02-17-65 v •
MINUTES
REGULAR MONTHLY ME TING OF
ADVISORY PLANNING BOARD FOR CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
FEBRUARY 17, 1965
The regular monthly meeting of the Atlantic Beach Advisory
Planning Board was held at the City Rail at 7:30 P.M., on Wednesday,
February 27, 1965.
Present: D.H. Stynchcomb, Mabel Marvin, Alan Potter, City
Manager A.J. Craig. Also present at request of the
Board, was Chief of Police Robert C. Vogel.
Absent: Carroll West and Commissioner John Weldon, both
parties being out of city.
The condition of the entrances to the shopping center on
Atlantic Boulevard was discussed with City reneger Craig and he
was urged to do everything within his power to have the owners of
the theatre and Pic-n-save to improve these entrances immediately.
The Atla :tic Boulevard entrance is not only an eye sore, it is also
a serious traffic hazard. It was felt that the owners of t hese firms
should desire this as they would certainly benefit therefrom. It
would appear that this should be their responsibility, not that of
the City, State or County.
Request of Jack Carter, Inc. for permission to erect a sign
on Nayport Road advertising a trailer business some distance off
Mayport Road was considered and disapproval recommended.
The Chairman stated that a matter of considerable importance,
which could affect the future of the City of Atlantic Beach, had been
referred by the City Commission to this Board for consideration and
recommendation. This was with respect to a request by Chief of Police
Robert C. Vogel for a City Ordinance establishing a "Curfew for Minors"
in the City of Atlantic Beach. The Chairman stated that he had trans-
mitted a copy of Chief Vogel's letter to the Com- is-ion and a copy
of the proposed ordinance to all members of this Board in advance so
that they might give the proposal proper consideration, and come to
this meeting for a full discussion of the matter.
Chief Vogel was asked to state in detail his reasons for feeling
that such an ordinance would be good for the City and would result in
better law enforcement by the City Police ')epartment. He did so, with
the essential reasons being those contained in his letter of February
4, 1965 to the Commissioners, namely; "Using the law as an added
control by parents over their children" and "ridding our streets of
roving bands of teen-agers".
After a lengthy discussion of the "pros and cons" of the proposal
the following points, important to consider, were developed:
• -Page 2-
1. Would not this be a reflection against the character of
our under 17 year teen-age residents, the great majority of whom
do not require such a control and would be penalized in order to
attempt to control a small minority?
2. Would this not reflect against the character of the parents
of this community by indicating that at least a substantial number
of the parents cannot exercise control over their children and there-
fore must be bolstered by a law which will establish this control
for them? It is believed that such cases are in a small minority.
3. Can't this create outside impressions that Atlantic Beach
is not a good community in which to live, because of teen-age
problems which cannot be controlled except by law?
4. The area north of the City Limits does not have, nor will it
have a curfew law, The City of Neptune Beach does not have and we
are told is not interested in adopting a curfew law, The City of
Jacksonville Beach does have a curfew law but we are told that no
attempt is made to enforce it. Ponte Vedra Beach and the area south
does not have a curfew law. since the greater portion of the Beaches
area has no such curfew law, it appears that enforcement of a curfew
in the small Atlantic Beach area would be almost impossible.
5. Only one police officer is on patrol duty in Atlantic Beach
from 10:00 P.1 until early morning, which appears inadequate to
assume additional responsibility for a new type of law enforcement,
such as a curfew law.
6. Teen-agers who are not taught to respect the advice or
giidance of their parents, or whose parents do not atter t to advise
or control them, will probably not have respect for or will be
controlled by a curfew law. The possible result could be an increase
in law violation, milk= rather than a decrease, thereby increasing
police problems with teen-age controls.
The above were the major points discussed and resulted in the
ananimous opinion of all present that nothing should be done which
unfavorably reflect onc:our-City or it's residents. It was agreed
that whatever could be done otherwise to strengthen the effectiveness
of our police Department should be done.
Accordingly it was agreed to not recommend the passage of any
ordinance which uses the terms curfew, specifies age limits, or
specifies time limits, ordinarily contained in a curfew ordinance.
This Board will strongly support passage of an ordinance which will
meet the needs of the Police Department, if the above specifics are
eliminated, and the City Attorney deems that such an ordinance s;-ill
be efEective.
Copy toti ed Correct:
City Commission
chcomb
Chai I