-
Annual Statements
-
»
Companies
-
»
COPT DEFENSE PROPERTIES
-
»
Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)
COPT DEFENSE PROPERTIES - Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)
Use these links to rapidly review the document
Table of Contents
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark one) |
|
|
ý |
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 |
or |
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number 1-14023 |
Corporate Office Properties Trust
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Maryland |
|
23-2947217 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |
|
(IRS Employer
Identification No.) |
6711 Columbia Gateway Drive, Suite 300
Columbia, MD |
|
21046 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (443) 285-5400 |
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
(Title of Each Class)
|
|
(Name of Exchange on Which Registered)
|
Common Shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
ý Yes o No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.
o Yes ý No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the
past 90 days. ý Yes o No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to
be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit
and post such files). ý Yes o No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not
be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer ý |
|
Accelerated filer o |
|
Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company) |
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.)
o Yes ý No
The aggregate market value of the voting and nonvoting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $1.9 billion,
as calculated using the closing price of the common shares of beneficial interest on the New York Stock Exchange and our outstanding shares as of June 30, 2010. For purposes of calculating this
amount only, affiliates are defined as Trustees, executive owners and beneficial owners of more than 10% of the registrant's outstanding common shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value. At
January 28, 2011, 66,938,717 of the registrant's common shares of beneficial interest were outstanding.
Portions
of the annual shareholders' report of the registrant for the year ended December 31, 2010 are incorporated by reference into Parts I and II of this
Form 10-K and portions of the proxy statement of the registrant for its 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year
covered by this Form 10-K are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Form 10-K
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Form 10-K contains "forward-looking" statements, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995, that are based on our current expectations, estimates and projections about future events and financial trends affecting the financial condition and operations of our business. Forward-looking
statements can be identified by the use of words such as "may," "will," "should," "could," "believe," "anticipate," "expect," "estimate," "plan" or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking
statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which we cannot predict with accuracy and some of which we might not even anticipate. Although we believe that the expectations,
estimates and projections reflected in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions at the time made, we can give no assurance that these expectations, estimates and projections
will be achieved. Future events and actual results may differ materially from
2
Table of Contents
those
discussed in the forward-looking statements. Important factors that may affect these expectations, estimates and projections include, but are not limited to:
-
- general economic and business conditions, which will, among other things, affect office property demand and rents, tenant
creditworthiness, interest rates and financing availability;
-
- adverse changes in the real estate markets including, among other things, increased competition with other companies;
-
- our ability to borrow on favorable terms;
-
- risks of real estate acquisition and development activities, including, among other things, risks that development
projects may not be completed on schedule, that tenants may not take occupancy or pay rent or that development and operating costs may be greater than anticipated;
-
- risks of investing through joint venture structures, including risks that our joint venture partners may not fulfill their
financial obligations as investors or may take actions that are inconsistent with our objectives;
-
- changes in our plans for properties or views of market economic conditions or failure to obtain development rights, either
of which could result in recognition of impairment losses;
-
- our ability to satisfy and operate effectively under Federal income tax rules relating to real estate investment trusts
and partnerships;
-
- governmental actions and initiatives; and
-
- environmental requirements.
For
further information on factors that could affect the company and the statements contained herein, you should refer to the section below entitled "Item 1A. Risk Factors." We
undertake no obligation to update or supplement forward-looking statements.
3
Table of Contents
PART I
Item 1. Business
OUR COMPANY
General. We are a specialty office real estate investment trust ("REIT") that focuses primarily on strategic customer
relationships and specialized
tenant requirements in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors. We acquire, develop, manage and lease office and data center
properties that are typically concentrated in large office parks primarily located adjacent to government demand drivers and/or in strong markets that we believe possess growth opportunities. As of
December 31, 2010, our investments in real estate included the following:
-
- 252 wholly owned operating office properties totaling 20.0 million square feet that were 88.2% occupied;
-
- 21 wholly owned office properties under construction, development or redevelopment that we estimate will total
approximately 3.0 million square feet upon completion, including five partially operational properties included above;
-
- wholly owned land parcels totaling 1,497 acres that we believe are potentially developable into approximately
14.4 million square feet;
-
- a wholly owned, partially operational, wholesale data center which upon completion is expected to have an initial
stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts; and
-
- partial ownership interests through real estate joint ventures in the following:
-
- 20 operating office properties containing approximately 1.1 million square feet that were 69.2% occupied;
-
- two office properties under development that we estimate will total approximately 235,000 square feet upon completion; and
-
- land parcels totaling 755 acres (including 563 acres under contract) that we believe are potentially developable into
approximately 7.5 million square feet.
We
conduct almost all of our operations through our operating partnership, Corporate Office Properties, L.P. (the "Operating Partnership"), a Delaware limited partnership, of
which we are the managing general partner. The Operating Partnership owns real estate both directly and through subsidiary partnerships and limited liability companies ("LLCs"). The Operating
Partnership also owns 100% of a number of entities that provide real estate services such as property management, construction and development and heating and air conditioning services primarily for
our properties, but also for third parties.
Interests
in our Operating Partnership are in the form of common and preferred units. As of December 31, 2010, we owned 93.6% of the outstanding common units and 95.8% of the
outstanding preferred units in our Operating Partnership. The remaining common and preferred units in our Operating Partnership were owned by third parties, which included certain of our Trustees.
We
believe that we are organized and have operated in a manner that permits us to satisfy the requirements for taxation as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and
we intend to continue to operate in such a manner. If we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we generally will not be subject to Federal income tax on our taxable income that is distributed to our
shareholders. A REIT is subject to a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement that it distribute to its shareholders at least 90% of its annual taxable income
(excluding net capital gains).
4
Table of Contents
Our
executive offices are located at 6711 Columbia Gateway Drive, Suite 300, Columbia, Maryland 21046 and our telephone number is (443) 285-5400.
Our
Internet address is www.copt.com. We make available on our Internet website free of charge our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as
reasonably possible after we file such material with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). In addition, we have made available on our Internet website under the heading "Corporate
Governance" the charters for our Board of Trustees' Audit, Nominating and Corporate Governance and Compensation Committees, as well as our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct and
Ethics and Code of Ethics for Financial Officers. We intend to make available on our website any future amendments or waivers to our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and Code of Ethics for
Financial Officers within four business days after any such amendments or waivers. The information on our Internet site is not part of this report.
The
SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. This Internet
website can be accessed at www.sec.gov. The public may also read and copy paper filings that we have made with the SEC at the SEC's Public Reference Room, located at 100 F Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
Significant 2010 Developments
During 2010, we:
-
- finished the period with our wholly owned portfolio of operating office properties 88.2% occupied;
-
- acquired three operating office properties totaling 514,000 square feet and a shell-complete office property totaling
183,000 square feet for $205.1 million;
-
- placed into service an aggregate of 816,000 square feet in newly constructed space in nine office properties;
-
- completed the formation of LW Redstone Company, LLC, a joint venture created to develop Redstone Gateway, a
468-acre master-planned office business park adjacent to Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama;
-
- entered the Springfield, Virginia submarket by acquiring 15 acres on which we are entitled to develop up to 978,000 square
feet adjacent to the new National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA) headquarters at Fort Belvoir;
-
- acquired a partially operational 233,000 square foot wholesale data center for $115.5 million that was 17% leased
on the date of acquisition to two tenants that have a combined initial critical load of three megawatts and further expansion rights of up to a combined five megawatts. We expect to complete the
development of the property to an initial stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts for additional development costs initially estimated at $166 million;
-
- issued a $240.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes due in 2030, and redeemable
by us, or subject to required repurchase upon request of the note holders, in April 2015 or thereafter as defined under the terms of the notes;
-
- issued 7.5 million common shares at a public offering price of $34.25 per share for net proceeds of
$245.8 million after underwriting discounts but before offering expenses; and
5
Table of Contents
-
- increased the borrowing capacity under our unsecured revolving credit facility (the "Revolving Credit Facility") by
$200.0 million, from $600.0 million to $800.0 million.
In
addition, our Board of Trustees, as part of an ongoing personnel development and succession program, elected Roger A. Waesche, Jr. to serve as President, in addition to his
current duties as Chief Operating Officer. Randall M. Griffin, who had served as President and Chief Executive Officer, continued in his role as Chief Executive Officer.
Business and Growth Strategies
Our primary objectives are to achieve sustainable long-term growth in results of operations and to maximize
long-term shareholder value. This section sets forth key components of our business and growth strategies that we have in place to support these objectives.
Business
Strategies
Customer Strategy: We believe that we differentiate ourselves by being a real estate company that does not view space in properties as
its primary
commodity. Rather, we focus our operations on serving the needs of our customers and enabling them to be successful. This strategy includes a focus on establishing and nurturing long-term
relationships with quality tenants and accommodating their multi-locational needs. It also includes a focus on providing a level of service that exceeds customer expectations both in terms of the
quality of the space we provide and our level of responsiveness to their needs. We believe that operating with such an emphasis on service enables us to be the landlord of choice with high quality
customers and contributes to high levels of customer loyalty and retention.
Our
focus on customers in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors is a key aspect of our customer strategy. A high
percentage of our revenue is derived from these customers, and we believe that we are well positioned for future growth through such customers for reasons that include the
following:
-
- our strong relationships and reputation for high service levels that we have forged over the years and continue to
emphasize;
-
- the proximity of our properties to government demand drivers (such as military installations) in various regions of the
country and our willingness to expand to other regions where demand exists; and
-
- the depth of our collective team knowledge, experience and capabilities in developing and operating single user data
centers and secure properties that meet the United States Government's Force Protection requirements.
Market Strategy: We focus on owning properties where our tenants want to be, which in the case of the United States Government and
defense
information technology customers is mostly near government demand drivers. We also concentrate our operations in markets and submarkets that are located where we believe we already possess, or can
effectively achieve, the critical mass necessary to maximize management efficiencies, operating synergies and competitive advantages through our acquisition, property management, leasing and
development activities. The attributes we look for in selecting markets and submarkets include, among others: (1) proximity to large demand drivers; (2) strong demographics;
(3) attractiveness to high quality tenants; (4) potential for growth and stability in economic down cycles; (5) future acquisition and development opportunities; and
(6) minimal competition from other property owners. We typically focus on owning and operating office properties in large business parks located outside of central business districts. We
believe that such parks generally attract long-term, high-quality tenants seeking to attract and retain quality work forces because they are typically situated along major
transportation routes with easy access to support services, amenities and residential communities.
