ROOK

REAL ESTATE DEAL ANALYSIS & FINANCIAL MODELING

Ember Coop Fire-Grilled Chicken — Miami-Dade Drive-Thru Entry

Tenant Representation Package — Sabal Point Restaurant Group, LLC · build-to-suit ground lease versus second-generation conversion

SUBMARKETMiami-Dade County

UNDERWRITTEN AUV$2,814,971

RECOMMENDED RENT$58.00/SF NNN

NPV @ 9.0% / 15 YR$1,825,445

§1 · Assignment

The most site-constrained brief in retail

The tenant. Sabal Point Restaurant Group, LLC — an eleven-unit franchisee of Ember Coop Fire-Grilled Chicken, expanding from Broward and Palm Beach into Miami-Dade under a four-unit development agreement.
The requirement. 2,600 SF freestanding on a 0.85–1.05 acre pad, tandem dual-order-point drive-thru, twelve-car stack. Sixty-eight percent of sales arrive through the window.
The constraint. A site that cannot queue twelve cars cannot open — regardless of rent, traffic count, or trade area. That single gate is what makes this the hardest assignment in tenant representation.

Underwritten AUV

$2.81M

547 transactions/day × $14.10 × 365

Required stack

12 cars

240 linear feet — 2.4× the Miami 21 code minimum

Miami-Dade mobility fee

$90.48

per SF, fast-food with drive-thru, Context Zone 3

Two strategies were screened against each other, not in sequence: a build-to-suit ground lease on a raw pad, and a second-generation conversion of an existing drive-thru envelope — a former drive-in bank branch, a coffee unit, or a dark QSR. In a 3.0%-vacancy county with a $90-per-foot impact fee on new drive-thru construction, the existing envelope is the premium product and the raw pad is the fallback. That inverts the conventional development instinct.

§2 · Thesis

Cash rent is half the story

A drive-thru QSR is a capital-heavy business wearing a retail lease. The tenant funds the building, the canopy, the dual order point, the kitchen line and — in Miami-Dade — a six-figure mobility fee. That capital has to earn a return before a dollar of rent is paid. Any comparison of a ground-up pad against a second-generation conversion that stops at cash rent reaches the wrong answer, because the pad’s cheap rent is bought with expensive capital.

Rook prices the capital. Amortized at the operator’s 9.0% cost of capital over the fifteen-year term, tenant capital converts into an annual charge directly comparable to rent — and the ranking inverts.

Metric	Site A — BTS ground-lease pad	Site C — second-gen conversion
Tenant capital	$2,389,497	$1,997,864
Annual cash occupancy (rent + NNN)	$222,589	$239,195
Cash occupancy-cost ratio	7.91%	8.50%
Capital rent equivalent (CRF 0.12406)	$296,438	$247,853
Total economic occupancy	18.44%	17.31%

On cash rent the pad wins by 59 basis points. On total economic cost the conversion wins by 113. The pad’s advantage is an accounting artifact of who holds the capital, and it reverses the moment the capital is priced.

§3 · Headline

The recommendation

Recommended site

Site C

Marlin Point — second-generation drive-thru conversion, US-1 at SW 152 St

NPV @ 9.0%, 15 yr, net of capital

$1.83M

$251,671 ahead of the build-to-suit pad

Year-2 cash-on-cash / payback

21.0%

4.76-year simple payback vs 5.47 on the pad

Opening offer

$58.00/SF

$168,200/yr. Cash occupancy is exactly 8.50% of AUV — the franchisor’s approval gate. Not a posture; the number the brand’s real-estate committee is solving for.

Settlement ceiling

$66.00/SF

$191,400/yr. 9.32% occupancy, 19.98% cash-on-cash, 5.01-year payback. Full negotiating authority to here.

Walk-away

$72.59/SF

$210,502/yr. Above this the franchisor will not approve the site at any return. The landlord’s $74.00 ask sits outside the range.

