I see, it's quite interesting to learn about such nuances in different countries. In your case it definitely makes sense. Also I liked your point about land, for some reason I forgot to mention it in my answer. Anyway, I agree with you, that except some hard work related to the house, you also have some significant advantages.
Yeah, it's like a dead elephant. Even if it's dead it's worth a lot. You win in both cases. And when you have those kinds of advantages, I'm going with the option d. It is the best in my opinion. As the owner you rent out the place and just do a little bit of maintenance every now and then. That's all it takes to be a house owner here in my country.
There aren't any passive income as easy as owning a house. But as you explained earlier, The story is different from place to place. Maybe in my country it is a good thing for having those advantages. But it could be a pain in the ass if you are from a place where you have to do most of the hard works and pay for everything. It is also a pain here too but not in traditional houses but only in hotels. Rather than owning a hotel I would prefer a house for sure. In a hotel, people stay for few days or hours and they damage all the shit they want and you are the one who will have to pay for that. So that's not a very good business idea. So yeah option d could be favorable based on places and rules and regulation that place have.