The analysis on this page comes from iVerify, North Star Group’s patent-pending site-screening and origination program, which converts corridor, freight, parcel, flood, soil, and logistics data into developer-grade site packets. The full screen behind it is the iVerify site report for this node.
Current stage
North Star Group · iVerify · pre-validation screening
What this screen examines
This is a worked example at the I-95 Exit 77 interchange in St George. On a ~20-acre site on the dry Zone X ground, a controlled truck-and-trailer yard prices at roughly $12-$15/night; at ~70% occupancy that is about $386K-$483K of stabilized NOI. On the well-drained Zone X terraces it holds a 13-16% yield on cost that clears a 12% return floor on the yard alone; the wet-soil tracts near the three AE creeks are the high-cost end, so the parcel has to sit on the dry ground. Once the parcel is controlled, the held land earns as trailer/IOS parking until a buyer commits.
Development thesis
An existing node
St George Exit 77 is a working I-95 truck-service node: a Pilot Travel Center and a Knight Transportation yard already operate at the interchange, with dry, flat, paveable land next to them.
The product here is not more free, first-come fuel-stop parking. It is a secured, reservable, storage-capable yard: truck parking, trailer staging, IOS storage, fleet parking, and overflow. The Pilot and Flying J filling overnight are the demand signal for that product, not competitors to it.
The Pilot on Charleston Highway inside the box and the Flying J about 6 miles south show that drivers already stop here, and a carrier yard already stages trailers at the ramp. I-95 carries about 43,000 vehicles a day through the box where it meets US-78 and US-178. Within 20 miles the screen reads 19 truck functions: four truck stops, six weigh stations and scales, four diesel-repair shops, two truck-parking lots, two I-95 rest areas, and a distribution center. St George can serve as the lower-friction overnight and staging point on the interstate for that trade.
Deal economics at a glance
Exits
Economic read. On dry Zone X ground the yard clears the 12% floor across the $12-$15/night band. The income-yard sale is the base exit; the entrance pad and a full-plaza sale are the upside.
The yard is built owner-direct and stabilized as a controlled truck-and-trailer operation. Once it cash-flows, there are three ways to exit, and the market picks the best one at the time:
| Exit | What you sell | Why it works |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Sell the whole asset | The entire stabilized parking-and-storage operation as a single income property | A fully-leased IOS asset is what an institutional or 1031 buyer wants; cleanest story, and as one asset it can price a little stronger |
| 2. Carve the entrance pads | The ~5 acres at the lot’s entrance to a fuel/retail/service operator, parking sold separately | The full lot has captured the customers; an operator pays a pad premium for access to that captive traffic, on top of the yard’s income value |
| 3. Develop and sell the best use (conditional) | A parcel at this node that clears the development screen (~25 acres of dry Zone X ground), on which North Star develops the highest and best building itself, a logistics or industrial build to suit, a service or retail building, or a travel-center format, leased to a creditworthy tenant on a triple net basis and sold as a stabilized asset | North Star develops it, signs a creditworthy triple-net tenant, and sells the stabilized asset; a credit net lease sells at a lower cap rate than the yard, so the value is higher, and that spread sits outside the gain figure below |
Illustrative planning figures from the validation model, not a projection of return. Values rest on achieving the rate and occupancy below and on the surface-section cost the soils drive; the exit cap is the market’s call. A point estimate would be false precision; the output is a range.
The revenue engine is the same as any yard of this size; at this node the cost side is the standard section on dry, well-drained Zone X ground, and the wet-soil tracts near the three AE creeks are the high-cost end. The table reads against the mid of the cost band. At a $12-$15/night band and ~70% occupancy, the yard clears the 12% floor across the band, and the table below reads against the mid of the cost band:
| Rate | Stabilized NOI | Yield on cost | 12% floor | Yard gain @ 9% cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $12 / night (floor) | ~$386K | ~12.9% | clears | ~$1.12M |
| $14 / night (mid) | ~$451K | ~15.0% | clears | ~$1.81M |
| $15 / night (top) | ~$483K | ~16.1% | clears | ~$2.15M |
Revenue math (base $14/night): 180 spaces × $14/night × 365 nights × 70% occupancy = ~$644K gross; less 30% operating expense = ~$451K NOI. Yield read against the ~$3.0M mid of the cost band. Sale values are net of a 4% cost of sale.