The gap between the ask and the walk-away is $4,098 a year — the landlord is asking roughly 2% more than the maximum any version of this tenant can pay. A reported Miami-Dade drive-thru conversion transacted at $72/SF against a $95/SF list, a 24% concession. The concession required here is 11%.

§4 · Queue Design

Why twelve cars, and why the code says five

This is the gate that decides the assignment, so it is derived rather than asserted. Peak-hour drive-thru volume is 12% of daily transactions; the peak fifteen minutes carries 35% of the peak hour; opening-period volumes run 1.8× stabilized. The window cycle is the bottleneck. Treating it as an M/M/1 server, the 95th-percentile queue is n₉₅ = ln(0.05) ÷ ln(ρ), where ρ = λ ÷ μ.

Configuration	Scenario	λ cars/hr	μ cars/hr	ρ	95th-pct queue
Single order point (35 s cycle)	Stabilized	62.5	102.9	0.608	6.0 cars
Single order point (35 s cycle)	Opening period (1.8×)	112.5	102.9	1.094	UNSTABLE
Tandem dual order point (24 s)	Stabilized	62.5	150.0	0.417	3.4 cars
Tandem dual order point (24 s)	Opening period (1.8×)	112.5	150.0	0.750	10.4 cars

The stabilized run rate does not justify twelve cars

At steady state a single order point handles the peak with a six-car queue. A broker who sizes the site to stabilized volume hands the client a site that works in year three and fails in month two.

The opening period is the design condition

At ρ = 1.094 the single-order-point system is saturated: arrivals exceed service capacity, the queue is unbounded, and the only limit is how many drivers give up. The franchisor’s twelve-car spec is the tandem configuration’s 10.4-car result plus a 15% design buffer.

Miami 21 Article 6, Table 13 requires five reservoir spaces — one at the window, three before, one after. One hundred linear feet. The franchisor specification is 2.4× the code minimum, and Miami-Dade’s unincorporated code sets no numeric restaurant stacking standard at all. Code compliance is not evidence that a site works. A drive-thru can satisfy every zoning requirement and remain commercially unusable.

§5 · Unit Economics

AUV built from transactions upward

Daypart	Tx/day	Check	Sales/day
Breakfast 06:00–10:30	97	$8.75	$848.75
Lunch 10:30–14:00	176	$15.50	$2,728.00
Afternoon 14:00–17:00	82	$11.25	$922.50
Dinner 17:00–21:00	138	$18.00	$2,484.00
Late 21:00–24:00	54	$13.50	$729.00
Total / blended	547	$14.10	$7,712.25

AUV = $7,712.25 × 365 = $2,814,971. Drive-thru share 68% = 372 cars/day. Calibrated between Panda Express ($2.592M) and Chipotle ($3.2M) — QSR 50, 2024 data.

Store-level P&L	% AUV	Amount
Food and paper	30.5%	$858,566
Labor incl. taxes and benefits	27.5%	$774,117
Controllables	9.5%	$267,422
Franchise royalty	5.0%	$140,749
National ad fund	4.0%	$112,599
EBITDAR — available for occupancy	23.5%	$661,518

Everything the site can pay — base rent, percentage rent, taxes, insurance, CAM, and the return on the tenant’s own capital — comes out of $661,518. The negotiation is a fight over how that number is divided between the landlord and the tenant’s balance sheet.

§6 · Signature Exhibit

Maximum supportable rent, walk-away rent, indifference rent

Three numbers a negotiator can use, each shown as a formula.

