US Arms Trade Treaty: UN appoints Iran to key role in negotiating away your 2nd Amendment rights

BCNews note: Iran? Are you for real? Iran, with their lifelong stellar record on human rights has been put in charge of treaty enforcement that could eventually lead to us losing our guns and right to own them? Really? Is this the same UN that the Chamber of Commerce created several years ago? I’m sitting here with my tounge hanging out wandering what in the heck is going on? Why is the UN anywhere near our border with this bull?

Then I think again and it astounds me that we still give the Chamber of Commerce so much credibility in light of their Frankenstein type creation! Did anyone, even the Chamber think that they could create such an animal with such fangs. Then I think well everything the Chamber of Commerce does somehow points right back to the United Nations as if by design, as if they were trying to take over the world and replace her with some type of alternative plan. A plan so deviant even our neighbors couldn’t blame on the Chamber!

Where does it stop? When does someone say enough is enough? When does some brave soul say the UN has no right in our country so get the hades out!

Do we hand our guns over to a foreign entity at the behest of the Chamber that is in every community in the US and seemingly and well disguised as red white and blue as apple pie? Some are saying even if our senate repels this treaty our “gun info” will still be in the hands of the UN for global monitoring! Folks, better wake up! I have been told many times by many people “by golly if they come after my guns, then I’m gonna get mad” well, they are after your guns and will be real close to getting them as soon a July 27th, 2012.

Our two Senators in Tennessee Alexander and Corker cant seem to give anyone a straight answer when asked if they are going to vote on it or not! Senators this is a no brainer! This is the gem in the crown that keeps our nation and it’s people free! This is our second amendment rights! Please! What is so difficult about this.

A United Nations treaty on the trade of conventional arms could give enemies of the U.S. access to the records of American gun owners, say critics. (AP)
UNITED NATIONS –  A treaty being hammered out this month at the United Nations — with Iran playing a key role — could expose the records of America’s gun owners to foreign governments — and, critics warn, eventually put the Second Amendment on global trial.

International talks in New York are going on throughout July on the final wording of the so-called Arms Trade Treaty, which supporters such as Amnesty International USA say would rein in unregulated weapons that kill an estimated 1,500 people daily around the world. But critics, including the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre, warn the treaty would mark a major step toward the eventual erosion of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment gun-ownership rights.

Americans “just don’t want the UN to be acting as a global nanny with a global permission slip stating whether they can own a gun or not,” LaPierre said. “It cheapens our rights as American citizens, and weakens our sovereignty,” he warned in an exclusive interview with FoxNews.com from the halls of the UN negotiating chambers.

“It cheapens our rights as American citizens, and weakens our sovereignty.”
– Wayne LaPierre, National Rifle Association

The world body has already been criticized for appointing Iran to a key role in the talks, even as Tehran stands accused by the UN of arming Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s bloody crackdown on rebels. The Obama administration in 2009 reversed Bush administration policy by agreeing to take part in the talks. But in another exclusive interview with FoxNews.com, the top government official on the issue under President Bush says he’s seen nothing new to convince him the U.S. should be at the table today.

While the treaty’s details are still under discussion, the document could straitjacket U.S. foreign policy to the point where Washington could be restricted from helping arm friends such as Taiwan and Israel, said Greg Suchan, Deputy Assistant Secretary in the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs from 2000 to 2007.

Suchan also highlighted ongoing concern that the treaty may end up giving foreigners access to U.S. gun-ownership records.

On that score, LaPierre, who serves as NRA executive vice president, warns that the “UN’s refusal” to remove civilian firearms and ammunition from the scope of the treaty amounts to a declaration that only governments should be gun owners.

But he revealed he was set Wednesday to tell the UN gathering that 58 U.S. senators had signed a letter saying that they would refuse to ratify any treaty that includes controls over civilian guns or ammunition.

Ratification by two-thirds of the Senate is necessary before an international treaty negotiated by the executive branch can become U.S. law. But the treaty could still go into effect elsewhere once 65 countries ratify it. Such a development could change the pattern of world arms transfers and reduce the U.S. share, which stands at about 40 percent of up to $60 billion in global deals.