6
Table of Contents
Capital Strategy: Our capital strategy is aimed at maintaining a flexible capital structure in order to facilitate growth and
performance in the face
of differing market conditions in the most cost-effective manner by:
-
- using debt comprised primarily of mortgage and other secured loans, our unsecured revolving credit facility and
exchangeable senior notes;
-
- using equity raised through issuances of common and preferred shares of beneficial interest, issuances of common and
preferred units in our Operating Partnership and, to a lesser extent, joint venture structures for certain investments;
-
- managing our debt by monitoring, among other things: (1) our debt levels relative to our overall capital structure;
(2) the relationship of certain measures of earnings to certain financing cost requirements (commonly referred to as coverage ratios); (3) the relationship of our total
variable-rate debt to our total debt; and (4) the timing of debt maturities to ensure that maturities in any year do not exceed levels that we believe we can refinance; and
-
- continuously evaluating the ability of our capital resources to accommodate our plans for future growth.
Sustainability Strategy: We are focused on developing and operating our properties in a manner that minimizes global impact for the
environment and
have been committed to this effort since 2003. Our strategy includes:
-
- constructing new buildings that are designed to use resources with a higher level of efficiency and lower impact on human
health and the environment during their life cycles than conventional buildings. An example of our focus in this area is our participation in the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design ("LEED") program, which has a rigorous certification process for evaluating and rating buildings in order for such buildings to qualify for the program's Certified, Silver, Gold
and Platinum ratings;
-
- retrofitting select existing office properties to also become certified LEED-Existing Building ("LEED-EB");
-
- registering our property portfolio in Energy Star, a joint program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the
U.S. Department of Energy that focuses on protecting the environment through energy efficient products and practices; and
-
- implementing LEED-EB prerequisites as standard operating procedure for key aspects of our property operations
and management.
We
believe that our commitment to sustainability is evident in the fact that as of December 31, 2010, we had ten buildings certified LEED Gold, 13 buildings certified LEED Silver,
one building certified LEED, two buildings certified LEED-EB and 31 other buildings registered in the LEED program, and we had 17 professionals on staff who hold the LEED Accredited Professional
designation. We also have established an internal goal to have 50% of our portfolio be brought up to LEED certification standards by 2015. We believe that this strategy is important not just because
our customers will demand it, but also because it is the right thing to do.
Growth
Strategies
Acquisition and Property Development Strategy: We pursue acquisition and property development opportunities for properties that support
our customer
and market strategies discussed above. As a result, the focus of our acquisition and development activities includes properties that are either: (1) located near demand drivers that we believe
are attractive to customers in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors or
7
Table of Contents
(2) located
in markets or submarkets that we believe meet the criteria set forth above in our market strategy. We may also acquire or develop properties that do not align with our customer or
market strategies but which we believe provide opportunity for favorable returns on investment given the associated risks.
We
typically seek to make acquisitions at attractive yields and below replacement cost. We also seek to increase operating cash flow of certain acquisitions by repositioning the
properties and capitalizing on existing below market leases and expansion opportunities. We pursue development activities as market
conditions and leasing opportunities support favorable risk-adjusted returns on investment.
Internal Growth Strategy: We aggressively manage our portfolio to maximize the operating performance of each property through:
(1) proactive
property management and leasing; (2) achieving operating efficiencies through increasing economies of scale and, where possible, aggregating vendor contracts to achieve volume pricing
discounts; and (3) renewing tenant leases and re-tenanting at increased rents where market conditions permit.
Industry Segments
We operate in two primary industries: commercial office real estate and wholesale data centers. We classify our properties containing
data center space as commercial office real estate when tenants significantly funded the data center infrastructure costs. At December 31, 2010, our commercial office real estate operations had
nine primary geographical segments, as set forth below:
-
- Baltimore/Washington Corridor (generally defined as the Maryland counties of Howard and Anne Arundel);
-
- Northern Virginia (defined as Fairfax County, Virginia);
-
- Suburban Maryland (defined as the Maryland counties of Montgomery, Prince George's and Frederick);
-
- Washington, DCCapitol Riverfront;
-
- St. Mary's & King George Counties (in Maryland and Virginia, respectively);
-
- Greater Baltimore, Maryland (generally defined as the Maryland counties of Baltimore and Harford and Baltimore City);
-
- Colorado Springs, Colorado;
-
- San Antonio, Texas; and
-
- Greater Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
As
of December 31, 2010, 153 of our wholly owned office properties were located in what is widely known as the Greater Washington, DC region, which includes the first five regions
set forth above, and 66 were located in neighboring Greater Baltimore. At December 31, 2010, we also owned 21 wholly owned office properties in Colorado Springs and eight in San Antonio. In
addition, we owned two office properties as of December 31, 2010 in Greater Philadelphia that are considered non-core to the Company. Our wholesale data center, which is comprised
of one property in Manassas, Virginia, is reported as a separate segment.
For
information relating to our segments, you should refer to Note 16 to our consolidated financial statements, which is included in a separate section at the end of this Annual
Report on Form 10-K beginning on page F-1.
8
Table of Contents
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had 411 employees, none of whom were parties to collective bargaining agreements. We believe that
our relations with our employees are good.
Competition
The commercial real estate market is highly competitive. Numerous commercial properties compete with our properties for tenants. Some
of the properties competing with ours may be newer or have more desirable locations, or the competing properties' owners may be willing to accept lower rents than are acceptable to us. We also compete
with our own tenants, many of whom have the right to sublease their space. The competitive environment for leasing is affected considerably by a number of factors including, among other things,
changes in economic factors and supply of and demand for space. These factors may make it difficult for us to lease existing vacant space and space associated with future lease expirations at rental
rates that are sufficient to meeting our short-term capital needs.
We
also compete for the acquisition of commercial properties with many entities, including other publicly-traded commercial REITs. Many of our competitors for such acquisitions have
substantially greater financial resources than ours. In addition, our competitors may be willing to accept lower returns on their investments. If our competitors prevent us from buying properties that
we have targeted for acquisition, we may not be able to meet our property acquisition goals.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Set forth below are risks and uncertainties relating to our business and the ownership of our securities. You should carefully consider
each of these risks and uncertainties and all of the information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and its Exhibits, including our consolidated financial statements and notes
thereto for the year ended December 31, 2010, which are included in a separate section at the end of this report beginning on page F-1.
Our performance and value are subject to risks associated with our properties and with the real estate industry. Real estate
investments are subject
to various risks and fluctuations in value and demand, many of which are beyond our control. Our economic performance and the value of our real estate assets may decline due to conditions in the
general economy and the real estate business which, in turn, could have an adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our
shareholders. These conditions include, but are not limited to:
-
- downturns in national, regional and local economic environments, including increases in the unemployment rate and
inflation or deflation;
-
- competition from other properties;
-
- deteriorating local real estate market conditions, such as oversupply, reduction in demand and decreasing rental rates;
-
- declining real estate valuations and impairment charges;
-
- increasing vacancies and the need to periodically repair, renovate and re-lease space;
-
- adverse developments concerning our tenants, which could affect our ability to collect rents and execute lease renewals;
-
- increasing operating costs, including insurance expense, utilities, real estate taxes and other expenses, much of which we
may not be able to pass through to tenants;
-
- increasing interest rates and unavailability of financing on acceptable terms or at all;
9
Table of Contents
-
- trends in office real estate that may adversely affect future demand, including telecommuting and flexible workplaces that
increase the population density per square foot;
-
- adverse changes in taxation or zoning laws;
-
- potential inability to secure adequate insurance;
-
- adverse consequences resulting from civil disturbances, natural disasters, terrorist acts or acts of war; and
-
- potential liability under environmental or other laws or regulations.
We may suffer adverse consequences as a result of recent and future economic events. Since the latter part of 2007, the United States
and world
economies have struggled through difficult conditions, including a significant recession. This slowdown has had devastating effects on the capital markets, with tightening credit availability. The
commercial real estate industry was affected by these events over the last four years and, we believe, will likely continue to be affected at least through 2011. These events could adversely affect us
in numerous ways discussed throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The real estate industry in general has encountered increased difficulty in obtaining capital to fund growth
activities, such as acquisitions and development costs, debt repayments and other capital requirements. As a result, the level of risk that we may not be able to obtain new financing for acquisitions,
development activities, refinancing of existing debt or other capital requirements at reasonable terms, if at all, has increased. We believe that there is an increased likelihood in the current
economic climate of tenants encountering financial difficulties, including bankruptcy, insolvency or general downturn of business, and as a result there is an increased likelihood of such tenants
defaulting in their lease obligations to us. We also expect that our leasing activities will be adversely affected, with an increased likelihood of our being unsuccessful in renewing tenants, renewing
tenants on terms less favorable to us or being unable to lease newly constructed properties. As a result, the conditions brought about by these economic events could collectively have an adverse
effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We are dependent on external sources of capital for future growth. Because we are a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our annual
taxable
income to our shareholders. Due to this requirement, we are not able to significantly fund our acquisition, construction and development activities using cash flow from operations. Therefore, our
ability to fund these activities is dependent on our ability to access capital funded by third parties. Such capital could be in the form of new debt, equity issuances of common shares, preferred
shares, common and preferred units in our Operating Partnership or joint venture funding. These capital sources may not be available on favorable terms or at all. Since the United States financial
markets have recently experienced extreme volatility and, as a result, credit markets have tightened considerably, the level of risk that we may not be able to obtain new financing for acquisitions,
development activities or other capital requirements at reasonable terms, if at all, has increased. Moreover, additional debt financing may substantially increase our leverage and subject us to
covenants that restrict management's flexibility in directing our operations, and additional equity offerings may result in substantial dilution of our shareholders' interests. Our inability to obtain
capital when needed could have a material adverse effect on our ability to expand our business and fund other cash requirements.
We
use our Revolving Credit Facility to initially finance much of our investing and financing activities. We also use a construction loan agreement with an aggregate commitment by the
lenders that is restorable (the "Revolving Construction Facility") and other credit facilities to fund a significant portion of our construction activities. Our lenders under these and other
facilities could, for financial hardship or other reasons, fail to honor their commitments to fund our requests for borrowings under these facilities. In the event that one or more lenders under these
facilities are not able or willing to
10
Table of Contents
fund
a borrowing request, it would adversely affect our ability to access borrowing capacity under these facilities, which would in turn adversely affect our financial condition, cash flows and
ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may suffer adverse consequences as a result of our reliance on rental revenues for our income. We earn revenue from renting our
properties. Our
operating costs do not necessarily fluctuate in relation to changes in our rental revenue. This means that our costs will not necessarily decline and may increase even if our revenues decline.