Step	Formula	Site A — BTS	Site C — conversion
EBITDAR	AUV × (1 − COGS − labor − controllables − royalty − ad fund)	$661,518	$661,518
(1) Required EBITDA	tenant capital × 18.0% hurdle	$430,109	$359,616
(2) Max supportable total occupancy	EBITDAR − required EBITDA	$231,409	$301,903
NNN load	just value × millage + insurance + CAM	$69,839	$70,995
(3) Maximum supportable base / ground rent	(2) − NNN load	$161,570 · $62.14/SF	$230,908 · $79.62/SF
(4) Franchisor target rent	(8.5% × AUV) − NNN	$169,434	$168,278 · $58.03/SF
(5) Franchisor cap rent	(10.0% × AUV) − NNN	$211,659	$210,502
(6) Capital floor rent	EBITDAR − (capital × 14.0%) − NNN	$257,150	$310,822
(7) Walk-away rent	MIN of (5) and (6)	$211,659 · $81.41/SF	$210,502 · $72.59/SF

The build-to-suit inverts. Its maximum supportable ground rent ($161,570) sits below the rent the 8.5% occupancy gate would allow ($169,434) — the capital hurdle binds first. The site could pass the franchisor’s occupancy test at a rent the balance sheet cannot fund. Against a $152,750 ask that is only $8,820 of headroom, and the breakeven AUV is $2,777,438, just 1.3% below plan.

Indifference rent = $69.03/SF.
(Site A cash occupancy + Site A capital rent equivalent) − Site C capital rent equivalent − Site C NNN = ($222,589 + $296,438) − $247,853 − $70,995 = $200,179 ÷ 2,900 SF. Below $69.03/SF the conversion beats the pad on total economic cost. The negotiating team should be told this number, not just the walk-away.

§7 · Capital

Build-to-suit budget versus conversion budget

Line item	Site A — build-to-suit	Site C — conversion
Building shell, MEP, interior fit (2,600 SF @ $340/SF)	$884,000	—
Interior conversion / tenant fit (2,900 SF @ $255/SF)	—	$739,500
Vault removal, teller-line demo, structural patching	—	$68,000
Drive-thru: dual order point, canopy, boards, technology	$118,000	$142,000
Site work, paving, retention / queue reconfiguration	$168,000	$88,000
Miami-Dade impact / mobility fees	$242,657	$212,624
A&E, permitting, traffic study, entitlement	$185,000	$76,000
Signage	$96,000	$88,000
FF&E, kitchen line, POS, drive-thru technology	$428,000	$428,000
Pre-opening and franchise fee	$140,000	$140,000
Contingency @ 8% of hard cost + FF&E	$127,840	$117,240
Less landlord TI / work allowance @ $35/SF	—	($101,500)
Total tenant capital	$2,389,497 · $919/SF	$1,997,864 · $689/SF
Rent equivalent — capital × CRF(9.0%, 15) = 0.12406	$296,438/yr	$247,853/yr

Miami-Dade charges a fast-casual restaurant $18.801/SF and a fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru $90.478/SF — 4.8× more. The county prices the trip-generation externality of the drive-through directly. A national cost guide quoting Florida impact fees at $7,000–$15,700 per 2,500 SF understates this line by roughly $200,000. The conversion does not escape the fee — it pays the differential from the drive-in bank rate, which is 79% of the greenfield charge.

The conversion can pay $48,586 a year more in cash rent than the pad and leave the operator in exactly the same economic position — $16.75 per square foot of additional rent capacity, created purely by not building a building.

§8 · Site Matrix

Four candidates, two gates

Gates first, scoring second. A site failing any hard gate is removed and is not scored, because a nine-car queue does not become a twelve-car queue because the landlord offered four months free.

Gate	Site A — Cordova Crossing Pad	Site B — Ridgeline Pad	Site C — Marlin Point Conversion	Site D — Allapattah Endcap
Achievable stack (≥12 cars)	14 — PASS	9 — FAIL	13 — PASS	6 — FAIL
Drive-through without a hearing	Administrative	Administrative	Existing lawful use	Warrant — FAIL
Access: 2 cuts, 1 full-movement	2 / 1 FM	RIRO only — FAIL	2 / 1 FM	Shared — FAIL
Frontage AADT (FDOT 2025)	70,500	52,500	57,500	28,500
Hours to 23:00 or later	PASS	PASS	PASS	22:00 — FAIL
Environmental	Clean	Open REC — FAIL	Clean	Clean
Result	ADVANCE	ELIMINATED	ADVANCE	ELIMINATED

