LETTER (SANITIZED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 22, 2008
• Sequence Number: 30
• Publication Date: February 21, 1984
• Content Type: LETTER

... ~ ROUTING qND RECORD SHEET
SUBJECT:: (Optionol~ '
~
~`
~ ~ 2
S
FR EXTENSION NO.
I
OL 20088-84
S
?' Chief, New Bui ingi ro~ect Office, OL DATE '+
;, 3E 40 Hqs ~ ~ ~~r' sr~n
TO: (Officer designation, ,room number, and
bul(din
9~
DATE
OFFICER'S
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
` ~
INITIALS
to whom. Draw a line across column offer each comment,(
' ~ ., ? ~
RECEIVEr
FORWARDED
'
1.- .
OLL =, Attn:
STA
7B. 02 Hqs
2. , , .. ` .
3... .
~
--
-
Also sent to:
a:
DDA
D/OL
--
---
-
_ _ -
-
D/PAO
s..
--
----
6.
~,
-
_
-~
7. ~.
S. --
-
9.~ ~
10.?
11. ~ '
12.
13..
14. ,
15.
FORM 61 Q usE PREVIOUS
I-79 EDITIONS
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
,. `iJ
~~ ?
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
TAT
TAT
T
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
CLEARVIEW MANOR CITIZENS ASSOCIATION
1232 Somerset Drive
~ McLean, Virginia 22101
February 21, 1984
Washington, D.C. 20505
New Bui ing ro~ec Office
Office of_ Logistics
Central Intelligence Agency
Re: Technical Memorandum No. 2
CIA Expansion Study
Clearview Manor Citizens Association offers the
following comments on Technical Memorandum No. 2 on the CIA
Expansion Study prepared by Dewberry & Davis and JHK
Associates for the Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation. The following comments reflect the unani-
mous opinion of Association members who attended a meeting
on February 20, 19$4 at which-time the results and projec-
tions of Technical Memorandum No. 1 were explained and the
alternatives in Technical Memorandum No. 2 were reviewed.
The primary recommendations of the Association are as
follows:
? Do not widen Rt. 123 to six lanes between
Potomac School Road and Merchant Lane;
? Adopt an alternative which relocates Rt. 123
eastbound (toward G.W. Parkway) parallel and
adjacent to Rt. 123 westbound (toward McLean);
? Adopt an alternative which incorporates a
traffic light at the Rt. 123-Potomac School
Road ,intersection;
? Do not include a grade separation for the,
intersection of Rt. 193 and Rt. 123; and
? Provide a right turn lane into and out of
Merchant Lane from and onto Rt. 123 east
bound.
01,-20088-84
STAT ~
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
February 21, 1984
Page Two
Our views concentrate on the alternatives proposed
for Route 123 between Potomac School Road and the G.W.
Parkway because this portion of the study most directly
affects us. However, our silence with respect to problems
and alternatives relating to the G.W. Parkway and its merge
` with the Beltway should not be interpreted as agreement with
the lack of effective solutions in those areas of the study.
We do endorse the proposal to improve the CIA entrance ramp
to the G.W. Parkway westbound be adopted. Tech Memo No. 2,
p. 42.
Aefore discussing our recommendations in detail, we
wish to point out that Clearview Manor represents an area of
approximately 110 homes which use Merchant Lane as their
primary entrance and exit road. The Association has a
direct interest in this issue and has actively participated
in its resolution. We are a member of the Ad Hoc Committee
for Traffic To/From the CIA and are represented on the CIA
Traffic Advisory Committee. Members of the Association have
attended meetings of the McLean Citizens Association and
representatives of CIA have met with our Association to
explain the project. In summary, our comments are supported
by careful review of the data available by our represen-
tatives as well as by daily encounters with Route 123 traf-
fic by our entire membership. This inchides children using
Fairfax County school buses entering Rt. 123 from Merchant
Lane.