At the $14 mid-case the yard clears the 12% floor at about 56% occupancy against the mid cost band, and breaks even on a 9% sale at about 44%; on the drier, lower-cost parcels those thresholds fall. So the 70% assumption carries cushion on the right Zone X parcel, subject to validating actual demand, surface cost, access, and operating expense. And while the entrance pads wait for an operator, they run as trailer/IOS parking: the held land earns, it does not just carry.
| Metric | Figure | Read |
|---|---|---|
| Direct total development cost (yard incl. land) | ~$2.8-3.3M | Owner-direct, preferred path; the dry, well-drained Zone X ground is the low-cost end, the wet-soil tracts near the three AE creeks are the high-cost end |
| GC retail cost | ~$5.0-5.6M | Stress / reference case; weakens economics |
| Stabilized NOI ($12-$15/night, 70% occ) | ~$386K-483K | Controlled yard only |
| Yield on cost | ~13-16% | Clears the 12% floor across the band on the dry Zone X ground |
| Yard income value @ 9% cap | ~$4.1-5.2M | Exit 1, NOI ÷ 9% cap, less 4% cost of sale |
| Yard sale gain | ~$1.1M-2.35M | Value less ~$2.8-3.3M cost |
| Entrance pad (5 ac) | ~$0.45M gain | Exit 2, ~$0.6M value less ~$0.15M basis |
| Gross gain after stabilization | ~$1.6M-2.8M | Yard + entrance pad, before carry |
Exits 1 and 2 are income-based; they are what the gain figure above rests on. The third is a development play, and it pencils the way any site does, on the whole screen: location, access, visibility, economics, demographics, competition, and site conditions. The node already carries much of it: a primary I-95 corridor location carrying about 43,000 vehicles/day, with a Pilot Travel Center and a Knight Transportation yard already operating at the ramp, and the existing stops filling overnight. The node works, and a reservable, storage-capable yard is a different product than the free first-come lots. Where a Zone X parcel here also clears the acreage and the rest of the development screen, North Star develops the best use on it and sells it as a stabilized asset leased to a creditworthy triple-net tenant at a lower cap rate than the yard, so it sits as upside rather than in the gross-gain range above.
Known validation items
These are diligence items, not unknowns being glossed; each is a normal validation step behind site control, before material spend:
| Item |
|---|
| Access and turning geometry off US-78 / US-178 at the ramps |
| Dorchester County and Town of St George zoning and permitted use, per tract |
| Water and sewer availability at the interchange |
| Geotech borings on the target Zone X tracts (bearing, seasonal high water table) |
| Wetland and creek delineation against the three AE polygons |
| Operator interest and a metered rate and occupancy confirmation |
| Which owners of the 33 ten-acre-plus parcels will sell, and at what basis |
Demand evidence
Corridor and freight base
The demand case here rests on corridor volume and the freight base around it. Two of the three legs are strong and documented; the third, the nightly rate and a metered occupancy figure, is the item still to confirm. The driver-reported fill below shows the corridor's existing stops already run full overnight, short of a metered study.
| # | Fact | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corridor volume. SCDOT counts I-95 through the box at about 42,300 to 43,100 vehicles a day; the feed does not break out a truck share. | SCDOT traffic counts |
| 2 | Freight base. Within 20 miles the screen reads 19 truck functions: four truck stops, six weigh stations and scales, four diesel-repair shops, two truck-parking lots, two I-95 rest areas, and a distribution center. That base generates the trailer moves, drops, and overnight staging a secured yard serves. | iVerify logistics-facility layer |
| 3 | An established stop economy at the node. The nearest stop is the Pilot Travel Center on Charleston Highway, inside the box; the Flying J at St George is about 6 miles south, and a Knight Transportation yard sits on the same highway at the interchange. Truck parking is the documented constraint along I-95, and the visible demand here is a paid stop and a carrier yard already operating at the ramp. | iVerify truck-stop layer |
| 4 | The existing stops run full overnight. On Trucker Path, the Pilot at St George and the Flying J on the same I-95 corridor both report filling overnight; the Pilot #4576 reads Full overnight, easing to Many by mid-morning, and the Flying J moves through its Paid Only tier before it fills. The history views reconcile to Pilot #4576: the overnight, hours-of-service-driven peak a reservable yard is built for. | Trucker Path driver reports + parking history |
Observed overnight fill, Trucker Path
Corridor and parking context
Driver behavior favors this kind of site. A Class 8 driver near an hours-of-service limit will not thread a 70-foot rig through city streets; the preference is to pull off the interstate, park, and roll. That favors an interstate-adjacent yard at this node over in-town lots.
