You're mixing up two different concepts. A neighborhood may have public streets, and these may provide a way to get from one side to the other. But there may

You're mixing up two different concepts. A neighborhood may have public streets, and these may provide a way to get from one side to the other. But there may also be restrictions on "no thru traffic", prohibiting people from using those public streets as a way to transit through the neighborhood. Eg, https://www.pahighways.com/mutcd/warning.html https://www.pahighways.com/mutcd/warning.html gives an example: > The No Thru Street Sign (W14-2-1) may be used to warn drivers that a street only provides access to the immediately adjacent area or subdivision and that the street cannot be used for through travel. The W14-2-1 sign should only be used where there is evidence that drivers attempt to use the street for travel beyond the immediately adjacent area or subdivision. " and https://ecode360.com/10776005#10776014 https://ecode360.com/10776005#10776014 shows how this might be described in PA law: > All streets specifically designated below shall be deemed to be other than through traffic routes, and, on such streets, through traffic shall be prohibited, and the Chief of Police shall cause all such streets upon which through traffic is prohibited to be clearly posted with signs stating "No Through Traffic" Thus, while the streets are public, that doesn't mean all types of public traffic is allowed. OTOH, rp1 was referring to NJ, where the binding Attorney General opinion is that the state has not granted cities the right to enforce "no thru traffic" restrictions.