There is also the potential to fit another unit, which would actually decrease my construction costs (less total sq feet), but increase sales costs.

Going back to the deed type, usually when you're transferring from personal name to an entity, you're still in the mix, so it's not as if Party B (the entity) would be potentially receiving clouded title from Party A (the individual[s]), but if down the line there's a change on the property, they'll go back and look at that transfer and wonder why the full covenants may not necessarily be represented from that transfer. 

or is this too risky a strategy to engage in?

As for the second option, the 25% down payment is substantial, potentially straining your liquidity.

While these choices can be striking and unique, they may not necessarily resonate with a broader audience, especially potential tenants.

Risk Management: What potential risks should I be aware of with this strategy, particularly in these markets?

Depending on the state it could take you 1 to 2 months for the eviction and then potentially another month to get the property back.

Hi David,Thank you for your insight, the investment cost does seem high but could potentially be justified.

My initial thought, and hope, is that you purchased the property because it has high upside potential, and that after stabilizing the asset, you'll be in a better position.

I know nothing about raw land and its potential.