For
new tenants or upon lease expiration for existing tenants, we generally must make improvements and pay other leasing costs for which we may not receive increased rents. We also make
building-related capital improvements for which tenants may not reimburse us.
If
our properties do not generate revenue sufficient to meeting our operating expenses and capital costs, we may have to borrow additional amounts to cover these costs. In such
circumstances, we would likely have lower profits or possibly incur losses. We may also find in such circumstances that we are unable to borrow to cover such costs, in which case our operations could
be adversely affected. Moreover, there may be less or no cash available for distributions to our shareholders.
In
addition, the competitive environment for leasing is affected considerably by a number of factors including, among other things, changes due to economic factors such as supply and
demand. These factors may make it difficult for us to lease existing vacant space and space associated with future lease expirations at rental rates that are sufficient to meeting our
short-term capital needs.
We rely on the ability of our tenants to pay rent and would be harmed by their inability to do so. Our performance depends on the
ability of our
tenants to fulfill their lease obligations by paying their rental payments in a timely manner. If one or more of our major tenants, or a number of our smaller tenants, were to experience financial
difficulties, including bankruptcy, insolvency or general downturn of
business, there could be an adverse effect on financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may be adversely affected by developments concerning some of our major tenants and sector concentrations. As of December 31,
2010, our 20
largest tenants accounted for 58.1% of the total annualized rental revenue of our wholly owned office properties, and our four largest of these tenants accounted for 64.2% of that total. We compute
the annualized rental revenue by multiplying by 12 the sum of monthly contractual base rents and estimated monthly expense reimbursements under active leases in our portfolio of wholly owned
properties as of December 31, 2010. Information regarding our four largest tenants is set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tenant
|
|
Annualized
Rental Revenue at
December 31, 2010 |
|
Percentage of Total
Annualized Rental
Revenue of Wholly
Owned Office Properties |
|
Number
of Leases |
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States of America |
|
$ |
95,049 |
|
|
21.1 |
% |
|
74 |
|
Northrop Grumman Corporation(1) |
|
|
32,857 |
|
|
7.3 |
% |
|
17 |
|
Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. |
|
|
21,311 |
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
8 |
|
Computer Sciences Corporation(1) |
|
|
18,788 |
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
6 |
|
- (1)
- Includes
affiliated organizations and agencies and predecessor companies.
Most
of our leases with the United States Government provide for a series of one-year terms or provide for early termination rights. The United States Government may
terminate its leases if, among other reasons, the United States Congress fails to provide funding. If any of our four largest tenants fail to make rental payments to us or if the United States
Government elects to terminate several of its
11
Table of Contents
leases
and the space cannot be re-leased on satisfactory terms, there would be an adverse effect on our financial performance and ability to make distributions to our shareholders.
As
of December 31, 2010, our properties that were occupied primarily by tenants in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving
such sectors accounted for 58.7% of the total annualized rental revenue of our wholly owned office properties. We expect to increase our reliance on these sectors for revenue. A reduction in
government spending targeting these sectors could affect the ability of these tenants to fulfill lease obligations or decrease the likelihood that these tenants will renew their leases. Moreover, a
reduction in government spending targeting these sectors could limit our future growth. Such occurrences could have an adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and
ability to make distributions to our shareholders. We generally classify the revenue from our leases into this sector grouping based solely on management's knowledge of the tenants' operations in
leased space. Occasionally, classifications require subjective and complex judgments. We do not use independent sources such as Standard Industrial Classification codes for classifying our revenue
into sector groupings and if we did, the resulting groupings would be materially different.
Most of our properties are geographically concentrated in the Mid-Atlantic region, particularly in the Greater Washington, DC region and neighboring
Greater Baltimore, or in particular office parks. We may suffer economic harm in the event of a decline in the real estate market or general economic conditions in those regions or
parks. Most of our properties are located in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States and, as of December 31, 2010, our properties located in the Greater
Washington, DC region and neighboring Greater Baltimore accounted for a combined 85.4% of our total annualized rental revenue from wholly owned office properties. Our properties are also typically
concentrated in office parks in which we own most of the properties. Consequently, we do not have a broad geographic distribution of our properties. As a result, a decline in the real estate market or
general economic conditions in the Mid-Atlantic region, the Greater Washington, DC region or the office parks in which our properties are located could have an adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We would suffer economic harm if we were unable to renew our leases on favorable terms. When leases expire, our tenants may not renew or
may renew on
terms less favorable to us than the terms of their original leases. If a tenant vacates a property, we can expect to experience a vacancy for some period of time, as well as incur higher leasing costs
than we would likely incur if a tenant renews. As a result, our financial performance and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders could be adversely affected if we experience a high
volume of tenant departures at the end of their lease terms. We expect that the effects of the global downturn on our real estate operations will make our leasing activities particularly challenging
at least through 2011 and, as a result, there could be an increased likelihood of our being unsuccessful in renewing tenants or renewing on terms less favorable to us than the terms of the original
leases. Set forth below are the percentages of total annualized rental revenue from wholly owned office properties as of December 31, 2010 that are subject to scheduled lease expirations in
each of the next five years:
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
10.4 |
% |
2012 |
|
|
12.7 |
% |
2013 |
|
|
13.3 |
% |
2014 |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
2015 |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
As
noted above, most of the leases with our largest tenant, the United States Government, provide for consecutive one-year terms or provide for early termination rights. All
of the leasing statistics set forth above assume that the United States Government will remain in the space that it leases through
12
Table of Contents
the
end of the respective arrangements, without ending consecutive one-year leases prematurely or exercising early termination rights.
We may be adversely affected by trends in the office real estate industry. Some businesses are rapidly evolving to make employee
telecommuting,
flexible work schedules, open workplaces and teleconferencing increasingly common. These practices enable businesses to reduce their space requirements. A continuation of the movement towards these
practices could over time erode the overall demand for office space and, in turn, place downward pressure on occupancy, rental rates and property valuations, each of which could have an adverse effect
on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may encounter a decline in the value of our real estate. The value of our real estate could be adversely affected by general
economic and market
conditions connected to a specific property, a market or submarket, a broader economic region or the office real estate industry. Examples of such conditions include a broader economic recession,
declining demand and decreases in market rental
rates and/or market values of real estate assets. If our real estate assets decline in value, it could result in our recognition of impairment losses. Moreover, a decline in the value of our real
estate could adversely affect the amount of borrowings available to us under credit facilities and other loans, which could, in turn, adversely affect our cash flows and financial condition.
We may not be able to compete successfully with other entities that operate in our industry. The commercial real estate market is
highly competitive.
We compete for the purchase of commercial property with many entities, including other publicly traded commercial REITs. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial resources than we
do. If our competitors prevent us from buying properties that we target for acquisition, we may not be able to meet our property acquisition goals. Moreover, numerous commercial properties compete for
tenants with our properties. Some of the properties competing with ours may be newer or in more desirable locations, or the competing properties' owners may be willing to accept lower rates than are
acceptable to us. Competition for property acquisitions, or for tenants of properties that we own, could have an adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability
to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may be unable to successfully execute our plans to acquire existing commercial real estate properties. We intend to acquire existing
commercial
real estate properties to the extent that suitable acquisitions can be made on advantageous terms. Acquisitions of commercial properties entail risks, such as the risks that we may not be in a
position, or have the opportunity in the future, to make suitable property acquisitions on advantageous terms and/or that such acquisitions will fail to perform as expected. The failure of our
acquisitions to perform as expected could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may be exposed to unknown liabilities from acquired properties. We may acquire properties that are subject to liabilities in
situations where we
have no recourse, or only limited recourse, against the prior owners or other third parties with respect to unknown liabilities. As a result, if a liability were asserted against us based upon
ownership of those properties, we might have to pay substantial sums to settle or contest it, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flow. Examples of unknown liabilities with
respect to acquired properties include, but are not limited to:
-
- liabilities for clean-up of disclosed or undisclosed environmental contamination;
-
- claims by tenants, vendors or other persons dealing with the former owners of the properties;
-
- liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business; and
13
Table of Contents
-
- claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the former owners of the
properties.
We may suffer economic harm as a result of making unsuccessful acquisitions in new markets. We may pursue selective acquisitions of
properties in
regions where we have not previously owned properties. These acquisitions may entail risks in addition to those we face in other acquisitions where we are familiar with the regions, such as the risk
that we do not correctly anticipate conditions or trends in a new market and are therefore not able to operate the acquired property profitably. If this occurs, it could adversely affect our financial
position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may be unable to execute our plans to develop and construct additional properties. Although the majority of our investments are in
currently
leased properties, we also develop, construct and redevelop properties, including some that are not fully pre-leased. When we develop, construct and redevelop properties, we assume the
risk that actual costs will exceed our budgets, that we will experience conditions which delay or preclude project completion and that projected leasing will not occur, any of which could adversely
affect our financial performance, results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders; the risk of projected leasing not occurring has increased as a result of the recent
economic conditions. In addition, we generally do not obtain construction financing commitments until the development stage of a project is complete and construction is about to commence. We may find
that we are unable to obtain financing needed to continue with the construction activities for such projects.
We may suffer adverse consequences due to our inexperience in developing, managing and leasing wholesale data centers. We have
significant experience
in developing, managing and leasing single user data center space in which tenants significantly funded the data center infrastructure costs. However, we do not have the same depth and length of
experience in relation to wholesale data centers, having acquired our first wholesale data center in 2010. This may increase the likelihood of us being unsuccessful in executing our plans with respect
to our existing wholesale data center or any such centers that we may acquire or develop in the future. If we are unsuccessful in executing our wholesale data center plans, it could adversely affect
our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
Our data centers may become obsolete. Data centers are much more expensive investments on a per square foot basis than office
properties due to the
level of infrastructure required to operate the centers. At the same time, technology, industry standards and service requirements for data centers are rapidly evolving and, as a result, the risk of
investments we make in data centers becoming obsolete is higher than office properties. Our data centers may become obsolete due to the development of new systems to deliver power to or eliminate heat
from the servers housed in the properties. Our data centers could also become obsolete from new server technology that requires less critical load and heat removal than our facilities are designed to
provide. In addition, we may not be able to efficiently upgrade or change power and cooling systems to meet new demands or industry standards without incurring significant costs that we may not be
able to pass on to our tenants. The obsolescence of our data centers could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our
shareholders.