Weighted criterion	Weight	Site A	Site C
Achievable stack margin over spec	14	126	112
Access, curb cuts, signalization, side of road	14	126	112
Frontage AADT and visibility	12	120	96
Trade-area demographics and daytime population	11	99	88
Total economic occupancy cost	16	96	128
Capital intensity and payback	12	60	108
Schedule to open and entitlement risk	11	66	110
Signage rights	6	54	42
Co-tenancy and competitive density	4	24	24
Total	100	771 — 77.1%	820 — 82.0%

Site D’s modeled NPV of $1,294,895 ranks third of four — and is unachievable. It presumes an AUV a six-car queue cannot deliver and ignores both the Warrant probability and the 22:00 hours restriction. It is shown here specifically to demonstrate what a scoring model produces when it is fed a site that should have been gated out. That is why gates precede scoring.

§9 · Corridors

Miami-Dade drive-thru geography

Every count below is a specific FDOT 2025 count-site record, identified so it can be independently retrieved. K is the design-hour factor; D is the directional distribution factor.

SR-94 · North Kendall Drive

Segment	Site	AADT	D
SW 152 → SW 137 Ave	871080	59,500	61.0
SW 137 → SW 127 Ave	870060	70,500	61.0
SW 127 → SW 117 Ave	870062	87,000	61.0
SW 117 → SW 107 Ave	870592	50,000	61.0

US-41 · SW 8th Street (Tamiami Trail)

Segment	Site	AADT	D
SW 127 Ave → HEFT	872561	47,500	61.0
HEFT → SW 107 Ave	870090	52,500	61.0
SW 87 Ave → SR-826	870092	59,000	61.0

US-1 · South Dixie Highway

Segment	Site	AADT	D
SW 112 Ave → SW 183 St	870346	50,500	61.0
→ SW 136 St (Site C)	870332	57,500	61.0
SW 136 → SW 112 St	870014	55,500	61.0
SW 112 → SW 98 St	870110	82,500	61.0

Okeechobee Road & NW 27th Avenue

Segment	Site	AADT	D
Okeechobee: NW 72 → NW 57 Ave	871172	66,500	55.0
NW 27 Ave: NW 20 St → W 36 St	875005	28,500	55.0
NW 27 Ave: NW 119 → NW 135 St	870128	30,000	55.0

Reading the D-factor. The southern and western arterials all carry D = 61.0 — 61% of design-hour traffic moves in the dominant direction. On that split, the wrong side of a divided arterial forfeits roughly a fifth of design-hour exposure before the access restriction is even considered. Ember Coop is 11.0% breakfast against 32.2% dinner, so it is an evening-side concept: the correct side of a 61-D arterial is the side carrying the PM peak. Okeechobee Road’s flatter D = 55.0 removes that problem and introduces another — at 6.0% trucks it is a freight corridor that converts poorly to a family dinner concept.

§10 · Market

Miami-Dade fundamentals

Miami-Dade retail vacancy, Q2 2026

3.0%

Lowest of the three South Florida counties — Colliers, released 2026-07-16

Average asking rent

$42.50

Per SF, up 2.6% vs Q1 2026 — 54% above Broward

Net absorption, Q2 2026

+378,795

Square feet, against 1.3M+ SF under construction

Restaurant leasing bands

Band	Submarkets	NNN ask
Class A	Brickell, Miami Beach, Coral Gables, Aventura	$120–$150
Secondary	Wynwood, Doral, Little Havana, Design District	$85–$110
Neighborhood	West Kendall, Sweetwater, Hialeah	$50–$75

At $2.81M AUV, a $120/SF Class A rent is 12.4% of AUV before NNN against an 8.5% gate. Brickell is not an expensive option for this concept; it is an unavailable one.

