Not A Prison Compound, Just A U.S. Village

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32050, 26 July 1969, Page 23

Not A Prison Compound, Just A U.S. Village

rNZF.XReufer— Copyright) WASHINGTON. Armed guards on 24hour patrol, a 9ft-high perimeter fence, hidden electronic sensors, stringent security at the gates and closed-circuit television.

This is not something planned for Vietnam—nor is it a prison compound.

It is a new community north-west of Washington where residents are willing to pay for a maximum of security that assures a minimum at anxiety in the home. raced with a mounting crime rate and fearing a trend towards lawlessness and disorder, this “walled village” concept in home security might set a pattern for nervous American homeowners with money to pay for their safety. The area is Biver Oaks, in hunting country about eight miles from Washington. Work is expected to start in two or three months and when it is completed, planners expect some 70 homes—perhaps 350 people—safely fastened within a perimeter wall surrounding its 67 acres. “We have had an overwhelming response with inquiries about homes there,” said Mr P. D. Maktos, a lawyer for the developers. “There is a definite tendency towards secure home sites and protected residences. The concept is based on the greatest amount of security by protecting the area and making it safe for the residents, their children and their homes," he said.

The security measures include a 9ft-high perimeter fence, possibly iron rails on top of brick or stone, electronic sensors hidden in the trees and on the ground that would track intruders, closedcircuit television in the homes as well as in the estate, some 25 armed guards—possibly deputy sheriffs with power of arrest—and security checks at the two entrances to the River Oaks estate. The cost to each owner is expected to start about SUS2OO,OOO for the house, which would be built to the owner’s plan. It could be considerably higher, said Mr Maktos. depending on the “extras” installed in the home and the cost of the general defences spread about the estate, which would be shared among the residents. like 1984. Does it seem like 1984 with television snooping in the homes and on the grounds? “No,” Mr Maktos insists. “It’s merely an extension of the idea of exclusiveness for people of means who want a measure of security. “The television cameras also watch children, who can be left alone to play in the house or outside. They can be set with time switches or turned off and on at will. They would not be permanently operating in the houses at any rate.”

Mr Maktos thinks the children would soon tire of triggering the electronic sensors for fun, and he does not think the residents would feel hemmed in or spied on by their guardians, human and technical.

Only residents, each 'furnished with special identity

cards, will be allowed into River Oaks freely. Tradesmen will need special passes and visitors will have to be cleared at the gates with the people whom they are visiting. The River Oaks idea was not new, Mr Maktos said. Similar projects have been built in Florida and California, but none has the stringency planned for the one near Washington. He foresses more mode-rately-priced estates develop-

ing in the future. At the moment, though, the emphasis is on social and financial but not racial exclusivity, although few Negroes are likely to be interested in River Oaks.

“River Oaks is catering for people of influence and affluence,” Mr Maktos said. “Two Federal judges have inquired about it, if that gives some idea of the sort of people who might be moving in.” Would he build a .house there? “I don’t think so);” Mr Maktos replied. “It would be too expensive for me.”