The Bush administration opposed a 2006 UN General Assembly resolution launching the treaty process, but President Obama decided the U.S. would take part on condition the final agreement be reached by consensus — thereby giving any of the 193 participating states an effective veto.

The safeguard is insufficient for opponents of the U.S. participation, not least because UN talks invariably involve compromise.

“The administration swears they have a whole bunch of red lines, and they will block consensus if anyone crosses them,” said Suchan, now a government relations consultant as senior associate with the Commonwealth Consulting Corporation in Arlington, Va.

“But the dynamics of international negotiations are that once you get 90 percent of what you seek, you say, ‘Maybe there is a way we can finesse the final 10 percent.’”

A clause permitting arms transfers solely between UN member states would allow UN member China to object to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, a non-UN member that China considers to be a renegade province.

This would be highly problematic for the U.S. at a time when Beijing is engaged in an unprecedented arms buildup.

Another fear is that Arab or other states critical of Israel may use any treaty language on human rights standards to argue against U.S. arms transfers to the Israeli government – much in the same way they currently use the UN Human Rights Council to repeatedly condemn Israel.

Suchan said U.S. arms trade law is seen as the global “gold standard” for regulating arms transfers, but doubted many countries would be willing to raise the bar that high. Instead, the treaty that emerges is expected to set a lower global standard – which Suchan said would have the effect of reducing Washington’s ability to press for voluntary arms embargoes against rogue states.

“We might want to urge a country to not sell arms to a state whose government is particularly odious,” Suchan explained.

“But that government could then ask whether the sale is prohibited under the Arms Trade Treaty – and if it is not, they would argue they are meeting the international standard.”

U.S. gun lobby concern focuses on the emphasis the treaty places on governmental – as opposed to individual – rights to guns, LaPierre explained.

“They’re trying to impose a UN policy that gives guns to the governments – but the UN doesn’t in turn make moral judgments as to whether these governments are good or bad,” he said.

“If you’re the government, you get the guns, if you’re a civilian, you don’t. But this will just end up helping evil governments and tyrants.”

For LaPierre, the emphasis he sees at the UN on governmental rights reflects what he believes is a wider international tradition that contrasts with the historical American emphasis on individual rights.

“The UN view is that governments – not individual citizens – ought to protect people,” he said, signaling that this principle permeates the draft that negotiators are currently working with.

LaPierre says the treaty that is likely to emerge will have the effect of squeezing individual gun owners in the United States and elsewhere by imposing on them an onerous collection of regulations.

“If they get this through, then what comes along is the institutionalizing of the whole gun control-ban movement within the bureaucracy of UN – with a permanent funding mechanism that we [in America] will be mainly paying for,” he said.

“The world’s worst human rights abusers will end up voting for this, while the Obama administration has not drawn a line in the sand like the previous administration did. Instead, it is trying to be a part of this train wreck because they think they can somehow finesse it. But, to me, there is no finessing the individual freedoms of American citizens.”

Source of info and we thank him for his generous contribution!
Steven Edwards is a UN-based freelance journalist
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/07/11/un-arms-treaty-could-put-us-gun-owners-in-foreign-sights-say-critics/#ixzz20Ms11rMk

UN Constitution being drafted for New World Order from Earth Summit in Rio

BCN Note- This is a tremendous article where Mrs Paugh describes very well our immediate future after the June 2012 Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. Preparatory meetings are going on now and the final plans are moving forward for the “big push” for the New World Order, Global Governance or a Sustainable World under International Law.

If the United Nations is successful getting this “covenant or new Constitution” signed into law, we will soon be under International Law where guns, control of land and certain freedoms we currently enjoy will be a thing of the past. Blue hats will be real familiar to us and the people directly under them will be known on a first name basis. We are a blink away and the realization of this plan as our new international constitution could very well be in our immediate lifetimes.

The chatter from social comments and twitter statements coming out of Rio right now are that this covenant will be a priority after the Summit closes in June 2012 and nothing will stop them. This is not might happen anymore, this is happening as I speak and the plans are being laid. Look at the obvious signs, google keywords. Not this might happen in a distant future, plans are being drawn in RIO right now by the US in conjunction with many others.