The capture needed is small. A ~180-space yard needs about 126 paid trucks a night (70% occupancy) to clear its return floor, a small share of the roughly 43,000 vehicles a day on I-95 at a node where a Pilot and a carrier yard already operate.
Where this still needs work: the fill data above is crowd-sourced driver reporting, not a metered study. The screen carries no metered overnight-occupancy count, no truck-specific share of the traffic count, and no live in-corridor rate comps for this I-95 segment. The $12-$15/night band is carried from the model as an assumption to test, not a corridor comp. A metered occupancy and rate study on the corridor's existing stops is the remaining demand step before site control; the observed overnight fill is the evidence pointing to it.
Order of work
Market first
The screen comes first, before any spend on site control, diligence, or construction. Does the I-95 Interchange at St George support a paid truck-parking, IOS, and operator-pad use at all? If it holds, the next step is choosing a parcel and an ownership path, then sizing a control-and-diligence budget to that parcel. The worked example here uses a dry Zone X parcel near the Exit 77 ramps. Control is funded once the node, the parcel, and the terms line up.
| Step | Decision |
|---|---|
| 1 | Confirm the market screen: node demand, rate, occupancy, and operator interest support a paid truck-parking / IOS / operator-pad use. |
| 2 | Select the preferred parcel and ownership path; size the site-control and diligence budget around that parcel. |
| 3 | Secure property control: option, purchase contract with due-diligence period, ground lease, or phased takedown. |
| 4 | Confirm civil / geotech scope and validate site layout once a control path is realistic. |
| 5 | Update budget and proforma; decide whether to exercise, assign, ground lease, JV, or hold for operator pad. |
| 6 | Bring in construction capital only after market, site control, and validation survive. |
Representative conceptual site plan
Site layout
| Zone | Acres | Function |
|---|---|---|
| Entrance operator pad | ~5.0 | The corner at the lot entrance, sold or ground-leased to a fuel, convenience, truck-service, repair, or retail operator who wants the captive traffic (Exit 2) |
| Controlled truck-and-trailer yard | ~10.0 | Initial use: truck parking, trailer drop / IOS staging, fleet parking, detention, and demand generation |
| Support / utility / detention | ~4.94 | Utilities, generator, restroom/septic, and stormwater detention, sized to the dry Zone X ground; usable functional land, not a separate sale |
On a ~20-acre buildable site, the ground is treated as a phased truck-service platform. The corner at the lot entrance is reserved for the operator pad. The rest runs as the controlled truck-and-trailer yard. Stormwater detention is folded into the plan at the standard size for dry, well-drained Zone X ground, and the support land stays usable as IOS and overflow rather than sitting idle. Acreage and layout vary by the parcel chosen and by how much of it clears the flood zones.
Profit Model
Build cost
At this node, the site runs two ways. The first is a truck-and-trailer yard, the simplest use to validate: it cash-flows on its own, proves the demand any larger use rests on, and carries its own income exits. The second is the parcel best use, developed by North Star and sold as a stabilized asset leased to a creditworthy tenant on a triple net basis, which trades at a lower cap rate than the yard. That path is a reasonable prospect at this node, not a stretch: a Pilot Travel Center and a Knight Transportation yard already operate at the ramp on a primary corridor carrying about 43,000 vehicles a day. What it asks for is a parcel here that clears the development screen (the full feasibility set, including dry, buildable ground) plus the ~25 acres the format needs: an acquisition target the broker works to, not a feature of a site in hand. The yard path stands on its own; the developed lease is the higher one, where a fitting parcel turns up. Which is highest-and-best is a validation question, not a claim the page makes.
The cost side at this node is the standard section on dry, well-drained Zone X ground; the wet-soil tracts near the three AE creeks are the high-cost end, and the buildable footprint is set by the flood zones. That is why the direct development cost is carried as a band, $2.8-3.3M, not a single figure: where a parcel lands in that band is a soils-and-flood question the geotech answers.