Certain of our properties containing data centers contain space not suitable for lease other than as data centers, which could make it difficult or impractical to
reposition them for alternative use. Certain of our properties contain data center space, which is highly specialized space containing extensive electrical and mechanical
systems that are designed uniquely to run and maintain banks of computer servers. As a result, in the event we needed to reposition such data center space for another use, major renovations and
expenditures could be required.
14
Table of Contents
We may suffer adverse effects as a result of the indebtedness that we carry and the terms and covenants that relate to this debt. Many
of our
properties are pledged by us to support repayment on indebtedness. In addition, we rely on borrowings to fund some or all of the costs of new property acquisitions, construction and development
activities and other items. Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of indebtedness that we may incur.
Payments
of principal and interest on our debt may leave us with insufficient cash to operate our properties or pay distributions to our shareholders required to maintain our
qualification as a REIT. We are also subject to the risks that:
-
- we may not be able to refinance our existing indebtedness, or may refinance on terms that are less favorable to us than
the terms of our existing indebtedness;
-
- in the event of our default under the terms of our Revolving Credit Facility, our Operating Partnership could be
restricted from making cash distributions to us, which could result in reduced distributions to our shareholders or the need for us to incur additional debt to fund these distributions;
-
- if we are unable to pay our debt service on time or are unable to comply with restrictive financial covenants in certain
of our debt, our lenders could foreclose on our properties securing such debt and, in some cases, other properties and assets that we own.
Some
of our debt is cross-defaulted, which means that failure to pay interest or principal on the debt above a threshold value will create a default on certain of our other debt. In
addition, some of our debt which is cross-defaulted also contains cross-collateralization provisions, which means that the collateral of the debt can also be used as collateral for certain of our
other debt. Any foreclosure of our properties could result in loss of income and asset value that would negatively affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make
expected distributions to our shareholders. In addition, if we are in default and the value of the properties securing a loan is less than the loan balance, we may be required to pay the resulting
shortfall to the lender using other assets.
As
of December 31, 2010, 22% of our debt had variable interest rates, including the effect of interest rate swaps. If short-term interest rates were to rise, our debt
service payments on debt with variable interest rates would increase, which would lower our net income and could decrease our distributions to our shareholders. We use interest rate swap agreements
from time to time to reduce the impact of changes in interest rates. Decreases in interest rates would result in increased interest payments due under interest rate swap agreements in place and, in
the event we decided to unwind such agreements, could result in our recognizing a loss and remitting a payment.
We
must refinance our debt in the future. As of December 31, 2010, our scheduled debt payments over the next five years, including maturities, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Amount(1) |
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2011 |
|
$ |
733,739 |
(2) |
2012 |
|
|
271,390 |
|
2013 |
|
|
146,049 |
|
2014 |
|
|
210,225 |
|
2015 |
|
|
396,473 |
|
- (1)
- Represents
principal maturities only and therefore excludes premiums and discounts.
- (2)
- Includes
$142.3 million in maturities that were extended to 2012 in January 2011 and an additional $311.8 million that may also be extended
for one year, subject to certain conditions.
15
Table of Contents
Our
operations likely will not generate enough cash flow to repay some or all of this debt without additional borrowings, equity issuances and/or property sales. If we cannot refinance our debt,
extend the repayment dates, or raise additional equity prior to the dates when our debt matures, we would default on our existing debt, which would have an adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may incur additional indebtedness, which may harm our financial position and cash flow and potentially impact our ability to pay dividends on any series of preferred
shares. Our governing documents do not limit us from incurring additional indebtedness and other liabilities. As of December 31, 2010, we had
$2.3 billion of consolidated indebtedness outstanding. We may incur additional indebtedness and become more highly leveraged, which could harm our financial position and potentially limit our
cash available to pay dividends. As a result, we may not have sufficient funds remaining to satisfy our dividend obligations relating to any series of preferred shares if we incur additional
indebtedness.
We have certain distribution requirements that reduce cash available for other business purposes. As a REIT, we must distribute at
least 90% of our
annual taxable income (excluding capital gains), which limits the amount of cash we can retain for other business purposes, including amounts to fund acquisitions and development activity. Also, it is
possible that because of the differences between the time we actually receive revenue or pay expenses and the period during which we report those items for distribution purposes, we may have to borrow
funds to meet the 90% distribution requirement.
We may be unable to continue to make shareholder distributions at expected levels. We expect to make regular quarterly cash
distributions to our
shareholders. However, our ability to make such distributions depends on a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control. Some of our loan agreements contain provisions that could restrict
future distributions. Our ability to make distributions at expected levels will also be dependent, in part, on other matters, including, but not limited to:
-
- continued property occupancy and timely receipt of rent obligations;
-
- the amount of future capital expenditures and expenses relating to our properties;
-
- the level of leasing activity and future rental rates;
-
- the strength of the commercial real estate market;
-
- our ability to compete;
-
- our costs of compliance with environmental and other laws;
-
- our corporate overhead levels;
-
- our amount of uninsured losses; and
-
- our decision to reinvest in operations rather than distribute available cash.
In
addition, we can make distributions to the holders of our common shares only after we make preferential distributions to holders of our preferred shares.
Our ability to pay dividends may be limited, and we cannot provide assurance that we will be able to pay dividends regularly. Because
we conduct
substantially all of our operations through our Operating Partnership, our ability to pay dividends will depend almost entirely on payments and distributions received on our interests in our Operating
Partnership, the payment of which depends in turn on our ability to operate profitably and generate cash flow from our operations. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to pay dividends on a
regular quarterly basis in the future. Additionally, the terms of some of the debt to which our Operating Partnership is a party limit its ability to make some types of payments and other
distributions to us. This in turn limits our ability to make some types of payments, including payment of dividends on common or preferred shares, unless we meet certain
16
Table of Contents
financial
tests or such payments or dividends are required to maintain our qualification as a REIT. As a result, if we are unable to meet the applicable financial tests, we may not be able to pay
dividends on our shares in one or more periods. Furthermore, any new shares of beneficial interest issued will substantially increase the cash required to continue to pay cash dividends at current
levels. Any common or preferred shares that may in the future be issued for financing acquisitions, share-based compensation arrangements or otherwise would have a similar effect.
Our ability to pay dividends on preferred shares is further limited by the requirements of Maryland law. As a Maryland REIT, we may not
under
applicable Maryland law make a distribution if either of the following conditions exist after giving effect to the distribution: (1) the REIT would not be able to pay its debts as the debts
become due in the usual course of business; or (2) the REIT's total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus the amount that would be needed, if the REIT were dissolved
at the time of the distribution, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of shareholders whose preferential rights are superior to those receiving the distribution. Therefore, we may not
make a distribution on any series of preferred shares if either of the above described conditions exists after giving effect to the distribution.
We may issue additional common or preferred shares that dilute our shareholders' interests. We may issue additional common shares and
preferred
shares without shareholder approval. Similarly, we may cause the Operating Partnership to issue its common or preferred units for contributions of cash or property without approval by the limited
partners of the Operating Partnership or our shareholders. Our existing shareholders' interests could be diluted if such additional issuances were to occur.
Real estate investments are illiquid, and we may not be able to sell our properties on a timely basis when we determine it is appropriate to do
so. Real estate investments can be difficult to sell and convert to cash quickly, especially if market conditions are not favorable, and we may find that to be
increasingly the case under the current economic conditions due to a lack of credit availability for potential buyers. Such illiquidity could limit our ability to quickly change our portfolio of
properties in response to changes in economic or other conditions. Moreover, under certain circumstances, the Internal Revenue Code imposes certain penalties on a REIT that sells property held for
less than two years and limits the number of properties it can sell in a given year. In addition, for certain of our properties that we acquired by issuing units in our Operating Partnership, we are
restricted by agreements with the sellers of the properties for a certain period of time from entering into transactions (such as the sale or refinancing of the acquired property) that will result in
a taxable gain to the sellers without the seller's consent. Due to these factors, we may be unable to sell a property at an advantageous time.
We may suffer economic harm as a result of the actions of our partners in real estate joint ventures and other investments. We invest in
certain
entities in which we are not the exclusive investor or principal decision maker. Investments in such entities may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present when a third party is not
involved, including the possibility that the other parties to these investments might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions. Our partners in these entities may
have economic, tax or other business interests or goals which are inconsistent with our business interests or goals, and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or objectives.
Such investments may also lead to impasses, for example, as to whether to sell a property, because neither we nor the other parties to these investments may have full control over the entity. In
addition, we may in certain circumstances be liable for the actions of the other parties to these investments. Each of these factors could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may need to make additional cash outlays to protect our investment in loans we make that are subordinate to other loans. We have
made and may in
the future make loans under which we have a
17
Table of Contents
secured
interest in the ownership of a property that is subordinate to other loans on the property. If a default were to occur under the terms of any such loans with us or under the first mortgage
loans related to the properties on such loans, we may be in a position where, in order to protect our investment, we would need to either (1) purchase the other loan or (2) foreclose on
the ownership interest in the property and repay the first mortgage loan, either of which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make
expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may be subject to possible environmental liabilities. We are subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws,
including air and
water quality, hazardous or toxic substances and health and safety. These laws can impose liability on current and prior property owners or operators for the costs of removal or remediation of
hazardous substances released on a property, even if the property owner was not responsible for, or even aware of, the release of the hazardous substances. Costs resulting from environmental liability
could be substantial. The presence of hazardous substances on our properties may also adversely affect occupancy and our ability to sell or borrow against those properties. In addition to the costs of
government claims under environmental laws, private plaintiffs may bring claims for personal injury or other reasons. Additionally, various laws impose liability for the costs of removal or
remediation of hazardous substances at the disposal or treatment facility. Anyone who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances at such a facility is potentially liable under such
laws. These laws often impose liability on an entity even if the facility was not owned or operated by the entity.
Although
most of our properties have been subject to varying degrees of environmental assessment, many of these assessments are limited in scope and may not include or identify all
potential environmental liabilities or risks associated with the property. Identification of new compliance concerns or undiscovered areas of contamination, changes in the extent or known scope of
contamination, discovery of additional sites, human exposure to the contamination or changes in cleanup or compliance requirements could result in significant costs to us that could have an adverse
effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
Terrorist attacks, such as those of September 11, 2001, may adversely affect the value of our properties, our financial position and cash
flows. We have significant investments in properties located in large metropolitan areas and near military installations. Future terrorist attacks could directly
or indirectly damage our properties or cause losses that materially exceed our insurance coverage. After such an attack, tenants in these areas may choose to relocate their businesses to areas of the
United States that may be perceived to be less likely targets of future terrorist activity, and fewer customers may choose to patronize businesses in these areas. This in turn would trigger a decrease
in the demand for space in these areas, which could increase vacancies in our properties and force us to lease space on less favorable terms. As a result, the occurrence of terrorist attacks could
adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
We may be subject to other possible liabilities that would adversely affect our financial position and cash flows. Our properties may be
subject to
other risks related to current or future laws, including laws benefiting disabled persons, state or local laws relating to zoning, construction, fire and life safety requirements and other matters.
