So they wouldn't have a problem with my large sign on an adjacent private property that says: "Juden Sind Nicht Bei Hier Erwunscht."?

LOL

Drollig, sehr drollig.

Kabbalah Energy Drink... Diet or Sugar?

They seem to be having simila problems with their website. Here one day gone the next.

http://www.kabbalahenergydrink.com/

Rabosi listen up: You're making a bigger sign - great! Can't wait to see it. But do yourself a favor: just because you're making a bigger sign doesn't mean it should have more words on it - it should have less. Otherwise no one has any idea of what you're talking about. Also, get someone who's first language is English to write it, *not* Yiddish. Like one of those guys who goes to Chulent or something.

G-d, I am so tired of these exclusionary anachronisms and their outward hostility. Maybe Patterson will come up with a way to tax them for the excessive tsuris they create.

Cover that sign with a blown up picture of goatse.cx

That'll learn 'em.

My recollection is that it is illegal for a private sign to give direction for a public highway. Check the MV law.

first of all that sign is pretty illegible from the street. The black on orange is hard to see. You only see DETOUR ROUTE and maybe "we urge all drivers...". Second of all, It would be funny if traffic were backed up. If the hasids get gridlocked it would sure get those bikers who can bike on every inch of sidewalk and street imaginable. all a biker needs is a sliver of road and he's good. I hope critical mass gets wind of this cause the hasids won't know what hit em.

I could care less about the sign.

I can't understand the rationale for encouraging traffic on Wythe (which also has a bike lane, as do berry and bedford in south williamsburg) instead of the wider, 2 lane kent avenue. Kent Avenue is a truck route. There is very little traffic coming from the west (apart from the lumberyard at 475kent, the division & grand st cul-de-sacs and the small amount of traffic on river st) so things move along swiftly, unlike Wythe...why encourage avoiding it? Someone enlighten me, please...

next thing you know it will be a lighted sign,

but I doubt it, there are regulations for that.

it does look larger than 4X8 as was stated in the previous post link.

On top of being bad dressers, the Hasids are bad designers. Oy vey!

That sign looks like some shitty billboard I might see on the side of the highway giving me directions to the nearest wholesale liquor warehouse or fireworks depot.

Clearly, thefacts doesn't know "thelaw." There are countless laws and regulations stating what kinds of signs you may and may not post on private property.

There are countless laws regulating signage on private property? Really, Rhonda?

Other than ADVERTISING signs on the sides of buildings, please list one or two of the other "countless" types of signage that are regulated by law. Do note that this sign is located in an M zone, where there are scant regulations even on advertising signs, which this sign is not.

Signs on scaffolding are indeed regulated because the scaffolding is placed over the public sidewalks, which, duh, are not private property.

Oh the facts, What a sad little person you are. I will expect another one of your witless, uninformed comments after I finish this. Please note:

Generally, statutory traffic regulations or rules of the road have no application to traffic on private ways or premises. However, this principle has often been qualified to hold that such traffic regulations or rules are applicable to private ways or premises used generally by the public for travel. For example, a man in the District of Columbia was convicted of driving without a license, even though he started his car on private property, and was only seen driving on private property. The court reasoned that unless a motor vehicle law is limited to public property by its own terms, the law applies to all drivers on both public and private property. Several states have followed this general rule including New York, New Jersey, Texas, Iowa and others. Other states have followed this rationale only when examining laws that are more broadly intended to protect against dangerous driving. So, most states permit a police officer to enforce drunk driving laws on any property, public or private, because driving drunk is so inherently dangerous.



Some states, including Massachusetts, Maine and Montana have specific laws that all traffic and motor vehicle laws apply on public property, as well as any private property that is generally open to the public. So, a stop sign posted in a mall parking lot would be enforceable by the police, but a stop sign posted at the end of a private driveway might not be. With regard to Amanda’s apartment complex, a court would likely consider it more like a mall parking lot because any member of the public might drive in the lot to visit a friend or relative. In some states, only traffic signs that are identical to those the state uses are enforceable by police. A small stop sign or a green sign would not work.

SO, with that being said, this is for the simpleton, Yes it is o.k. to have this sign on private property as they are basically giving a suggestion. Notice the language "we urge you" and long acre is right, when I drive by I barely noticed it until now. Score what for the Hassids? What a lamea*s

Nasty Smacky, after much windbaggery and double-posting on a non-germane issue, accompanied by lots of off-topic pedantry, obfuscation and non-sequiturs on out-of-state DMV laws, while ignoring our own NYC's Zoning Resolution on signage - which is what applies in this case - winds up in the end agreeing with me by concluding: "Yes it is o.k. to have this sign on private property as they are basically giving a suggestion. Notice the language 'we urge you'".

But what else can one expect from someone who spends New Year's Eve at 2:09 am researching Montana's DMV laws to address a NYC Zoning issue in Williamsburg?

Did somebody get their feelings hurt?

Oh the facts, What a sad little person you are. I will expect another one of your witless, uninformed comments after I finish this. Please note:

Generally, statutory traffic regulations or rules of the road have no application to traffic on private ways or premises. However, this principle has often been qualified to hold that such traffic regulations or rules are applicable to private ways or premises used generally by the public for travel. For example, a man in the District of Columbia was convicted of driving without a license, even though he started his car on private property, and was only seen driving on private property. The court reasoned that unless a motor vehicle law is limited to public property by its own terms, the law applies to all drivers on both public and private property. Several states have followed this general rule including New York, New Jersey, Texas, Iowa and others. Other states have followed this rationale only when examining laws that are more broadly intended to protect against dangerous driving. So, most states permit a police officer to enforce drunk driving laws on any property, public or private, because driving drunk is so inherently dangerous.



Some states, including Massachusetts, Maine and Montana have specific laws that all traffic and motor vehicle laws apply on public property, as well as any private property that is generally open to the public. So, a stop sign posted in a mall parking lot would be enforceable by the police, but a stop sign posted at the end of a private driveway might not be. With regard to Amanda’s apartment complex, a court would likely consider it more like a mall parking lot because any member of the public might drive in the lot to visit a friend or relative. In some states, only traffic signs that are identical to those the state uses are enforceable by police. A small stop sign or a green sign would not work.

SO, with that being said, this is for the simpleton, Yes it is o.k. to have this sign on private property as they are basically giving a suggestion. Notice the language "we urge you" and long acre is right, when I drive by I barely noticed it until now. Score what for the Hassids? What a lamea*s

That's nothing new for "thefacts." In fact, most people here seem to have very quickly forgotten the ads on scaffolding that had to be taken down this past year because they violated size regulations and/or lacked permits. That was despite the fact that they were "on private property."

LOL

Private signs on private property are legal, and there is nothing that DOT bureaucrats and the Spandex Nazis can do about it.

Score one for the Hasids!