These cases assume a control path on the parcel is in hand or in reach; the spending that confirms them is staged behind site control (see Market first, then site control).
| Case | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Initial yard-only case | Tests whether controlled parking / staging can carry the initial project on the drier ground |
| Seeded operator-pad case | Tests whether the yard increases the value and attractiveness of the entrance pad |
The budget model compares two delivery paths: conventional GC retail and owner-direct procurement with construction management. Direct procurement assumes the sponsor buys major components directly where practical: aggregate/base, geogrid, fencing, lighting, gate systems, generator, restroom/septic service, security, and site components. The purpose is to show whether the project remains inside the required NOI-to-cost screen after real civil, soils, and operating costs are validated.
The model runs the same two delivery paths, owner-direct and GC retail. Owner-direct procurement reduces modeled development cost to the $2.8-3.3M band versus the $5.0-5.6M GC-retail stress case. The return and exit figures are in Deal Economics above. Illustrative planning figures from the validation model; not a projection of return.
Entrance pad
Exit values
Under Exit 2, the ~5 acres at the lot’s own entrance sell separately as an operator pad. A full yard puts a steady crowd of paying drivers at the entrance: fuel, food, and service demand an operator can reach from the corner. Until a buyer commits, the pad runs as trailer drop and IOS staging, so the held land earns. The remaining support land is functional: utilities, detention, and IOS overflow folded into the operation.
| Scenario | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Low, bulk-land credit | Conservative case: value the pad as raw land only |
| Mid, operator pad | The busy lot has captured the customers; an operator pays for access to them |
| High, develop and sell | Where a parcel at this node clears the development screen on dry, buildable ground, North Star develops the best use, leases it to a creditworthy triple-net tenant, and sells the stabilized asset at a lower cap |
For illustration
Example parcel
The read below is how the iVerify screen isolates the candidate class at this node, the dry Zone X ground near the ramps. It is here to illustrate the method, not because a parcel is listed, available, or selected. The screen holds 135 parcels in the box; 33 are 10 acres or larger; about 1,666 acres in total. The candidates for a frontage yard are the smaller 10-to-30-acre parcels nearest the interchange, on the dry Zone X terraces and outside the three AE creek polygons.
| What the screen reads | On the candidate class |
|---|---|
| Target size | 10-30 acres |
| Distance to interchange | at the Exit 77 ramps |
| Flood | Zone X target, outside the three AE creek polygons (the regulated floodplain) |
| Soils, dry target | Noboco (well drained) and Goldsboro (moderately well drained) |
| Soils, to route around | Coxville, Pantego, Pelham, Rains, poorly to very poorly drained and hydric, tracking the AE creeks |
| Relief | 98.8 to 110.6 ft, about 12 ft across nearly a mile, flat and paveable |
| Inventory | 135 parcels in the box; 33 are 10 acres or larger; about 1,666 acres total |
| To be verified | Buildable footprint, base flood elevation, surface section / geotech, road access, utilities, zoning, ownership terms |
This candidate class reads the way the node's ground tends to: dry Zone X terraces near the ramps, with the wet Coxville/Pantego/Pelham/Rains units to route around along the three AE creeks. No parcel is presented here as fully engineered or as available. The next work is normal validation on a specific candidate: geotech and surface-section ROM, flood set-back and base flood elevation, zoning, owner terms, access/driveway confirmation, utility confirmation, and operator/rate validation.
Soils and grading
Grade and drain
The engineering question here is the subgrade: which tracts carry the dry, well-drained Zone X ground, and what surface section the poorly-drained units near the AE creeks demand under a truck-yard load.
| Soil association | Box share | Plain-English read |
|---|---|---|
| Noboco | drier target | Well drained; the target ground for a buildable yard, where the surface-section cost is lowest |
| Goldsboro | drier target | Moderately well drained; buildable with standard section |
| Coxville / Pantego / Pelham / Rains | the wet units | Poorly to very poorly drained and hydric, tracking the AE creeks; the wet ground to route around, validate undercut, stabilization, and detention |
The dry, well-drained ground is the majority target here, so parcel selection onto the Zone X terraces is straightforward relative to the wet-soil nodes. What flat coastal-plain ground gives back is grade: it does not read as a cut/fill or blasting problem; it reads as a subgrade and drainage problem, and the seasonal high water table on the wet units is the limit, so a geotech boring sets bearing and water table before paving.