These laws may require significant property modifications in the future and could result in the levy of fines against us. In addition, although we believe that we adequately insure our properties, we
are subject to the risk that our insurance may not cover all of the costs to
restore a property that is damaged by a fire or other catastrophic events, including acts of war or, as mentioned above, terrorism. The occurrence of any of these events could have an adverse effect
on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
18
Table of Contents
We may be subject to increased costs of insurance and limitations on coverage, particularly regarding acts of terrorism. Our portfolio
of properties
is insured for losses under our property, casualty and umbrella insurance policies through September 30, 2011. These policies include coverage for acts of terrorism. Future changes in the
insurance industry's risk assessment approach and pricing structure may increase the cost of insuring our properties and decrease the scope of insurance coverage, either of which could adversely
affect our financial position and operating results. Most of our loan agreements contain customary covenants requiring us to maintain insurance. Although we believe that we have adequate insurance
coverage for purposes of these agreements, we may not be able to obtain an equivalent amount of coverage at reasonable costs, or at all, in the future. In addition, if lenders insist on greater
coverage than we are able to obtain, it could adversely affect our ability to finance and/or refinance our properties and execute our growth strategies, which, in turn, would have an adverse effect on
our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.
Our business could be adversely affected by a negative audit by the United States Government. Agencies of the United States, including
the Defense
Contract Audit Agency and various agency Inspectors General, routinely audit and investigate government contractors. These agencies review a contractor's performance under its contracts, cost
structure and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and standards. The United States Government also reviews the adequacy of, and a contractor's compliance with, its internal control systems
and policies. Any costs found to be misclassified may be subject to repayment. If an audit or investigation uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties
and administrative sanctions, including termination of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines, and suspension or prohibition from doing business with the United States
Government. In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us.
Our ownership limits are important factors. Our Declaration of Trust limits ownership of our common shares by any single shareholder to
9.8% of the
number of the outstanding common shares or 9.8% of the value of the outstanding common shares, whichever is more restrictive. Our Declaration of Trust also limits ownership by any single shareholder
of our common and preferred shares in the aggregate
to 9.8% of the aggregate value of the outstanding common and preferred shares. We call these restrictions the "Ownership Limit." Our Declaration of Trust allows our Board of Trustees to exempt
shareholders from the Ownership Limit. The Ownership Limit and the restrictions on ownership of our common shares may delay or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium
price for our common shares or otherwise be in the best interest of our shareholders.
Our Declaration of Trust includes other provisions that may prevent or delay a change of control. Subject to the requirements of the
New York Stock
Exchange, our Board of Trustees has the authority, without shareholder approval, to issue additional securities on terms that could delay or prevent a change in control. In addition, our Board of
Trustees has the authority to reclassify any of our unissued common shares into preferred shares. Our Board of Trustees may issue preferred shares with such preferences, rights, powers and
restrictions as our Board of Trustees may determine, which could also delay or prevent a change in control.
The Maryland business statutes impose potential restrictions that may discourage a change of control of our company. Various Maryland
laws may have
the effect of discouraging offers to acquire us, even if the acquisition would be advantageous to shareholders. Resolutions adopted by our Board of Trustees and/or provisions of our bylaws exempt us
from such laws, but our Board of Trustees can alter its resolutions or change our bylaws at any time to make these provisions applicable to us.
Our failure to qualify as a REIT would have adverse tax consequences, which would substantially reduce funds available to make distributions to our
shareholders. We believe that since 1992 we have
19
Table of Contents
qualified
for taxation as a REIT for Federal income tax purposes. We plan to continue to meet the requirements for taxation as a REIT. Many of these requirements, however, are highly technical and
complex. The determination that we are a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances that may not be totally within our control. For example, to qualify as a REIT, at least
95% of our gross income must come from certain sources that are specified in the REIT tax laws. We are also required to distribute to shareholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (excluding
capital gains). The fact that we hold most of our assets through our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a technical or
inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Furthermore, Congress and the Internal Revenue Service might make changes to the tax laws and regulations and the courts might issue new rulings
that make it more difficult or impossible for us to remain qualified as a REIT.
If
we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would be subject to Federal income tax at regular corporate rates. Also, unless the Internal Revenue Service granted us relief under certain statutory
provisions, we would remain disqualified as a REIT for four years following the year we first fail to qualify. If we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would have to pay significant income taxes and would
therefore have less money available for investments or for distributions to our shareholders. In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we will no longer be required to pay dividends. As a result
of all these factors, our failure to qualify as a REIT could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital and would likely have a significant adverse effect on the value of our
securities.
We could face possible adverse changes in tax laws, which may result in an increase in our tax liability. From time to time changes in
state and
local tax laws or regulations are enacted, which may result in an increase in our tax liability. The shortfall in tax revenues for states and municipalities in recent years may lead to an increase in
the frequency and size of such changes. If such changes occur, we may be required to pay additional taxes on our assets or income. These increased tax costs could adversely affect our financial
condition and results of operations and the amount of cash available for payment of dividends.
A number of factors could cause our security prices to decline. As is the case with any publicly-traded securities, certain factors
outside of our
control could influence the value of our common and preferred shares. These conditions include, but are not limited to:
-
- market perception of REITs in general and office REITs in particular;
-
- the level of institutional investor interest in our Company;
-
- general economic and business conditions;
-
- prevailing interest rates;
-
- our financial performance;
-
- our underlying asset value;
-
- market perception of our financial condition, performance, dividends and growth potential; and
-
- adverse changes in tax laws.
We may experience significant losses and harm to our financial condition if financial institutions holding our cash and cash equivalents file for bankruptcy
protection. We believe that we maintain our cash and cash equivalents with high quality financial institutions. We have not experienced any losses to date on our
deposited cash. However, we may incur significant losses and harm to our financial condition in the future if any of these financial institutions files for bankruptcy protection.
Certain of our Trustees have potential conflicts of interest. Certain members of our Board of Trustees own partnership units in our
Operating
Partnership. These individuals may have personal
20
Table of Contents
interests
that conflict with the interests of our shareholders. For example, if our Operating Partnership sells or refinances certain of the properties that these Trustees contributed to the Operating
Partnership, the Trustees could suffer adverse tax consequences. Their personal interests could conflict with our interests if such a sale or refinancing would be advantageous to us. We have certain
policies in place that are designed to minimize conflicts of interest. We cannot, however, provide assurance that these policies will be successful in eliminating the influence of such conflicts, and
if they are not successful, decisions could be made that might fail to reflect fully the interests of all of our shareholders.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None
21
Table of Contents
Item 2. Properties
The following table provides certain information about our wholly owned office properties as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2730 Hercules Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
240,336 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
8,087,504 |
|
$ |
33.65 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300 Sentinel Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
192,562 |
|
|
79.5 |
% |
|
4,883,794 |
|
|
31.90 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
304 Sentinel Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
162,647 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,900,519 |
|
|
30.13 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
306 Sentinel Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
155,883 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,741,283 |
|
|
30.42 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2720 Technology Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
156,730 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
5,174,350 |
|
|
33.01 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
302 Sentinel Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
153,598 |
|
|
99.6 |
% |
|
5,073,056 |
|
|
33.16 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2711 Technology Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
152,196 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,775,664 |
|
|
31.38 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
308 Sentinel Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
31,128 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,027,224 |
|
|
33.00 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
320 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
125,681 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,808,650 |
|
|
38.26 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
125,681 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,303,838 |
|
|
34.24 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
322 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
125,568 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,791,402 |
|
|
38.16 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
324 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
125,118 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,543,967 |
|
|
28.32 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
119,904 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,041,801 |
|
|
33.71 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
118,598 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,772,677 |
|
|
31.81 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2721 Technology Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
118,093 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,863,446 |
|
|
32.72 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2701 Technology Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
117,450 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,671,870 |
|
|
31.26 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2691 Technology Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
103,683 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,362,821 |
|
|
32.43 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
93,482 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,716,807 |
|
|
29.06 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
87,422 |
|
|
89.0 |
% |
|
2,586,642 |
|
|
33.25 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
133 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
87,401 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,773,921 |
|
|
31.74 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
87,206 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,831,278 |
|
|
32.47 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
69,336 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,210,056 |
|
|
31.87 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
9,908 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
231,218 |
|
|
23.34 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
4,462 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
203,798 |
|
|
45.67 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1550 West Nursery Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
162,101 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,366,433 |
|
|
20.77 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
1306 Concourse Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
116,307 |
|
|
68.8 |
% |
|
1,909,479 |
|
|
23.88 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1304 Concourse Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
101,792 |
|
|
78.9 |
% |
|
2,111,806 |
|
|
26.29 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
900 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1982 |
|
|
100,824 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,372,295 |
|
|
23.53 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
880 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1981 |
|
|
99,524 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,197,490 |
|
|
22.08 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1199 Winterson Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
96,636 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,654,571 |
|
|
27.47 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
920 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1982 |
|
|
96,566 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,942,773 |
|
|
20.12 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1302 Concourse Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1996 |
|
|
84,053 |
|
|
82.3 |
% |
|
1,741,674 |
|
|
25.17 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
881 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
73,572 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,784,645 |
|
|
24.26 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1099 Winterson Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
70,583 |
|
|
31.2 |
% |
|
520,008 |
|
|
23.59 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1190 Winterson Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1987 |
|
|
68,899 |
|
|
93.5 |
% |
|
1,784,960 |
|
|
27.71 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
849 International Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
68,768 |
|
|
86.3 |
% |
|
1,579,873 |
|
|
26.62 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
911 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
68,296 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,580,369 |
|
|
23.14 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1201 Winterson Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
67,903 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,414,097 |
|
|
20.83 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
999 Corporate Boulevard |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
66,889 |
|
|
91.8 |
% |
|
1,812,239 |
|
|
29.52 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
901 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
58,035 |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
|
858,162 |
|
|
29.57 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
891 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
57,955 |
|
|
91.1 |
% |
|
1,427,742 |
|
|
27.04 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
800 International Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
57,379 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,199,164 |
|
|
20.90 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
930 International Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
57,272 |
|
|
99.8 |
% |
|
1,066,358 |
|
|
18.66 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
900 International Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
57,140 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
889,963 |
|
|
15.58 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
939 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1983 |
|
|
54,280 |
|
|
51.4 |
% |
|
483,944 |
|
|
