A mall developer with a new F&B zone and a shared services problem.

Crescent Galleria. A mixed-use development in Dubai with 4,200 sqm of F&B space. Five tenant proposals. One fixed infrastructure envelope.

The question.

The developer has received five tenant proposals for the F&B zone: a full-service Arabic restaurant with charcoal grill (requesting 2,400 sqft), a specialty coffee roaster with a food menu (800 sqft), a pan-Asian casual dining concept (1,600 sqft), a cloud kitchen operator wanting four virtual brands from one shell (1,800 sqft), and a bakery-cafe (900 sqft). The combined requested area exceeds the available space by 15%. The combined electrical load exceeds the building's 600 kVA F&B allocation by roughly 40%.

The terrace level has a single shared exhaust shaft. Two shared grease trap risers serve the entire zone. The leasing team can evaluate rent and brand strength, but has no capability to assess whether these five concepts can physically coexist within the building's shared infrastructure.

The advisory question is not "which tenants are viable." It is: given a fixed building services envelope, which combination of tenants maximises long-term F&B revenue while staying within the infrastructure constraints? A resource allocation problem, not a checklist.

The engagement.

Four weeks structured in three phases.

• Week 1. Review all five tenant proposals against the building's infrastructure. Model the cumulative electrical, gas, exhaust, and grease trap load for every possible tenant combination. Identify where tenant demands compete for the same shared resource.
• Weeks 2 to 3. Produce a tenant compatibility matrix. Some combinations work; others create conflicts. The Arabic restaurant's charcoal grill requires a dedicated exhaust duct separate from the main kitchen hood (Civil Defence requirement), but the terrace level has only one shared exhaust shaft. If the Arabic restaurant takes the terrace, no other cooking tenant can share that level. The cloud kitchen operator's electrical load alone would consume 280 of the 600 available kVA, leaving insufficient capacity for the pan-Asian concept and the Arabic restaurant to run simultaneously during peak hours.
• Weeks 3 to 4. Consolidated report ranking three viable tenant combinations by projected rent yield, infrastructure fit, and operational risk. Include lease schedule templates for technical conditions.

What we found.

The cloud kitchen operator's proposal (four virtual brands, 300 orders per day, six combi ovens, four fryers, blast chiller) would require approximately 280 kVA: 47% of the building's total F&B electrical allocation consumed by a single tenant occupying 1,800 sqft.

The Arabic restaurant's charcoal grill requires a dedicated exhaust duct with its own fire suppression system and gas interlock, separate from the standard kitchen hood. Retrofitting this after fit-out costs approximately three times what it costs to build correctly. The real constraint is spatial: the terrace level's single exhaust shaft cannot serve both the charcoal grill's dedicated duct and another cooking tenant's standard hood.

The specialty coffee concept underestimated water filtration. GCC water hardness halves the lifespan of espresso machines (AED 25,000 to 60,000 per unit) without proper softening: a AED 2,000 to 5,000 investment the tenant had omitted.

The pan-Asian concept was the most infrastructure-efficient: moderate electrical load, standard exhaust requirements, highest projected rent per sqft.

The trade-off.

Combination A (highest rent yield). Arabic restaurant + pan-Asian + cloud kitchen + coffee roaster. Exceeds electrical capacity by 120 kVA. Would require the developer to fund a transformer upgrade (AED 180,000 to 250,000, 4 to 6 month lead time).

Combination B (infrastructure-safe). Pan-Asian + bakery-cafe + coffee roaster + Arabic restaurant (ground floor). Fits within limits. Loses the cloud kitchen's rent.

Combination C (recommended). Pan-Asian + Arabic restaurant (ground floor with charcoal grill exhaust built correctly) + coffee roaster (terrace, non-cooking) + bakery-cafe. No building services modifications required. Developer's MEP consultant confirmed deliverability.

Recommendations.

• Accept Combination C. The rent yield is 12 to 15% lower than Combination A, but it avoids AED 180,000 or more in transformer costs, a 4 to 6 month delay, and the year-two risk of an exhaust shaft dispute between competing tenants.
• Attach technical lease schedules to the Arabic restaurant (charcoal grill exhaust and fire suppression specified and costed before lease execution, tenant bears cost) and the coffee roaster (water filtration system required).
• If the developer wants to reconsider the cloud kitchen operator in a future phase, allocate a standalone unit with independent electrical supply.