What tells me a lot is your use of HUD this or that in your statements.
I’m sure I don’t need to post all the confining and restrictive rules one might commonly see in most any park, but the use of HUD etc. bespeaks of urbanized or urbanized influence frankly.
You know the kind of urban where a bikini clad sunbather girl could get beat up by a bunch of Muslim Thug zealot females, or a white girl with a baby could be beat down by some black girls who don’t think she should be there (all the while one of Obama’s sons twerk dancing at the melee). Or where if you happen to be doing something any protected minority thinks you shouldn’t get the crap beaten out of you and it gets posted on Youtube....
Don’t buy it. If you want nature, buy your own.
You have read the new HUD rules, right? And the recent Supreme Court decision on the use of disparate impact in housing policy? Or at least seen the various threads here on them?
Of particular interest is the part in the new HUD rules that orders localities to look at housing outcomes from a regional perspective. Again, there have been threads here on that, worth looking over. In any event, from the new HUD rules outer-ring suburbs and even exurbs get drawn into the “urban” areas for calculating impact.
One solution is not to take HUD money. But thanks to the Supreme Court decision on disparate impact that may not even be enough to escape court judgements (or, more likely, consent decrees from cowed local leaders).
The only way would be to tie the land up now, someway.