly when
carriers are permitted to cross lawns, especially in suburban
developments. Normally, the passage of one person a day does no
injury to a mature lawn. We are pleased to report that many of our
customers recognize the savings potential in such cumulative short
cuts and permit their carriers to travel the most direct route from
stop to stop. The
Postal Service,
however, follows the written requests of the resident or home owner
who object to this common practice. Upon receipt of a written request
from the current resident or the home owner the carrier will be
instructed to comply with their request to not cross their lawn to
deliver 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 " Letter
carriers are expected to cross lawns while making deliveries if the
customers do not object and there are no particular hazards to the
carrier. In most cases, delivery can be made more quickly when
carriers are permitted to cross lawns, especially in suburban
developments. Normally, the passage of one person a day does no
injury to a mature lawn."
One
of the bigger issues for me with the reply is Your case has been
investigated and a solution has been provided to you. If not to
much work. Will you inform me where the solution is? I don't
see any. Whether or not many see crossing (which one hopes means
walking NOT DRIVING across lawns is a moot point. What about those
who do not like this. From the response. They seem not to matter. I
guess needs of many outweighs the needs of the few. Further from the
reply there seems no problem for the postal system to not require
carriers to use the drive of walkway. That would really put a wear on
shoes. Wouldn't it. I
also wonder if the damages caused by letting carriers drive on lawns
can 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 is
federal government service.
Very
soon Washington is going to receive letters on this until something
is done. The permitting drivers to drive on lawns unlike it seems
from you. Is something needing a stop put to. For
you to say you expect carriers to cross lawns sounds much like you
endorse them doing damage to lawns. From the attitude in the
responses you sent. If they damage property so be it. We have no
right to complain do we."
Where
in the reply is acknowledgment they were to take my response as the
written demand to stop driving on the lawn?!! I also stand by the
statement the last time this happened at no time was I informed the
request 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.
| 
