This article was written to look into the pros and cons, as well as the different effects, of surveillance in cities in a deep and multifaceted way. In this context, in-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview form with 14 people, consisting of site managers and residents of a high-security site in Erzurum. The aim of the study is to reveal the multiplier effects of surveillance (positively and negatively) by examining the purpose of the existence of high-security sites where the urban elites are clustered, how these sites fill the gap in community life, why people cluster in these places, and what their residents' expectations are from secure sites. The intersection of surveillance and urban security literature is explored and focused on the urban panopticon phenomenology in this context. The urban panopticon is a diagram of mechanisms that includes the psycho-spatial, psycho-social, and psycho-political effects of surveillance sets consisting of various control and control mechanisms in cities. This concept will enable the enrichment of two powerful fields, the city and surveillance, by producing its own literature, as well as the crystallization of the meaning and context arising from the evaluation of surveillance as a whole. In fact, when we look at the literature on surveillance within social theory, we see two common but opposing views: surveillance is either referred to as a tool of power or as one of the modern demographic participation mechanisms. Based on the field research data, this study put forward the concept of "Pragmatism of Surveillance" as a third way to reconcile these opposing approaches and strengthened it with various arguments. The pragmatism of surveillance refers to the fact that people living in cities in modern times regard surveillance as an indispensable element of their lives, putting "security" at the center. In this context, the argument that surveillance restricts freedom and violates private space is an issue that should be approached cautiously in terms of the urban panopticon. Similarly, residents of the high-security complex stated that security is the most important factor in choosing these locations, that surveillance regulates social relations within the complex and contributes to the revival of civilized society. Another striking finding here is the requests and demands of the residents of the site to have camera surveillance throughout the site, including the elevators, so as not to leave any gaps. Although the secure sites house the elites of the cities, almost all of the interviewees stated that the places where there is no camera can give the impression of "dereliction, anonymity, and desolation." In the study, this situation was identified with the "broken glass theory" and tried to be explained through this theory.