Things like the density are important (4 units/ac), but what about minimum lot widths, frontage, setbacks, mitigation or environmental?

How about we phrase it something like:"Healthy, green, environmentally equitable, socially just, cross-fit house for rent. 

Just price conscious and not in need of high speed internet.

The design needs to be cost conscious but still appealing.

Environmental Protection Agency estimates that toilets consume 27 percent of indoor water usage.Property managers and landlords sink 25 to 35 percent of their operating costs into utilities, while water costs, in particular, are up an estimated 200 percent in the past 15 years.Meanwhile, small, barely noticeable leaks may add $900 to yearly water statements, with larger leaks totaling, in some cases, $4,000.

While the argument is based solely on the potential environmental advantages, utility costs will be dramatically higher at the current electricity vs. natural gas rates in Ontario (at least in London). 

If your conscious gets the best of you, just disclose! 

You have to have a phase 1 environmental study done, not to mention a wetlands survey, and depending on the results you could be required to do a phase 2 or 3 environmental study.

We have far more environmental regulations that we have to contend with, along with a lack of available supply of land.  

Additionally, the color approval (and everything else, it seems) is scrutinized and decided by an "environmental control committee" and not the design committee.