Net lease pricing, Q2 2026

Sector	Cap rate
QSR — corporate guarantee	5.85%
QSR — franchisee guarantee	6.85%
Ground leases (McDonald’s / Chick-fil-A)	4.45%
Single-tenant net lease retail	6.60%

The 100-basis-point spread is the price of a franchisee covenant — roughly 15% of asset value on identical rent. That is why the LOI offers a corporate guaranty with a defined 60-month burn-off rather than resisting it. The guaranty is cheaper than the rent it buys back.

The second-generation pipeline is real and it is growing. FDIC data show 13,588 fewer bank branches between year-end 2010 and year-end 2024, including 1,354 in 2024. Six restaurant chains announced roughly 950–1,050 U.S. closures for 2025–2026 — Wendy’s 300–350, Papa Johns 300, Pizza Hut 250, Jack in the Box 50–100. Papa Johns identified its cohort as units over a decade old averaging under $600,000 in volume: envelopes that failed for reasons unrelated to the site. Meanwhile new drive-thru creation is constrained by the Urban Development Boundary, a $90.478/SF mobility fee, and a regulatory trend running unambiguously against it. The stock of Miami-Dade drive-thru envelopes is approximately fixed and slowly contracting.

§11 · Sensitivity

Where the deal stops working

Cash occupancy-cost ratio — base rent × AUV

Base rent	$2.25M	$2.45M	$2.65M	$2.815M	$3.00M	$3.20M
$50/SF	9.60%	8.82%	8.15%	7.67%	7.20%	6.75%
$54/SF	10.12%	9.29%	8.59%	8.09%	7.59%	7.11%
$58/SF	10.63%	9.76%	9.03%	8.50%	7.97%	7.47%
$62/SF	11.15%	10.24%	9.46%	8.91%	8.36%	7.84%
$66/SF	11.66%	10.71%	9.90%	9.32%	8.75%	8.20%
$70/SF	12.18%	11.18%	10.34%	9.73%	9.13%	8.56%
$74/SF	12.69%	11.66%	10.78%	10.15%	9.52%	8.92%

Green ≤ 8.50% clears the franchisor target. Red > 10.00% is unapprovable at any return.

Year-2 unlevered cash-on-cash — base rent × AUV

Base rent	$2.25M	$2.45M	$2.65M	$2.815M	$3.00M	$3.20M
$50/SF	15.65%	18.01%	20.36%	22.30%	24.48%	26.83%
$58/SF	14.49%	16.85%	19.20%	21.14%	23.32%	25.67%
$66/SF	13.33%	15.68%	18.04%	19.98%	22.15%	24.51%
$74/SF	12.17%	14.52%	16.88%	18.82%	20.99%	23.35%

At $58/SF the 18.0% hurdle survives an AUV of roughly $2.51 million — a 10.8% miss. At $66/SF that tolerance narrows to about $2.65 million, a 5.9% miss. Every four dollars per square foot of rent conceded costs roughly 250 basis points of AUV tolerance. That, rather than the rent itself, is what the settlement ceiling protects.

§12 · NPV

Fifteen-year comparison, net of capital

Candidate	Tenant capital	Yr-1 rent	Avg effective rent	Yr-2 CoC	Payback	NPV @ 9.0%
Site C — Marlin Point Conversion	$1,997,864	$168,200	$63.99/SF	21.01%	4.76 yr	$1,825,445
Site A — Cordova Crossing Pad	$2,389,497	$152,750	$64.82/SF	18.27%	5.47 yr	$1,573,774
Site D — Allapattah Endcap (eliminated)	$1,746,000	$159,800	$75.03/SF	19.09%	5.24 yr	$1,294,895
Site B — Ridgeline Pad (eliminated)	$2,295,000	$138,000	$60.90/SF	13.40%	7.46 yr	$501,390

Site C — conversion

$1,825,445

Site A — BTS pad

$1,573,774

Site D — endcap (gated out)

$1,294,895

Site B — pad (gated out)

$501,390

Modeled over a common fifteen-year horizon at a 9.0% discount rate, with sales growing 2.5% annually from Year 2, NNN escalating 3.5% annually, and rent escalating 10% every five years. Cash flows are unit EBITDAR less total cash occupancy; Year 0 is the tenant capital outflow. The workbook recalculates dynamically and returned zero error cells on a LibreOffice headless recalculation.

