I tried to fight the proposed bill, but it got passed.

I would be inclined to bundle the rents and allow them to sublet it with you getting final veto rights on any proposed tenant.

They usually have regulations on the # of dwellings per acre and I’d hate for you to spend money designing bringing utilities to the site only to be in a city council meeting where the local neighbors shut down the proposed development. 

Your suggestion does not provide any greater protection than the proposed transaction.

Doing it the way you have it proposed will be a monumental time suck and not worth it.

Myself and a partner have a potential opportunity for a spec build, and I am trying to run numbers for the proposal.

Sellers, in light of this new proposed ruling, will have a knee jerk reaction, but in time they will themselves see the importance of having to compensate for greater buyer attention.We came out of a white flame hot covid market where commissions were flying, sellers were getting paid, and buyers were getting smoked if they couldn't bring 100K above ask. 

Additionally, they don't have the time or resources to research and investigate Owners calling with questions on legality of property/building renovations or proposed changes.

My only concern is single-family rents could be flat for a few years due to the big run-up we've had in the past few years.In general, I like your proposed strategy.

I proposed a couple owner financed terms to them and they returned with this one:Sale Price: $300,000 $25,000 Down. 3% interest. 5 year balloon. ($244K ish) This is obviously far better than any bank can give me with interests rates around 7.5% here non owner occupied.