17.34 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
921 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1983 |
|
|
54,175 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,218,938 |
|
|
22.50 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
938 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
52,988 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,244,578 |
|
|
23.49 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
870 Elkridge Landing Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1981 |
|
|
5,627 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
190,854 |
|
|
33.92 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7467 Ridge Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
74,136 |
|
|
83.1 |
% |
|
1,436,000 |
|
|
23.31 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7240 Parkway Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
74,153 |
|
|
79.9 |
% |
|
1,278,782 |
|
|
21.58 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7272 Park Circle Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1991/1996 |
|
|
59,888 |
|
|
79.6 |
% |
|
999,610 |
|
|
20.97 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7318 Parkway Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
59,204 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,200,508 |
|
|
20.28 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7320 Parkway Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1983 |
|
|
56,964 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
1340 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
45,867 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
934,899 |
|
|
20.38 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1362 Mellon Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
43,232 |
|
|
58.6 |
% |
|
572,879 |
|
|
22.61 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1334 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
37,317 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
870,824 |
|
|
23.34 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1331 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
28,998 |
|
|
29.5 |
% |
|
144,125 |
|
|
16.84 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1350 Dorsey Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
18,698 |
|
|
67.2 |
% |
|
268,575 |
|
|
21.38 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1344 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
16,964 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
499,521 |
|
|
29.45 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1341 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
15,947 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
318,390 |
|
|
19.97 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1343 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
9,903 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
135,968 |
|
|
13.73 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1348 Ashton Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
3,108 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
75,930 |
|
|
24.43 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5520 Research Park Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
103,990 |
|
|
39.2 |
% |
|
1,034,972 |
|
|
25.37 |
|
|
|
Catonsville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5522 Research Park Drive |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
23,500 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
781,887 |
|
|
33.27 |
|
|
|
Catonsville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2500 Riva Road |
|
Annapolis |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
155,000 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,217,712 |
|
|
14.31 |
|
|
|
Annapolis, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Old Annapolis Road |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1974/1985 |
|
|
171,436 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
7,320,399 |
|
|
42.70 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7125 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1973/1999 |
|
|
470,249 |
|
|
63.8 |
% |
|
5,860,672 |
|
|
19.54 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7000 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
145,806 |
|
|
76.9 |
% |
|
1,975,915 |
|
|
17.63 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6721 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
131,451 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,781,845 |
|
|
28.77 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6731 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
123,847 |
|
|
89.2 |
% |
|
3,211,304 |
|
|
29.07 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6711 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2006-2007 |
|
|
123,599 |
|
|
93.2 |
% |
|
3,400,641 |
|
|
29.53 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6940 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
108,822 |
|
|
86.2 |
% |
|
2,405,306 |
|
|
25.64 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6950 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
112,861 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,631,046 |
|
|
23.31 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7067 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
86,027 |
|
|
92.4 |
% |
|
1,842,907 |
|
|
23.17 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8621 Robert Fulton Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2005-2006 |
|
|
86,033 |
|
|
94.2 |
% |
|
1,734,169 |
|
|
21.40 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6750 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
75,328 |
|
|
86.8 |
% |
|
1,717,494 |
|
|
26.27 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6700 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
76,347 |
|
|
77.0 |
% |
|
1,444,917 |
|
|
24.59 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6740 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1992 |
|
|
63,480 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,813,601 |
|
|
28.57 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7015 Albert Einstein Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
61,203 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,293,310 |
|
|
21.13 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8671 Robert Fulton Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
56,350 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,051,310 |
|
|
18.66 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6716 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
52,131 |
|
|
90.6 |
% |
|
1,100,117 |
|
|
23.29 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
8661 Robert Fulton Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
49,307 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
938,964 |
|
|
19.04 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7142 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1994 |
|
|
47,668 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
716,005 |
|
|
15.02 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7130 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
46,460 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
883,181 |
|
|
19.01 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6708 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
39,203 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
916,824 |
|
|
23.39 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7065 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
38,560 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
774,928 |
|
|
20.10 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7138 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
38,225 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
863,790 |
|
|
22.60 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7063 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
36,472 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
958,645 |
|
|
26.28 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6760 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1991 |
|
|
36,225 |
|
|
57.8 |
% |
|
477,243 |
|
|
22.79 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7150 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1991 |
|
|
35,812 |
|
|
84.6 |
% |
|
572,576 |
|
|
18.89 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7061 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
29,910 |
|
|
83.0 |
% |
|
586,231 |
|
|
23.62 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6724 Alexander Bell Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
28,107 |
|
|
94.6 |
% |
|
707,435 |
|
|
26.60 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7134 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
21,991 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6741 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
4,592 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
123,984 |
|
|
27.00 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7200 Riverwood Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
160,000 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,400,776 |
|
|
27.50 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7160 Riverwood Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
61,984 |
|
|
94.6 |
% |
|
1,718,771 |
|
|
29.32 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9140 Guilford Road |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1983 |
|
|
40,286 |
|
|
53.3 |
% |
|
385,654 |
|
|
17.95 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7150 Riverwood Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
39,496 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
780,997 |
|
|
19.77 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9160 Guilford Road |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
37,034 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
948,186 |
|
|
25.60 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7170 Riverwood Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
29,162 |
|
|
65.3 |
% |
|
359,160 |
|
|
18.87 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9150 Guilford Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
18,592 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
366,640 |
|
|
19.72 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10280 Old Columbia Road |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
16,195 |
|
|
90.5 |
% |
|
247,579 |
|
|
16.89 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10270 Old Columbia Road |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
15,910 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
237,242 |
|
|
14.91 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9130 Guilford Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
13,700 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10290 Old Columbia Road |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
10,263 |
|
|
43.9 |
% |
|
96,897 |
|
|
21.50 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9720 Patuxent Woods Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
40,004 |
|
|
12.4 |
% |
|
47,145 |
|
|
9.51 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9740 Patuxent Woods Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
38,292 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
567,968 |
|
|
14.83 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9700 Patuxent Woods Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
31,220 |
|
|
84.2 |
% |
|
569,376 |
|
|
21.65 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9730 Patuxent Woods Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
30,485 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
482,386 |
|
|
15.82 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
9710 Patuxent Woods Drive |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
14,778 |
|
|
72.2 |
% |
|
131,309 |
|
|
12.30 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9020 Mendenhall Court |
|
Howard County |
|
|
1982/2005 |
|
|
49,217 |
|
|
88.6 |
% |
|
651,297 |
|
|
14.94 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
Perimeter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,432,626 |
|
|
89.5 |
% |
$ |
201,596,725 |
|
$ |
26.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Virginia: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15000 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
471,440 |
|
|
80.4 |
% |
$ |
9,261,749 |
|
$ |
24.44 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15010 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
223,610 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
6,957,290 |
|
|
31.11 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15059 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
145,224 |
|
|
98.8 |
% |
|
4,532,214 |
|
|
31.60 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15049 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
145,706 |
|
|
99.8 |
% |
|
4,792,103 |
|
|
32.97 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14900 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
126,158 |
|
|
76.9 |
% |
|
2,777,767 |
|
|
28.62 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14280 Park Meadow Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
114,126 |
|
|
88.3 |
% |
|
2,701,138 |
|
|
26.80 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4851 Stonecroft Boulevard |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
88,094 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,604,401 |
|
|
29.56 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14850 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
72,194 |
|
|
33.4 |
% |
|
334,537 |
|
|
13.89 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14840 Conference Center Drive |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
69,710 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,135,089 |
|
|
30.63 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13200 Woodland Park Drive |
|
Herndon |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
404,665 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
12,289,923 |
|
|
30.37 |
|
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13454 Sunrise Valley Road |
|
Herndon |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
111,816 |
|
|
75.0 |
% |
|
2,206,231 |
|
|
26.30 |
|
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13450 Sunrise Valley Road |
|
Herndon |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
53,776 |
|
|
98.5 |
% |
|
1,418,577 |
|
|
26.78 |
|
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3120 Fairview Park Drive(4) |
|
Herndon |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
7,080 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
281,705 |
|
|
39.79 |
|
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1751 Pinnacle Drive |
|
Tysons Corner |
|
|
1989/1995 |
|
|
260,469 |
|
|
95.6 |
% |
|
8,688,804 |
|
|
34.88 |
|
|
|
McLean, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1753 Pinnacle Drive |
|
Tysons Corner |
|
|
1976/2004 |
|
|
186,707 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
6,752,584 |
|
|
36.17 |
|
|
|
McLean, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1550 Westbranch Drive |
|
Tysons Corner |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
152,240 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,883,163 |
|
|
32.08 |
|
|
|
McLean, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2900 Towerview Road |
|
Herndon |
|
|
1982/2008 |
|
|
139,802 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,339,361 |
|
|
16.73 |
|
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,772,817 |
|
|
91.9 |
% |
$ |
74,956,636 |
|
$ |
29.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suburban Maryland: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11800 Tech Road |
|
North Silver Spring |
|
|
1969/1989 |
|
|
228,179 |
|
|
82.6 |
% |
$ |
3,314,427 |
|
$ |
17.60 |
|
|
|
Silver Spring, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400 Professional Drive |
|
Gaithersburg |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
129,355 |
|
|
61.2 |
% |
|
2,245,727 |
|
|
28.37 |
|
|
|
Gaithersburg, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110 Thomas Johnson Drive |
|
Frederick |
|
|
1987/1999 |
|
|
122,490 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,912,166 |
|
|
23.77 |
|
|
|
Frederick, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 West Gude Drive |
|
Rockville |
|
|
1987 |
|
|
108,588 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rockville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 West Gude Drive |
|
Rockville |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
106,694 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,680,626 |
|
|
25.12 |
|
|
|
Rockville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
695,306 |
|
|
71.4 |
% |
$ |
11,152,946 |
|
$ |
22.45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
Washington, DCCapitol Riverfront: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1201 M Street |
|
Washington, DC |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
200,509 |
|
|
99.8 |
% |
$ |
8,917,050 |
|
$ |
44.58 |
|
|
|
Washington, DC |
|
Capitol Riverfront |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1220 M Street |
|
Washington, DC |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
161,165 |
|
|
97.0 |
% |
|
6,804,065 |
|
|
43.54 |
|
|
|
Washington, DC |
|
Capitol Riverfront |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
361,674 |
|
|
98.5 |
% |
$ |
15,721,115 |
|
$ |
44.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
