Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
November 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
July 7, 1998
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
October 5, 1959
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP62-00680R000100210007-8.pdf81.78 KB
Sanitized'- Approve 1 For Release,; CDP62-0008 8000100210007-8 25X1A8a 25X1X4 METAORii D'M,~ FrOR SUBJECT: City Planning Exchange REFERSNCE: Your demo for the Record, dated 24 September 1959, 'ame yub ject of important establishments is lacx )$r most Soviet cities. 1. In our opinion, an exchange of US-USSR city planners would produce a net intelligence advantage for the U.S. The extent e, of the U.S. advantage would depend upon,USSR cities visited and the accessibility of the U.3. group to intelligence briefing officers prior to departure. 2. Information on layout, development plans, and location25X1X4 City planning specialists, properly Sho~~Id briefed, be able to contribute uniquely to the acquisition of elements of this information, not only through observation but also through elicitation in the course of technical discussions with their Sovict hosts. We would also anticipate some possible return in the form of unique urban mapping which this specialist group may have access 3. We feel that the Soviet group, on the other hand, is not likely to obtain new information of intelligence significance. .~ wide variety of open sources provide information on the U.S. cities Sanitized - Approved For ReI RDP62-00680R000100210007-8 Sanitized = Approv,W For R011 -RDP62-0068OR000100210007-8 cited in your memo. In addition, data on U.S. urban planning Gtr theory and practice available to +Ile Soviets through a variety of professional publications and international planners meetinr-. the last of which was held some r. ago in P,Ioscow. 4. It is recommended that the proposed exchange be encouraged. Recognizing that the exchange will of necessity include such fai^ly adequately covered cities as ;:.oscow, Leningrad, Minsk, Kiev, and Kharkov, it is recommended that one half of the itinerary (three cities) be made up of such cities, and the second half include three of the following cities: Gor "_{iy, Kuybyshev, Angarsk, Novosibirsk, and Irkutsk. These cities are less frequently visited, and therefore more important intel l igencewise . They are plausible as selections to be put forward by a city planner group. If negotiations core to a standstill over the selection of these cities, Chelyabinsk, Baku, Kazan', Noril'sk, Stalinsk, Tomsk, Komsomol'sk, or Yerevan may be substituted for cities in the second group. If feasible, the itinerary of cities in the U.S.A. might be expanded to include at least one additional closed city to strengthen our bargaining position in the negotiations for the UJSSR cities. 5. Additionally, it is recommended that after the itinerary is firm/steps be taken to insure that appropriate members of the J.S. delegationbriefed in detail on key intelligence gaps . 25X1A9a Chief, Geographic Research Area Sanitized - Approved For Re lease ? j f -RDP62-00680R000100210007-8