Six Lanes for Route 123. We are strongly opposed
to increasing Route 123 to six lanes at this time. The
study (Tech Memo No. 2, p. 29) concludes that a four-lane
Rt. 123 will not be adequate to handle traffic in year
2005. While this may be a premature conclusion not sup-
ported by the facts, our primary concern is with
constructing six lanes between Potomac School Road and
Merchant Lane before Rt. 123~is expanded to six lanes beyond
those two intersections. The study does not address when or
if this would happen. As a result, there would be a six
lane bulge for a short distance with traffic compressed back
to four lanes beyond those points. This seems very
dangerous and ill-advised.
Furthermore, the compression on eastbound Route
123
would occur at the Merchant Lane intersection which is
already hazardous (per those who use it Avery morning).
For
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
STAT
February 21, 1984
Page Three
example, Alternative 4 (Tech Memo No. 2, Fig. 9) would merge
three lanes from Rt. 123 east with two lanes from Rt. 19f~3
east, i.e., five lanes into three lanes, just west of
Merchant Lane; at, or just east of, Merchant Lane these
three surviving lanes (and vehicles) would compress into two
lanes heading east to the~G.W. Parkway. Those who reside in
Clearview Manor exiting onto Rt. 123 in the morning would be
confronted with three lanes of traffic (which has just been
compressed from five lanes), including two lanes from Rt.
193 which we cannot see because of the curve in Rt. 123.
This, we respectfully submit, is an imposing task not to be
undertaken lightly.
It should also be noted that widening Rt. 123 east
bound to six lanes all the way to the Kirby Road, G.W.
Parkway complex does not resolve the problem. This is the
critical bottleneck with room for only two lanes -- one con-
tinuing down Rt. 123 toward Chain Bridge and one entering
eastbound G.W. Parkway (toward D.C.). What happens to the
third lane? In a comparable situation, the study rejects
widening the G.W. Parkway from the CIA to the Beltway
because this "would not increase capacity at the most criti-
cal points," that is, at the merge with the Beltway. See
Tech Memo No. 2, p. 6. This is likewise true for Route 123.
The bottleneck at the G.W. Parkway will remain s~ why
enlarge Rt. 123 to six lanes until and unless the capacity
at that critical point is increased?
Finally, we strongly object to the addition of
another eastbound lane on Rt. 123 closer to the residents of
Clearview Manor and EvermaY? The roadway at this point is
elevated above the homes creating a severe noise problem for
the domes closest to Rt. 123. If a third lane is added even
closer to those homes a bad situation would be aggravated.
We beliee that this would poke a substantial environmental
impact that may not be resolvable given the less adverse and
reasonable alternatives available. At a minimum, a signifi-
cant additional expense would involve the erection of a
noise reduction wall or fence.
Relocate Eastbound Route 123. We strongly recom-
mend an alternative which would relocate Rt. 123 east so it
is parallel and adjacent to Rt. .123 west. This has several
obvious advantages.
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
STAT
February 21, 1984
Page F1VP_
The basic rationale for a grade separation is
explained in the study as follows. VDH&T policy and its
regional planning prefer grade separation when an ilrban
Minor Arterial road (Rt. 193) intersects with an .Urban
Principal Arterial and Federal Aid Primary Highway (Rt.
123). Tech Memo No. 2, p.~43. While the consultants
acknowledge that any six-lane alternative on Rt. 123 will
accomodate traffic demand, a grade separation approach will
reduce traffic delay and is therefore preferred. Tech Memo
No. 2, p. 36. However, the facts accumulated in Technical
Memorandum No. 1 do not support the need for a grade separa-
tion at the joinder of Rts. 193 and 123.
Technical Memorandum No. 1 studied existing traffic
as well as projections for 1986 (when CIA expansion was
assumed to be completed) and 2005 in the area of the CIA.