St. Mary's & King George Counties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22309 Exploration Drive |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1984/1997 |
|
|
98,860 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
1,489,935 |
|
$ |
15.07 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22289 Exploration Drive |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
58,676 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,293,086 |
|
|
22.04 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22299 Exploration Drive |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
58,363 |
|
|
93.9 |
% |
|
1,272,775 |
|
|
23.24 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22300 Exploration Drive |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
44,830 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
740,600 |
|
|
16.52 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46579 Expedition Drive |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
61,156 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,393,131 |
|
|
22.78 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46591 Expedition Drive |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
2005-2006 |
|
|
59,483 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,367,515 |
|
|
22.99 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44425 Pecan Court |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
58,981 |
|
|
94.2 |
% |
|
1,131,964 |
|
|
20.38 |
|
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44408 Pecan Court |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
50,532 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23535 Cottonwood Parkway |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
46,656 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
576,202 |
|
|
12.35 |
|
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44417 Pecan Court |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
29,053 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
304,771 |
|
|
10.49 |
|
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44414 Pecan Court |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
25,444 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
258,390 |
|
|
10.16 |
|
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44420 Pecan Court |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
25,200 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16480 Commerce Drive |
|
King George County |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
70,728 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,296,725 |
|
|
18.33 |
|
|
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16541 Commerce Drive |
|
King George County |
|
|
1996 |
|
|
36,053 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
688,662 |
|
|
19.10 |
|
|
|
King George, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16539 Commerce Drive |
|
King George County |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
32,076 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
585,387 |
|
|
18.25 |
|
|
|
King George, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16442 Commerce Drive |
|
King George County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
25,518 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16501 Commerce Drive |
|
King George County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
22,833 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
482,256 |
|
|
21.12 |
|
|
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16543 Commerce Drive |
|
King George County |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
17,370 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
416,428 |
|
|
23.97 |
|
|
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
821,812 |
|
|
86.8 |
% |
$ |
13,297,827 |
|
$ |
18.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Baltimore: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11311 McCormick Road |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1984/1994 |
|
|
214,704 |
|
|
93.5 |
% |
$ |
4,643,709 |
|
$ |
23.14 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200 International Circle |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1987 |
|
|
125,352 |
|
|
97.1 |
% |
|
2,690,307 |
|
|
22.11 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226 Schilling Circle |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1980 |
|
|
97,309 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,401,352 |
|
|
24.68 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201 International Circle |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1982 |
|
|
78,243 |
|
|
84.1 |
% |
|
1,536,019 |
|
|
23.35 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
11011 McCormick Road |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1974 |
|
|
57,104 |
|
|
24.9 |
% |
|
269,571 |
|
|
18.96 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216 Schilling Circle |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
35,806 |
|
|
91.8 |
% |
|
722,790 |
|
|
21.99 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222 Schilling Circle |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1978/1997 |
|
|
28,618 |
|
|
63.5 |
% |
|
354,738 |
|
|
19.52 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
224 Schilling Circle |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1978/1997 |
|
|
27,575 |
|
|
79.2 |
% |
|
421,454 |
|
|
19.31 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10150 York Road |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
174,737 |
|
|
77.1 |
% |
|
2,534,548 |
|
|
18.81 |
|
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9690 Deereco Road |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
133,861 |
|
|
85.5 |
% |
|
2,934,096 |
|
|
25.64 |
|
|
|
Timonium, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
375 W. Padonia Road |
|
Hunt Valley/Rte 83 |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
104,885 |
|
|
99.6 |
% |
|
2,000,112 |
|
|
19.14 |
|
|
|
Timonium, MD |
|
Corridor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7210 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1972 |
|
|
83,435 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
795,136 |
|
|
9.53 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7152 Windsor Boulevard |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
57,855 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
969,876 |
|
|
16.76 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 Governor's Court |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1981/1995 |
|
|
56,383 |
|
|
70.9 |
% |
|
634,002 |
|
|
15.86 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7125 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
50,604 |
|
|
84.9 |
% |
|
866,651 |
|
|
20.17 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7104 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
30,081 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
595,662 |
|
|
19.80 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17 Governor's Court |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1981 |
|
|
14,454 |
|
|
79.2 |
% |
|
213,845 |
|
|
18.67 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 Governor's Court |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1981 |
|
|
14,568 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
241,902 |
|
|
16.61 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7127 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
11,630 |
|
|
62.2 |
% |
|
150,161 |
|
|
20.75 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7129 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
11,075 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
81,844 |
|
|
7.39 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7108 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
8,811 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
160,039 |
|
|
18.16 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7102 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
8,879 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
149,003 |
|
|
16.78 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7106 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
8,899 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
137,073 |
|
|
15.40 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7131 Ambassador Road |
|
Baltimore County |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
7,734 |
|
|
44.2 |
% |
|
33,844 |
|
|
9.89 |
|
|
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
Westside |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
502 Washington Avenue |
|
Towson |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
90,435 |
|
|
77.5 |
% |
|
1,353,535 |
|
|
19.32 |
|
|
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102 West Pennsylvania Avenue |
|
Towson |
|
|
1968/2001 |
|
|
49,701 |
|
|
84.9 |
% |
|
902,784 |
|
|
21.41 |
|
|
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 West Pennsylvania Avenue |
|
Towson |
|
|
1952/1989 |
|
|
20,099 |
|
|
71.7 |
% |
|
253,146 |
|
|
17.56 |
|
|
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
109-111 Allegheny Avenue |
|
Towson |
|
|
1971 |
|
|
18,431 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
302,127 |
|
|
16.39 |
|
|
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1501 South Clinton Street |
|
Baltimore |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
474,637 |
|
|
89.82 |
% |
|
14,963,100 |
|
|
35.10 |
|
|
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209 Research Boulevard |
|
Harford County |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
47,930 |
|
|
100.00 |
% |
|
1,360,410 |
|
|
28.38 |
|
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
210 Research Boulevard |
|
Harford County |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
27,551 |
|
|
100.00 |
% |
|
817,292 |
|
|
29.66 |
|
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4940 Campbell Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
50,415 |
|
|
82.1 |
% |
|
947,788 |
|
|
22.91 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
8140 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
76,271 |
|
|
77.0 |
% |
|
1,618,164 |
|
|
27.54 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8110 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
79,091 |
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
1,772,798 |
|
|
23.42 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9910 Franklin Square Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
57,812 |
|
|
97.3 |
% |
|
1,275,032 |
|
|
22.66 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9920 Franklin Square Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
42,891 |
|
|
88.2 |
% |
|
853,392 |
|
|
22.56 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9930 Franklin Square Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
39,750 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
912,035 |
|
|
22.94 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9900 Franklin Square Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
33,800 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
580,001 |
|
|
17.16 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9940 Franklin Square Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
32,242 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
635,808 |
|
|
19.72 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8020 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
50,796 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
928,800 |
|
|
18.28 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8094 Sandpiper Circle |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
49,585 |
|
|
88.7 |
% |
|
815,265 |
|
|
18.53 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8098 Sandpiper Circle |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
46,485 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
850,882 |
|
|
18.30 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8010 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
38,487 |
|
|
92.5 |
% |
|
664,111 |
|
|
18.65 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5355 Nottingham Ridge Road |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
35,930 |
|
|
79.58 |
% |
|
475,646 |
|
|
16.63 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5325 Nottingham Ridge Road |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
35,678 |
|
|
76.3 |
% |
|
589,576 |
|
|
21.65 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7941-7949 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1996 |
|
|
57,782 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8007 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1995 |
|
|
41,799 |
|
|
84.8 |
% |
|
634,373 |
|
|
17.89 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8019 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
32,423 |
|
|
75.9 |
% |
|
508,682 |
|
|
20.67 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8013 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
29,995 |
|
|
27.6 |
% |
|
131,969 |
|
|
15.94 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8003 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
17,599 |
|
|
43.1 |
% |
|
182,921 |
|
|
24.11 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8015 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
15,669 |
|
|
87.1 |
% |
|
279,185 |
|
|
20.45 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8023 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
9,486 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
182,736 |
|
|
19.26 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5020 Campbell Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
43,623 |
|
|
65.2 |
% |
|
444,271 |
|
|
15.63 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5024 Campbell Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
33,710 |
|
|
60.2 |
% |
|
344,830 |
|
|
16.98 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5026 Campbell Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
30,163 |
|
|
77.8 |
% |
|
365,325 |
|
|
15.57 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5022 Campbell Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
26,748 |
|
|
74.7 |
% |
|
348,054 |
|
|
17.42 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10001 Franklin Square Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
218,215 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,127,298 |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8114 Sandpiper Circle |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1986 |
|
|
45,806 |
|
|
75.8 |
% |
|
892,640 |
|
|
25.70 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4979 Mercantile Road |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
51,198 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
753,911 |
|
|
14.73 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4969 Mercantile Road |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1983 |
|
|
47,132 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
7939 Honeygo Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
28,208 |
|
|
81.7 |
% |
|
517,254 |
|
|
22.45 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8133 Perry Hall Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
27,996 |
|
|
90.2 |
% |
|
524,990 |
|
|
20.80 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7923 Honeygo Boulevard |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
23,481 |
|
|
61.4 |
% |
|
293,652 |
|
|
20.36 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8031 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1988/2004 |
|
|
66,000 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,238,328 |
|
|
18.76 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8615 Ridgely's Choice Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
37,746 |
|
|
58.4 |
% |
|
466,258 |
|
|
21.16 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8029 Corporate Drive |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
1988/2004 |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
476,524 |
|
|
19.06 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,750,398 |
|
|
85.0 |
% |
$ |
68,122,627 |
|
$ |
21.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colorado Springs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
655 Space Center Drive |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
103,970 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
2,135,769 |
|
$ |
20.54 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
985 Space Center Drive |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
104,028 |
|
|
78.0 |
% |
|
1,824,943 |
|
|
22.50 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
565 Space Center Drive |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
89,899 |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
36,345 |
|
|
18.63 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
745 Space Center Drive |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
51,500 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,359,311 |
|
|
26.39 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
980 Technology Court |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1995 |
|
|
33,207 |
|
|
99.9 |
% |
|
645,475 |
|
|
19.45 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
525 Babcock Road |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1967 |
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
191,559 |
|
|
13.68 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1055 North Newport Road |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
2007-2008 |
|
|
59,763 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,190,948 |
|
|
19.93 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3535 Northrop Grumman Point |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