Strong International environmental law will rule the day with land regulations enforced by the EPA while strangling our ability to offset the heavy penalties that will ensue after unsustainable activity has occurred, thus forcing us into compliance and losing everything we have including our freedoms.

We are fixing to be cast into the perfect storm of Socialism with enforcement of International Law under the complete control of the UN! Large coporations are a direct part of this and the NGOs that are enabling them to include the Chamber of Commerce are willing pawns in the plot. The only thing at this time standing between us and world domination by the United Nations are our elected officials at all levels. You only hope that will be enough.

The Comprehensive Plans that you are hearing about precariously popping up in every county in the US and across the world will be the convenient tool already in place to easily facilitate the transition to global governance. It’s well thought out and begs to be realized as a pretty good “marketing” tool under the guise of climate change! Listen to the recurring themes being echoed across the world by every vested party, they have the same common green/sustainable/environmental and social themes and overt tones, too likely to be mere coincidence.

The early indicators, the majority of our locally elected officials are all on board to implement Comprehensive Plans to facilitate expansive land use/environmental regulations. Many at the State and Federal levels are being influenced by the persuasion techniques and monetary influence from NGOs posing as lobbyists heavily influencing the minds and votes of all on a daily basis.

The tide is turning, few have the backbone to fight it any longer. Environmental Green political correctness is making it appealing to move forward with very little resistance.

The ominous thing about all this is that Our current set of elected leaders could possibly go down in the history books as the persons responsible for Americas slide to Socialism or Communism! Not an envious position to be in if you ask me.

DICED is UN’s Environmental Constitution for the World

– Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh  Wednesday, March 21, 2012

I am sure there are many Americans who have no idea nor care what “The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development” (DICED) is. They should. Some call the Draft Covenant “Agenda 21 on steroids” while others see it as the “Environmental Constitution of global governance.”

The first version of the Covenant was presented to the United Nations in 1995 on the occasion of its 50th anniversary. It was hoped that it would become a negotiating document for a global treaty on environmental conservation and sustainable development.

The fourth version of the Covenant, issued on September 22, 2010, was written to control all development tied to the environment, “the highest form of law for all human activity.’

The Covenant’s 79 articles, described in great detail in 242 pages, take Sustainable Development principles described in Agenda 21 and transform them into global law, which supersedes all constitutions including the U.S. Constitution.

All signatory nations, including the U.S., would become centrally planned, socialist countries in which all decisions would be made within the framework of Sustainable Development.

In collaboration with Earth Charter and Elizabeth Haub Foundation for Environmental Policy and Law from Canada, the Covenant was issued by the International Council on Environmental Law (ICEL) in Bonn, Germany, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) with offices in Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Federal agencies that are members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) include U.S. Department of State, Commerce, Agriculture (Forest Service), Interior (Fish and Wildlife, National Park Service), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The same agencies are members of the White House Rural Council and the newly established White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities (Executive Order, March 15, 2012).

The Draft Covenant is a blueprint “to create an agreed single set of fundamental principles like a ‘code of conduct’ used in many civil law, socialist, and theocratic traditions, which may guide States, intergovernmental organizations, and individuals.”

The writers describe the Covenant as a “living document,” a blueprint that will be adopted by all members of the United Nations.  They say that global partnership is necessary in order to achieve Sustainable Development, by focusing on “social and economic pillars.” The writers are very careful to avoid the phrase, “one world government.” Proper governance is necessary on all levels, “from the local to the global.” (p.36) 

The Covenant underwent four writings, in 1995, 2000, 2004, and 2010, influenced by the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, by ideas of development control and social engineering by the United Nations, “leveling the playing field for international trade, and having a common basis of future lawmaking.”