Validation tests
| Test | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Test pits / borings | Confirm actual soil, clay depth, water table, and buildable footprint |
| Proctor density | Confirm compaction behavior on the subgrade |
| Plasticity index | Identify shrink-swell / pumping risk in the wet units |
| R-value or CBR | Support pavement / aggregate-base design over soft subgrade |
| Seasonal high water table | Confirm depth to water, drives fill height, underdrain, and detention |
| Wetland / hydric delineation | Separate buildable ground from jurisdictional / hydric areas |
| Cut/fill & import estimate | Confirm fill needed to raise the pad above the wet ground |
| Surface-section ROM | Compare geogrid/geotextile + aggregate base, cement/lime stabilization, millings, or asphalt-at-throat sections |
The validation package converts the subgrade and the flood set-back into geotech, civil ROM, and local contractor pricing: the numbers that decide where in the $2.8-3.3M cost band a given parcel lands.
Phase 2 · site control + diligence
Control, then diligence
This is Phase 2 work. After the market screen survives and a preferred parcel and ownership path are identified, validation spending follows an acceptable option / PSA / ground-lease path. Once the site can be tied up, this budget buys the evidence needed before construction equity is exposed.
| Item | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Developer site sketch | Establish phased site logic |
| Civil ROM | Grade, drainage, entrance, detention, and the surface section |
| Geotech allowance | Confirm subgrade performance, water table, and base design |
| Rate comps | Validate the $12-$15/night rate band against local demand |
| Operator calls | Test yard, fleet, trailer, IOS, fuel, and service demand |
| Zoning confirmation | Confirm permitted-use path |
| Owner contact | Option, PSA, ground lease, phased takedown, or pad structure |
| Utility check | Power, water, septic/restroom service, generator, lighting, telecom |
| Updated proforma | Confirm whether the project still clears the return screen |
The candidate advances only if site control, validation, and economics all remain inside the screen.
Powered by iVerify Patent Pending
The source data
The screen behind this page is the live iVerify report for this node. iVerify pulls the public data and the table shows what each layer becomes in it.
| Raw data | iVerify output |
|---|---|
| Traffic counts (SCDOT) | Corridor demand signal |
| FMCSA carrier records | Local carrier / trailer / power-unit demand |
| Public truck-parking inventory | Supply constraint signal |
| Parcels | Owner / size / value / geometry review |
| FEMA flood | Buildable-footprint screen |
| NRCS soils | Soil / grading / surface-section risk screen |
| Elevation | Relief and civil-cost signal |
| Lodging / truck services | Overnight-stop and service-node signal |
| Demographics | Labor-shed and local-market context |
| Broker tool | Parcel shortlist and action list |
The page shows the outputs: report, parcel facts, method. The raw tables, carrier exports, scoring weights, schema, and extraction logic stay inside the engine.
Backup Documents
Backup, on request
iVerify Report 19
Full technical screen: traffic, parcels, flood, soils, topo, carriers, demographics, lodging, truck-service context, broker tools.
Excel Validation Model
Direct procurement vs. GC retail, the cost band, yard economics, and the gross-gain build. Standalone for this node.
Opportunity Brief
Two-page executive summary, current model and demand context. Available on request.
Conceptual Master Site Plan
Phased plan with entrance operator pad, controlled yard, and support / detention reserve. Available on request.
North Star Group / iVerify
Developer-led method
North Star Group is a developer-led systems and real estate platform focused on practical site origination, development strategy, infrastructure, and applied AI tools. iVerify is North Star’s corridor-screening and parcel-origination system for freight, IOS, truck-service, and logistics-land opportunities.
Michael Hoffman is the principal of North Star Group, Inc. His background includes real estate development, systems integration, and invention work, with issued patents and pending housing / site-screening concepts. This package reflects a developer-led method: screen the corridor, isolate candidate parcels on the drier, buildable ground, identify the demand signal, prepare a validation budget, and advance only if the economics survive real-world checks.
Contact
Michael Hoffman
North Star Group, Inc.
Fairhope, Alabama
701-770-9118
michaelh@nsgia.com
www.nsgia.com
This is a pre-validation screening package. Construction capital, final site control, final engineering, and final operator structure are not being requested at this stage.