Present: Phil Wheeler (Rochester-Olmsted Planning Dept), Jose Rivas, Amy Blenker, Sean Allen, Charlie Quigg, Tammy Greenwood, Karel Weigel, Dave Edmonson, Steve Thornton, Marcia Marcoux, Joe Powers, Brad Lahr, Bob Sixta, Chris Batchelder

Absent: Marc Carpenter

Wheeler - shared crash data.
Sixta - will changes to 2nd result in additional traffic on 6th SW?
Wheeler responded that the effect on other streets would be considered when making a recommendation for changing Second Street. Explained that the committee is not yet at that point in the process.
Allen - review of the consultants / process / staff
Rivas - staff is doing well, too early to asses the consultant
Lahr - consultant did well at community event
Greenwood - things are going well
Marcoux - we should have anticipated that people at the event would be expecting to be responding to a specific proposal rather than simply taking input. Consultant could have presented the event better in the introduction. Staff cleared up the confusion in the end, but it could have been smoother.
Edmonson - ironic that we began by talking about traffic…thought we were talking about a vision, about people. We should shift our priorities.

Quigg- The turnout at the event was remarkable.
Batchelder- I've never been involved in an event like that one. Astonished by the way the event was conducted. There was not enough background information provided for the participants. Not enough about purpose/agenda in the introduction or in advance of the meeting.
Rivas- People showed up wanting to see a proposal.
Powers- Did the Highway 52 project effect the public reaction? Kutzky Park neighborhood wants change. Others may be resistant to change. I tried to convince the City to add 2nd Street to the downtown planning program because I want the services, amenities, improvements.
Quigg- Disagreement that some are resistant to change.
Edmonson- Various interests want things to remain as they are.
Wheeler- the plan 13 years ago was very poorly received. It seems that people are concerned by any approach.

Allen- Consultant will create visual options based on goals developed by the committee. Is the committee in agreement with the process?
Greenwood- Public meeting went well. People she talked to understood what the meeting was about. The meeting was informational and she felt that people were excited about the project and the event. Edmonson- there will necessarily be controversy. We must proceed with confidence. The City should proceed with a plan for change.
Marcoux- can we present options based on the feedback?
Weigel- expanded on that…Add decisions to the options presented
Greenwood- how do we get background information out to the public?
Weigel- we have to assume that everyone is totally uninformed. Start with a review.

Allen- is this the right process?
Batchelder- everything appeared highly evolved, well along.
Wheeler- Consultant should have had more experience with this sort of event. Would be good to go to neighborhood groups. First summarize the results of the input.
Weigel- Staff, rather than consultant, need to summarize the results. Consultant has been disappointing in response to questions/challenges brought up by steering committee members.
Edmonson- we've stirred it up so we better do a good job in the next time -- show the process is working.
Rivas- a summary of the results presented publicly--in newspaper, workshop, and neighborhood associations--is in order.
Lahr- what is the forum to reach the businesses?
Allen- Staff has been talking to the Chamber. We plan to meet at the chamber with businesses one-on-one and an event. Keep the chamber board up to date. RDA too.
Thornton- if you hear concerns please forward to staff.