Article 3 proposes that the entire globe should be under “the protection of international law.”
Article 11 discusses “equity” and “equitable manner” which are code words for communism.
Article 16 requires that all member nations must adopt environmental conservation into all national decisions.
Article 20 requires that all nations must “mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.” If we ratify this document, we must thus fight a non-existent man-made climate change.
Article 31 requires the eradication of poverty by spreading the wealth from developed nations to developing countries.
Article 32 requires recycling. 
Article 33 demands that countries calculate “the size of the human population their environment is capable of supporting and to implement measures that prevent the population from exceeding that level.”
Article 33 delineates long-term resettlement and estimating the “carrying capacity of the environment.”
Article 34 demands the maintenance of an open and non-discriminatory international trading system in which “prices of commodities and raw materials reflect the full direct and indirect social and environmental costs of their extraction, production, transport, marketing, and where appropriate, ultimate disposal.” The capitalist model of supply and demand pricing does not matter.
Article 36 describes military and hostile activities.
Article 39 decides management plans and quotas for permissible taking or “harvesting transboundary biological resources.”
Article 41 requires integrated planning systems, irrespective of administrative boundaries within a country, and is based on Paragraph 10.5 of Agenda 21, which seeks to “facilitate allocation of land to the uses that provide the greatest sustainable benefits and to promote the transition to a sustainable and integrated management of land resources.” The impact assessment procedure is developed by the World Bank.
“Aquifers, drainage basins, coastal, marine areas, and any areas called ecological units must be taken into account when allocating land for municipal, agricultural, grazing, forestry, and other uses.” Agricultural subsidies are discouraged, as well as subsidizing private enterprises.
“Physical planning must follow an integrated approach to land use – infrastructure, highways, railways, waterways, dams, and harbors. Town and country planning must include land use plans elaborated at all levels of government.”
Article 48 demands that biotechnology from research and development and royalties be shared; free access and transfer of technology is also required.
Article 51 reveals that we will have to pay for these repressive new requirements while Article 52 shows that we must pay 0.7 percent of GDP for Official Development Assistance. This reaffirms the political commitment made in Paragraph 33.13 of Agenda 21 in 1992.
Article 69 deals with settlement of disputes by an arbitrary tribunal such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the International Court of Justice, or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Article 71 describes the amendment process, which is submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. UN Secretary-General would review the implementation of this document every five years.
Writers of the Draft Covenant are the UN Secretariat, international lawyers, and U.S. professors from Cornell, Princeton, Pace University, Middlebury College, George Washington University Law School, Bucknell University, University of Indiana, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Meadville Theological School, University of the Pacific, two General Counsel Representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, and two attorneys in private practice.

Since this Draft Covenant has a Preamble and 79 articles, it is obviously intended to be a world constitution for global governance, an onerous way to control population growth, re-distribute wealth, force social and “economic equity and justice,” economic control, consumption control, land and water use control, and re-settlement control as a form of social engineering.

Bradley County, Chattanooga region receive their “Death, Color Zone” designations

This is an urgent notice to all citizens living in Bradley County and the Chattanooga Region. Your Mayors have voluntarily taken the necessary steps to place you into a specified “Death Color Zones! Your property rights are at extreme risk! YOU WILL EVENTUALLY LOSE YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS!

The Mayors of 16 surrounding counties in 3 States have knowingly, willingly and covertly placed you into your very own “Death, Color Zone!” Their willing participation to sign on with the Chattanooga Regional Growth plan with ICLEI, a well documented component in the implementation of Agenda 21, has put us at great risk and will have a long lasting effect on our county and region for generations to come.

Because of recent actions of a collective of Mayors at the direction of The Southeast Tennessee Economic Development Council, its Board Chairman, Bradley County Mayor Gary Davis and Cleveland Mayor Tom Rowland we have now have the Chattanooga Region ready for “Color Zone” designation. The “Biodiversity Simulation Map” or “Death Map” is being used as a guide!

Bradley Counties URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY, the designated area being appointed by the Counties growth plan, will result into a herding of all citizens into these designated areas known as “Black Zone” color to include Hamilton County as another “black” zone!

This “Black Zone” color designation means this will be a population area only! The “Red Color Zone” is reserved for the more rural areas and will be uninhabitable consisting of mostly National Parks, forests and recreation areas!

You can clearly see Polk County and other counties in the region fall into the “Red Zone!” The “Red Zones” and it’s citizens will eventually be displaced into “Black Zones” better known as the Urban Growth Boundaries! If you are doubting this plan, does it surprise you that every county in the US has a “Comprehensive Growth Plan” of some kind with a specific Urban Growth Boundary! The reason for that is explained in this article.