§13 · Terms

LOI posture — both structures

Structure A — second-generation lease (preferred)

Primary term	15 years
Options	Four × 5 years
Base rent, Yrs 1–5	$58.00/SF · $168,200
Base rent, Yrs 6–10 / 11–15	$63.80 / $70.18
Escalation	10% every 5 years
Percentage rent	6% over fixed $3.2M
Free rent	5 months
Landlord allowance	$35/SF · $101,500
Landlord work	Vault removal, roof, slab, parking, utilities

Structure B — build-to-suit ground lease

Primary term	20 years
Options	Four × 5 years
Ground rent, Yrs 1–5	$152,750
Escalation	10% every 5 years
Percentage rent	6% over fixed $3.4M
Landlord allowance	None — site work only
Landlord work	Pad to subgrade, utilities to boundary, retention, access drives
Impact fees	Tenant — est. $242,657

Provisions the drive-thru actually turns on

Drive-thru operating rights. 06:00–24:00 seven days; right to install, relocate and replace order points, canopies, boards and speaker systems; right to stripe and re-configure the queue, escape and bypass lanes; landlord may not adopt center rules restricting hours, queue routing, order-point location or speaker volume within code.
Signage. Two illuminated building elevations; a top-panel monument position with a minimum 60 SF face specified in the lease — not “subject to availability”; all queue wayfinding and directional signage.
Exclusive use. 1,500-foot radius against chicken-primary concepts and drive-thru QSR; remedy is 50% rent abatement and, after 180 days, termination.
Zoning contingency. Permitted by right or administrative approval only; no warrant, exception or variance; twelve-car queue confirmed in writing by a licensed traffic engineer; no recorded exclusive or plat note restricting the use.
Franchisor approval contingency. Written site approval within 60 days; Tenant may terminate and recover any deposit if not obtained.
Mobility fee condition. Written County determination required; landlord contributes 50% of the differential capped at $106,300; Tenant may terminate if the actual differential exceeds $260,000.

Percentage rent is offered at a fixed $3,200,000 breakpoint, not a natural one. At the opening rent a natural breakpoint computes to $2,803,333 — below plan AUV — which would convert percentage rent from a landlord upside participation into an immediate rent increase. A fixed breakpoint 13.7% above plan makes the landlord a participant in genuine outperformance rather than a co-owner of the base case.

§14 · Risk

What could break this

Risk	Exposure	Mitigation
Existing envelope cannot deliver a 12-car queue after reconfiguration	Deal-fatal	Licensed traffic engineer’s queue-storage study and franchisor site pre-approval as express LOI contingencies, before any non-refundable deposit
Mobility fee differential larger than modeled	$212,624 base	Written determination from Miami-Dade RER before lease execution; landlord contributes 50% capped at $106,300; termination right above $260,000
Landlord holds at the $74.00/SF ask	$4,098/yr above walk-away	Site A ground lease held live and visible through negotiation; walk-away computed and communicated internally before the first offer
Vault removal and structural condition	$68,000 modeled	Landlord obligation in the LOI; slab, roof, structure and parking field delivered in working order with a 12-month warranty
South Florida insurance escalation above 3.5%/yr	20–30% observed over 2 yrs	Separately stated insurance; controllable CAM capped at 4%/yr cumulative; no capital pass-through
AUV underperformance	~60 bps of occupancy per $200K	Hurdle survives a 10.8% AUV miss at the opening rent; fixed percentage-rent breakpoint prevents compounding the downside
Property tax reassessment on change of use	$45,910 modeled	Carried at full just value × 17.3245 mills, not at the seller’s in-place assessment
Competing drive-thru opens inside the primary ring	Trade-area dilution	1,500-foot exclusive; category rather than spatial differentiation — a brand requiring clear air will not open in Miami-Dade
Cross-access easement prohibits queue storage in the shared aisle	Operating covenant default	All REAs, declarations and plat notes delivered within 10 business days; queueing right expressly granted in the lease