These projections were the basis for a level of service ana-
lysis at various locations and the identification of several
problem areas. Tech Memo No, 1, pp. 8, 12-13, Fig. 5. Of
note is the fact that the existing at-grade intersection of
Rts. 193 and 123 which is controlled by a traffic light was
not identified as a problem area. This condition is con-
firmed in the study's level of service analysis. The peak
AM level of service at the existing at-grade and light-
controlled intersection of Rts. 193 and 123 is "A" and will
only become level "B" by the year 2005. Tech Memo No. 1,
Fig. 3. (Contrast this with the existing level of service
on Rt. 123 eastbound during the AM rush hour which is "D"
and will deteriorate to "F" in 2005. Id. A highway should
operate at no worse than a level of service "D" during the
peak period. Id. at p. 7).
The existing at-grade, light-controlled intersec-
tion between Rts. 193 and 123 works. There is no reason to
think that it would not contj~nue to work at a position
slightly west on Rt. 123. Although plans exist to upgrade
the safety of Rt. 193, no increased capacity will result
since it has been designated a Virginia Historic Byway.
Tech Memo No. 2, p. 6.
Thus, the facts do not warrant discarding a traffic
light at the intersection of Potomac School Road and Routes
193 and 123. This we submit is essential for traffic
safety. As noted in the study: "Under any of the alter-
natives, problems crossing Route 123 will continue to exist
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
STAT
r^ebruary 21, 1984
Page Six
at Merchants (sic) Lane and Potomac School Road under
unsignalized conditions." Tech Memo No. 2, p. 36. We who-
leheartedly agree. We have already pointed out our concerns
with traffic safety at Merchant Lane under certain of the
alternatives. This concern is heightened when Alternatives
4, 5 and 6 are examined. Id., Figs. 9, 10 and 11. There
would be no traffic light on Route 123 from Kirby Road to
the heart of McLean. This, we submit, is a frightening and
untenable prospect.
Conclusions. The consultants recommend .
Alternatives 2A and 4 as warranting further study, with
Alternative 4 their apparent choice. Tech Memo No. 2, p.
43. We could not disagree more. Keeping in mind the five
planning objectives unanimously endorsed by our Association,
we find Alternatives 2A and 4 unacceptable for the following
reasons:
? worst possible safety impact at Merchant Lane;
? no improvement in environmental concerns since
roadways are not effectively relocated
parallel and adjacent to westbound Route 123;
? no traffic light at Potomac School Road; and
? no right turn lane into Merchant Lane appears
feasible because of merger of Rts. 123 and 193
just west of Merchant Lane.
We also note that Alternative 4 creates perhaps the
shortest and least desirable weaving area between the CIA
and Route 193. Tech Memo No. 2, p. 35.
Our-review indicates that Alternatives 2 and 3
(Id., Figs. 7 and 8) most closely meet the basic planning
objectives we have identified.
? drivers entering Rt. 123 from Merchant Lane
will have a clear view of eastbound traffic;
? noise and environmental concerns will be
minimized;
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
February 21, 1984
Page Seven
STAT
? traffic will be controlled by a light at
Potomac School Road= and
a turning lane into Merchant Lane appears com-
patihle.
Therefore, we urge that Alternatives 2 and 3 be
given further evaluation.
We appreciate the opportunity to present our com-
ments on the alternatives discussed in Technical Memorandum
No. 2. While we understand the CIA's desire to have the
Advisory Committee reflect the unanimous opinion of its mem-
bers, we trust that you will also understand and recognize
the time constraints under which the several components of
the Advisory Committee must function. We brought the issues
before our Association members as promptly as possible and
their unanimous views are expressed herein. We have not had
an opportunity to review our conclusions with other members
of the Advisory Committee; however, we do not anticipate any
disagreements. Given the purpose of the February 21
meeting, which we understand is designed to select alter-
natives for further evaluation, we feel that the submission
of this letter and its wide dissemination is appropriate.
Very truly yours,
CLEARVIEW MANOR CITIZENS
ASSOCIATION
By:
McLean, Virginia 22101
STAT
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
February 15, 1984
Rough notes of Ad Hoc Committee meeting held on 2/14/84.