The Wildlands Project and UN Convention on Biological Diversity Plan to Restore Biodiversity in the United States!

See the map and the following paragraph on this site! See where your home will fall within the “death zone!”

http://www.discerningtoday.org/wildlands_map_of_us.htm
 
You may purchase an 11″ X 17″ laminated print of this map for $13.00
 
The Wildlands Project would set up to one-half of America into core wilderness reserves and interconnecting corridors (red), all surrounded by interconnecting buffer zones (yellow).

No human activity would be permitted in the red, and only highly regulated activity would be permitted in the yellow areas. Four concerned conservative activists who now make up the board of Sovereignty International were able to find UN documentation that proved the Wildlands Project concept was to provide the basis for the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

They used this information and this map produced by Dr. Michael Coffman, editor of Discerning the Times Digest and NewsBytes and CEO of Sovereignty International, to stop the ratification of the treaty an hour before its scheduled cloture and ratification vote. (See Congressional Record S13790)

Since the treaty was stopped, tens of thousands of Americans have used this map to expose environmentalist’s efforts to implement this diabolical agenda piecemeal local(plan), just as President Clinton did by setting aside millions of acres of public and private land. © 2000 Discerning the Times Digest and NewsBytes. 

Taken From: The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8a-e; United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment, Section 13.4.2.2.3; US Man and the Biosphere Strategic Plan, UN/US Heritage Corridor Program, “The Wildlands Project”, Wild Earth, 1992,. Also see Science, “The High Cost of Biodiversity,” 25 June, 1993, pp 1968-1871 and the Border 21 Sidebar of NAFTA. The very high percentage of buffer zone in the West is due to the very high percentage of federal land.

With the assistance of clumps of HUD housing and grants in the multiple millions this will much more easily be a reality. Your recent MOA (Memorandum of Agreement) signed by our region, will use millions of tax payers dollars to herd them into Urban Growth areas! Your willing participation with HUD, the EPA and DOT along with other NGOs (Non Governmental Organizations) while forging Public Private Partnerships with the Chamber of Commerce, you are willingly putting everyone you represent at great risk!

Look below, and see where your decisions today will leave the many people you represent!

Agenda 21 and the United Nations and many “green movements” and many “useful idiots” of our elected conglomerate have a plan that moves people into zones and the 2035 BCC Strategic Growth Plan clearly recognizes this and gives it several names, but the death map demonstrates this designation as “Color Zones which reflect property owners being forced from their property and into a “human Settlement” within a “Rural, urban or designated growth area represented as a color designation on the map.
The Counties you represent will fall into these ominous colors and represent a redistribution of our populace to make it in their minds the most “sustainable.” After all, “Urban Sprawl” is a formidable enemy to sustainability and its goals that come with it!

The color zones are recognized by color schemes and their designations are in parentheses as how it will fall on the Biodiversity Map after our counties are manipulated according to this Agenda 21 plan and the will of our negligent self saving Mayors!

RED- No human presence!
YELLOW- Buffer zone around Red area with very controlled limited access!
BLACK DOT- Where people in red and yellow areas will be relocated (human settlements)
TENNESSEE:
Polk County (red)
Bradley County (Red and Yellow)
Cleveland (Black dot)
Hamilton-Chattanooga (Black Dot)
Bledsoe (Red and Yellow)
Rhea (Red and Yellow)
McMinn (Mostly Yellow)
Marion (Mostly Red)
Sequatchie (Red)
Meigs (Red)

ALABAMA:

Jackson County (Red)
Dekalb (Yellow)

GEORGIA:

Catoosa (Red and Yellow)
Murray (Red and Yellow)
Walker (Yellow)
Dade (Yellow)
Whitfield (Yellow)

Notice where the Black Dots fall! Who are the noticeable recipients that will receive the bulk of the population growth? Yes, Chattanooga/Hamilton and Cleveland/Bradley County and the appointed leaders, Mayors Rowland, Davis and Littlefield and their local Chambers of Commerces!

The plan is in place!