§15 · Verification

Sources and math

Every figure in this deck either cites a named source with a 2026-08-06 retrieval date or shows its formula. The tenant, the brand, the four candidate sites and the unit-level operating assumptions are fabricated. The traffic counts, zoning provisions, fee schedules, millage rates, cap rates, market rents, construction cost ranges and demographics are real, sourced and dated.

Figure	Value	Derivation or source
AUV	$2,814,971	547 tx/day × $14.10 blended check × 365
EBITDAR	$661,518	AUV × (1 − 30.5% − 27.5% − 9.5% − 5.0% − 4.0%)
Capital recovery factor	0.12406	0.09 ÷ (1 − 1.09⁻¹⁵)
Build-to-suit impact fee	$242,657	(2,600 × $90.478 × 1.02) + (2,600 × $0.5642) + (2,600 × $0.4777)
Conversion fee differential	$212,624	2,900 × ($90.478 − $18.597) × 1.02
Target rent	$58.03/SF	((8.5% × AUV) − $70,995) ÷ 2,900
Walk-away rent	$72.59/SF	MIN((10.0% × AUV) − NNN, EBITDAR − capital×14% − NNN) ÷ 2,900
Indifference rent	$69.03/SF	(($222,589 + $296,438) − $247,853 − $70,995) ÷ 2,900
BTS breakeven AUV	$2,777,438	($152,750 + $69,839 + $430,109) ÷ 23.5%
Design queue n₉₅	10.4 cars	ln(0.05) ÷ ln(0.750), ρ = 112.5 ÷ 150.0

Sources

FDOT Transportation Data & Analytics, Annual Average Daily Traffic feature service (RCI_Layers/FeatureServer/0), 2025 records, and Florida Traffic Online · Miami 21 Zoning Code, as amended April 2012, Article 6 Table 13 and Article 1 definitions · Miami-Dade County Code Ch. 33 Art. XXXIII(K) Standard Urban Center District note [9], and § 33-124 off-street parking standards · Miami-Dade County Impact Fee Rate Schedule, mobility rates effective 12/31/2023–12/30/2027, fire/police/school/parks effective 12/31/2024–12/30/2027 · Colliers Miami-Dade retail Q1 and Q2 2026, the latter released 2026-07-16 and reported by Commercial Observer · The Boulder Group Q2 2026 Net Lease Market Report, reported 2026-07-07 · QSR Magazine / Intouch Insight, 2025 QSR Drive-Thru Report, and QSR Magazine, The 2025 QSR 50 · Paytronix, restaurant rent as a percentage of sales, 2025-03-27 · WFO Construction QSR construction cost guide, January 2026 · Atlantic Commercial Advisors, Miami-Dade restaurant leasing, 2026-07-20 (broker commentary, not an audited survey) · Justin Crow / Mattis Advisors, Miami-Dade retail storefront pricing, August 2026 · Jorge Guanche, Miami-Dade millage compilation, 2026-05-23 · Bisnow, bank branch retreat, 2025-04-14, citing FDIC and OCC data · Restaurant Dive, 2026 chain closures, 2026-03-19 · U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2024 1-year and 5-year estimates, via Census Reporter. All retrieved 2026-08-06.

Verify all code, fee and market provisions with the governing jurisdiction and with current CBRE / JLL / Colliers broker surveys before relying on this analysis for any live transaction.