After reviewing the consultant's analysis of the proposed
CIA roadway improvements, the following points are submitted
as a consensus report. There should be:
(1) NO SIX LANES actual, installed Route 123 as
currently proposed--will accept four lanes improved (grading,
etc .) .
(2) A complete, regional review of McLean AND surround-
ing transportation corridors undertaken prior to CIA expan-
sion/occupancy with recommendations for correction submitted
to appropriate government officials and legislation submitted
by Capitol Hill delegations to enact such recommendations.
(3) Traffic signals installed (regardless of alternative
chosen) at Potomac School Road, Merchant Lane, and Turkey
Run Farm Road for rush hour use and at other times, a caution
light blinking.
(4) Entrance at Turkey Run Farm Road/Route 193 open to
traffic at all times.
(5) A statement on where traffic signs will be placed
along Routes 123 and 193.
(6) A statement on whether environmental impact state-
ments shown as "significant" for Alternatives 3 and 4 are
actually long-term or short-term.
(7) A statement why consultant's report clearly lacked
a position on (a) the beltway widening needs addressed verbally
by consultants; (b) intersection problems of Route 123/Kirby
Road/Parkway, and (c) understanding by everyone that Route 193
is clearly a traffic hazard.
With respect to Alternatives 1-7 for Route 123/CIA
entrance, the following comments are made:
(1) Alternative #1. Negatives are:
o six lanes
o no light at PSR
o eight lanes in middle
o no break at Merchant Lane; sight distance very poor
o took extra two lanes at Saville Lane
STAT
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
Page 2
(2) Alternative #2. Negatives are:
d seven lanes of traffic at PSR
o CIA traffic must cross west bound lanes by signal;
o Route 123 left hand lane will back up and Route
193 will back up on left turn
o three lanes on Merchant Lane bad due to no merging
lane and no traffic light.
o three lanes for Saville Lane area
Advantage: roadway is away from Evermay and Clearview Manor.
(3) Alternative #2a. Negatives are:
o fly-over merge unacceptable in addition to
comments outlined above.
(4) Alternative #3. (Best alternative if limited to
four lanes. )
What are requirements for signs/lights on fly-over?
Saville/Merchant Lane area - what does the map mean?
(5) Alternative #4. Negatives are:
o weaving problem from CIA to Route 193
o five lanes are merged into three lanes at Merchant
Lane (similar to problems of Route 270/Beltway
? in Maryland)
o bad design at Route 193/Turkey Run Farm Road
o bad design re land requirements for Saville/Merchant Lane
o no lights
Advantage: unrestricted transportation flow
(6) Alternative #5. Negatives are:
o bad sight distance at Merchant/Saville
o made extza lane at Evermay
? o weaving at 193/123~CIA entrance very bad
o Turkey Run Farm Road has sight problem
O bridge area at CIA is ugly and too much land used
(7) Alternative #6. Negatives are:
o tri-level fly-overs are bad, especially if not
at current ground levels
o blind corner at Merchant Lane
o weaving is bad on Route 193 to Route 123 to CIA
o very bad esthestically
o Turkey Run Farm Road is unclear
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
 Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7
Page 3
(8)
Alternative #7. Negatives are:
o
Turkey
Run Road entrance?
o
Turkey
Run Road to 123 to 193 (map is unclear)
o
blind
corner at Merchant Lane
o
Saville Lane corner cut
o
tri-level fly-overs--NO
One question which kept surfacing concerned `the six
lanes shown on maps--what happens to all the traffic--does
it funnel from six lanes to two lanes--same question applies
to either the Dunaway Court or Merchant Lane area S.
Another question which is very important- -will people
be added to CIA compound (even in small increments) prior
to all transportation improvements (roadway) being accomplished?
Approved For Release 2008/08/22 :CIA-RDP90B01370R000100010030-7