It is the will of the people who should stop this madness!
We are the tenants of a Republic protected and guided by the Constitution!
We are not willing participants in our demise and we must not allow this to be a reality, God help us!
We are in this battle for the long haul.
Mayors and all willing participants in this scheme, you are being placed on notice! A very concerted effort to remove you from office either by recall or at the election ballot box will be inevitable.
The decision is yours!
Your political fate is in your hands! Your deciisions are now affecting millions! The public is becoming informed and an informed public makes very wise decisions on the fate of their county!

Deciding to join with ICLEI out of Chattanooga shows very poor judgement as this Non Governmental Organization is a direct component of the United Nations and shows that you have now stepped up as a willing participant and placed the people in a death zone!

What is PUD? Planned Unit Development in Bradley County! Will regulate our socks off!

On the surface and in the local paper it seemed pretty benign. Oh lets see we have county planner Corey Divel announcing that he is going to introduce this little ole program called PUD (panned Unit Development Standards), yawn? Right? Wrong!

This is the only reason I started this news blog site! I am so tired of lazy reporting or should I say one sided, complicit reporting, if that is more fitting! You can just about count on every person in town that wants report something, yet leave the public uninformed intentionally, you can bet it will come from our local press!

I was glancing over the local paper yesterday and noticed the PUD story! At first I glance I lost interest pretty quickly! It was short, precise and perhaps intentional without alot of details! That should gave been my first clue to cue in but I didn’t! I put the paper away thinking I was done with it. The thought of PUD kept racing through my head! What is PUD? Sounds boring and non harmful!

Well, I went to my trusty search engine and put in PUD! Just PUD! I glanced over the PUD-Peptic Ulcer Disease websites and within one minute I was on to them! Like a prized coon dog picking up the scent. In this case, it was the Agenda 21, United Nations, and ICLEI scent! The dirty rascals almost slipped one by me and the uninformed public that they are supposed to be informing, well they went uninformed! After all they do accept payment for these stories, why not the complete truth?

PUD to me is more like a plethora of projects with many tentacles that as they unfold should scare you to death! Again,if we are unknowing when we accept these programs into our community and are clueless when they get here, you can count on Bradley County News to uncover them!

This beast is chocked full of every land, construction, electrical, water, zoning, annexation, eminent domain, lights, sewer, front yard, open space, agriculture, commercial, private and farm regulation you could possibly think of! ICLEI uses it to do what they want! The UN sits back and says aha another secret way to implement Agenda21!

I have started out slow with just a simple definition from Wikipedia and some of the history!

Tune in later to see what I have found! Some of these regulations and plans for Bradley County should make you shake in fear!

Search your self in the meantime! It costs nothing but a few minutes of your time! Read closely and think about the impact of some of those words and then think about the affect it will have on your county and your life!

Can’t wait till I put together the rest of this story! You will be blown away!

A planned unit development (PUD), is both a type of building development as well as a regulatory process. A PUD is a designed grouping of varied and compatible land uses, such as housing, recreation, commercial centers, and industrial parks, all within one contained development or subdivision.

History

The origins of PUDs in the new American communities can be traced to British movements during the 1950’s. The developments in Britain’s new communities dealt with the locations of industrial elements and how they were publicly dictated before building ever began in order to uphold an economic base. However, in America, privately controlled communities often had to attract industry after the residential sectors had been built and occupied.

The newest forms of the planned unit development in America were found shortly after World War II in the Levittowns and Park Forest as whole communities within the limits and orbits of large metropolitan centers. The first zoning evidence of PUD was created by Prince Georges County, Maryland in 1949. It “permit[ed] the development of a large tract of land as a complete neighborhood unit, having a range of dwelling types, the necessary local shopping facilities and off-street parking areas, parks, playgrounds, school sites, and other community facilities,” (Burchell 43). Alexandria, Virginia, in 1952, as an amendment to its city code, provided for a “Community Unit Plan” with the intent to provide for planned community facilities and open space development with new residential building. One of the first modern uses of the actual term planned unit development appeared in San Francisco’s ordinance in 1962.

Definitions

Planned unit development is a means of land regulation which promotes large scale, unified land development by means of mid-range, realistic programs in chase of physically curable, social and economic deficiencies in land and cityscapes. Where appropriate, this development control promotes:

A mixture of both land uses and dwelling types with at least one of the land uses being regional in nature
The clustering of residential land uses providing public and common open space
Increased administrative discretion to a local professional planning staff while setting aside present land use regulations and rigid plat approval processes
The enhancement of the bargaining process between the developer and government municipalities which in turn strengthens the municipality’s site plan review and control over development for potentially increased profits due to land efficiency, multiple land uses, and increased residential densities.
Frequently, PUDs take on a variety of forms ranging from small clusters of houses combined with open spaces to new and developing towns with thousands of residents and various land uses. However, the definition of a PUD does not take into consideration these types of developments unless they fit into a category of size ranging from 100 to 200 acres (40 to 81 ha). In a PUD the property owner owns the land the dwelling sits on. So they say!

Mixtures of land uses

In PUDs, the zoning of districts becomes very different from what was standard under the Standard Zoning Enabling Act. Historically, the districts were very narrow in type and large in area. Within PUDs, zoning becomes much more integrated with multiple land uses and districts being placed on adjacent land parcels.

Residential properties in PUDs are by far the most numerous and occupy the largest land areas. PUDs tend to incorporate single-family residential uses within close proximity to two-family units and multiple-family dwellings to form a larger diversified neighborhood concept. Schools, churches, retirement homes, hospitals, and recreation facilities begin to find their way into residential districts. Residential districts also tend to use the best land in the community and the most favorable sites are protected from commercial and industrial uses.

Grouping shopping districts by service area is a first step in returning to the neighborhood concept. Land is reserved for regional, community, and local shopping clusters with some specific restrictions based on market experience and on what types of business intend to locate at each development. Local shopping districts with sufficient provisions for off-street parking, height restrictions, and traffic control are not frequently found surrounded by residential areas.

Industrial standards now help to reduce the journey for employees to work. Nowadays, there tends to be environmental and performance regulations that cut back on the amount of nuisance to surrounding areas adjacent to industrial districts. With sufficient setbacks, off-street parking, and height regulations, industrial locations adjacent to residential zones are usually looked to as an overall community goal. PUDs do not normally have large numbers of industrial districts, but if so, they tend to be geared more towards light industry.

A planned residential unit development (PRUD) (sometimes planned unit residential development (PURD)) is a variant form of PUD where common areas are owned by the individual homeowners and not a home owners association or other entity. A PRUD is considered the same as a PUD for planning commission purposes and allows for flexibility in zoning and civic planning.

Design principles

Houses and placement of houses

Houses in PUDs often include access to a large shared open space surrounding the house as well as a smaller private yard. These large protected open spaces are created by the layout of the buildings and are intended for use by all residents of the developments. Different housing types (single-family, two-family, multiple-family) are often mixed rather than separated as is done in conventional development

Streets

Street patterns are one of the most important elements in establishing the neighborhood character of a residential community. Most non-PUD development focuses on obtaining maximum frontage for lot sizes and maximum flow of traffic on all streets. However, in order to dispel the monotony of the typical grid plan street pattern, PUDs often employ a hierarchy of street types based on usage. Local streets serve only residences and have a low traffic volume, while collector streets connect local streets to arterials, which are the major routes of travel throughout a PUD.

Sidewalks and pedestrian ways

Sidewalks and pedestrian ways of PUDs supplement and complement street systems in establishing the character of the neighborhood. Sidewalks are located on at least one side of every street to enable the walkability of the developments. Circulation systems are provided to link residential groupings, open space areas, schools, and local shopping areas.

Combining design features

It is in the ability to design each of these components simultaneously that makes PUDs unique and effective. Each of the elements work together to enhance the whole. This a major advantage over traditional zoning practices that force lots to be planned in accordance with broad rules that may allow for some incompatibility.

References:

Burchell, Robert. Planned Unit Development: New Communities American Style. New Jersey: MacCrellish & Quigley, 1972.
New York City Planning Commission. Planned Unit Development. New York: Planning Department, 1968.

Contributing source: Wikipedia