124,305 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,341,806 |
|
|
18.84 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1670 North Newport Road |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1986-1987 |
|
|
67,500 |
|
|
56.2 |
% |
|
795,514 |
|
|
20.97 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1915 Aerotech Drive |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
37,946 |
|
|
34.5 |
% |
|
238,837 |
|
|
18.26 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1925 Aerotech Drive |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1985 |
|
|
37,946 |
|
|
60.1 |
% |
|
494,422 |
|
|
21.67 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
East |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10807 New Allegiance Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
145,723 |
|
|
41.2 |
% |
|
1,353,816 |
|
|
22.57 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12515 Academy Ridge View |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
61,372 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,435,164 |
|
|
23.38 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9965 Federal Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
1983/2007 |
|
|
74,749 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,233,813 |
|
|
16.51 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9945 Federal Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
74,005 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9950 Federal Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
66,223 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,048,213 |
|
|
15.83 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9925 Federal Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
53,788 |
|
|
81.3 |
% |
|
697,407 |
|
|
15.95 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9960 Federal Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
46,948 |
|
|
78.3 |
% |
|
803,174 |
|
|
21.84 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5775 Mark Dabling Boulevard |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
109,678 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,882,027 |
|
|
17.16 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5725 Mark Dabling Boulevard |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1984 |
|
|
108,976 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
2,079,346 |
|
|
19.08 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
|
5755 Mark Dabling Boulevard |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
103,400 |
|
|
87.2 |
% |
|
2,033,358 |
|
|
22.56 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,568,926 |
|
|
76.2 |
% |
$ |
23,821,247 |
|
$ |
19.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Antonio, Texas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7700 Potranco Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
1982/1985 |
|
|
508,412 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
16,451,125 |
|
$ |
32.36 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8000 Potranco Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
125,005 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,218,879 |
|
|
25.75 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8030 Potranco Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
125,005 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,218,879 |
|
|
25.75 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7700-5 Potranco Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
25,056 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
355,632 |
|
|
14.19 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7700-1 Potranco Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
8,674 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
289,539 |
|
|
33.38 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1560 A Cable Ranch Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
1985/2007 |
|
|
45,935 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
581,182 |
|
|
12.65 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1560 B Cable Ranch Road |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
1985/2006 |
|
|
77,040 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
1,801,365 |
|
|
23.38 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
Northwest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
915,127 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
25,916,601 |
|
$ |
28.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
785 Jolly Road |
|
Blue Bell |
|
|
1996 |
|
|
219,065 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
2,783,362 |
|
$ |
11.94 |
|
|
|
Blue Bell, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
801 Lakeview Drive |
|
Blue Bell |
|
|
1994 |
|
|
156,695 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
4,142,959 |
|
|
17.18 |
|
|
|
Blue Bell, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
375,760 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
6,926,321 |
|
$ |
18.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11751 Meadowville Lane |
|
Richmond Southwest |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
193,000 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
5,639,518 |
|
$ |
29.22 |
|
|
|
Chester, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201 Technology Park Drive |
|
Southwest Virginia |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
102,842 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,416,773 |
|
|
33.22 |
|
|
|
Lebanon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
295,842 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
9,056,291 |
|
$ |
30.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,990,288 |
|
|
88.2 |
% |
$ |
450,568,336 |
|
$ |
25.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- This
percentage is based upon all rentable square feet under lease terms that were in effect as of December 31, 2010.
- (2)
- Annualized
rental revenue is the monthly contractual base rent as of December 31, 2010 multiplied by 12, plus the estimated annualized expense
reimbursements under existing leases. We consider annualized rental revenue to be a useful measure for analyzing revenue sources because, since it is point-in-time based, it
does not contain increases and decreases in revenue associated with periods in which lease terms were not in effect; historical revenue under GAAP does contain such fluctuations. We find the measure
particularly useful for leasing, tenant, segment and industry analysis.
- (3)
- Annualized
rental revenue per occupied square foot is a property's annualized rental revenue divided by that property's occupied square feet as of
December 31, 2010.
- (4)
- This
property, which was shell complete in 2008 and acquired by us in December 2010, contains a total 183,440 square feet. For accounting purposes,
this space was 100% operational upon acquisition. For occupancy reporting, we are not including the unoccupied portion of the property in rentable square feet until the earlier of when leases commence
on the space or one year from the date of acquisition.
31
Table of Contents
The following table provides certain information about our wholly owned office properties that were under construction, development or redevelopment as of
December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Estimated
Rentable
Square Feet
Upon Completion |
|
Percentage
Leased at
December 31,
2010 |
|
Under Construction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
316 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
125,044 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7205 Riverwood Road |
|
Howard Co. Perimeter |
|
|
86,000 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
308 Sentinel Drive(1) |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
151,543 |
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
410 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
110,000 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
430 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
109,341 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
581,928 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
St. Mary's & King George Counties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45310 Abell House Lane |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
80,205 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Baltimore: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
206 Research Boulevard |
|
Harford County |
|
|
127,300 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209 Research Boulevard(1) |
|
Harford County |
|
|
77,192 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
210 Research Boulevard(1) |
|
Harford County |
|
|
79,573 |
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
284,065 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Antonio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 Sentry Gateway |
|
San Antonio Northwest |
|
|
94,550 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Under Construction |
|
|
|
|
1,040,748 |
|
|
32 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under Development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
310 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
240,000 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
312 Sentinel Way |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
125,000 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
420 National Business Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
140,000 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
505,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Estimated
Rentable
Square Feet
Upon Completion |
|
Percentage
Leased at
December 31,
2010 |
|
Northern Virginia: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7770 Backlick Road |
|
Springfield |
|
|
240,000 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Springfield, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Baltimore: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
202 Research Boulevard |
|
Harford County |
|
|
127,530 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Antonio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sentry Gateway |
|
San Antonio Northwest |
|
|
93,830 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8100 Portanco Road |
|
San Antonio Northwest |
|
|
125,000 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
218,830 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Under Development |
|
|
|
|
1,091,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under Redevelopment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7468 Candlewood Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
357,700 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Virginia: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3120 Fairview Park Drive(2) |
|
Herndon |
|
|
183,440 |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Philadelphia: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
801 Lakeview Drive(1) |
|
Greater Philadelphia |
|
|
218,653 |
|
|
72 |
% |
|
|
Blue Bell, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
751 Arbor Way |
|
Greater Philadelphia |
|
|
113,500 |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
Blue Bell, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
332,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Under Redevelopment |
|
|
|
|
873,293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Estimated
rentable square feet includes space reported as rentable square feet on the previous table of wholly owned operating office properties
attributable to partially operational properties.
- (2)
- This
property, which was shell complete in 2008, was acquired by us in December 2010. For accounting purposes, this space was 100% operational upon
acquisition. For occupancy reporting, we are including the space as "Under Redevelopment" until the earlier of when leases commence on the space or one year from the date of acquisition. Estimated
rentable square feet for this property includes 7,080 rentable square feet reported on the previous table of wholly owned operating office properties attributable to the occupied portion of the
property.
33
Table of Contents
The following table provides certain information about our wholly owned developable land holdings not under construction or development as of
December 31, 2010, including properties under ground lease to us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Acres |
|
Estimated
Developable
Square
Feet |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Business Park North |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
162 |
|
|
1,111,000 |
|
|
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1243 Winterson Road (AS 22) |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2 |
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
940 Elkridge Landing Road (AS7) |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
3 |
|
|
54,000 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West Nursery Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
1 |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1460 Dorsey Road |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
6 |
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Columbia Gateway Parcel T-11 |
|
Howard Co. Perimeter |
|
|
14 |
|
|
220,000 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7125 Columbia Gateway Drive |
|
Howard Co. Perimeter |
|
|
8 |
|
|
275,000 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Riverwood |
|
Howard Co. Perimeter |
|
|
5 |
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
1,782,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Virginia: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Westfields Corporate Center |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
23 |
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WestfieldsPark Center |
|
Dulles South |
|
|
33 |
|
|
674,000 |
|
|
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patriot Ridge |
|
Springfield |
|
|
11 |
|
|
738,000 |
|
|
|
Springfield, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Woodland Park |
|
Herndon |
|
|
5 |
|
|
225,000 |
|
|
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
2,037,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suburban Maryland: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Johnson Drive |
|
Frederick |
|
|
6 |
|
|
170,000 |
|
|
|
Frederick, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Route 15 / Biggs Ford Road |
|
Frederick |
|
|
107 |
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
Frederick, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rockville Corporate Center |
|
Rockville |
|
|
10 |
|
|
220,000 |
|
|
|
Rockville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
1,390,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
St. Mary's & King George Counties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dahlgren Technology Center |
|
King George County |
|
|
39 |
|
|
122,000 |
|
|
|
Dahlgren, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expedition VII |
|
St. Mary's County |
|
|
6 |
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
182,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Acres |
|
Estimated
Developable
Square
Feet |
|
Greater Baltimore: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canton Crossing |
|
Baltimore |
|
|
10 |
|
|
773,000 |
|
|
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White Marsh |
|
White Marsh |
|
|
152 |
|
|
1,692,000 |
|
|
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37 Allegheny Avenue |
|
Towson |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northgate Business Park |
|
Harford County |
|
|
34 |
|
|
439,000 |
|
|
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
2,944,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colorado Springs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
InterQuest |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
113 |
|
|
1,623,000 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9965 Federal Drive |
|
I-25 North Corridor |
|
|
4 |
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patriot Park |
|
Colorado Springs East |
|
|
71 |
|
|
756,000 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerotech Commerce |
|
Colorado Springs East |
|
|
6 |
|
|
90,000 |
|
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
2,499,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Antonio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northwest Crossroads |
|
San Antonio Northwest |
|
|
31 |
|
|
375,000 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Military Drive |
|
San Antonio Northwest |
|
|
37 |
|
|
658,000 |
|
|
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
1,033,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Philadelphia: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arborcrest |
|
Blue Bell |
|
|
8 |
|
|
790,000 |
|
|
|
Blue Bell, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fort Ritchie(1) |
|
Fort Ritchie |
|
|
591 |
|
|
1,700,000 |
|
|
|
Cascade, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Land |
|
|
|
|
1,497 |
|
|
14,357,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- The
Fort Ritchie acquisition includes 284,000 square feet of existing office space targeted for future development and 110 existing usable residential
units.
The following table provides certain information about our wholly owned wholesale data center property as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Year
Built |
|
Gross
Building
Area |
|
Raised
Floor
Square
Footage(1) |
|
Initial
Stabilization
Critical Load
(in MWs)(2) |
|
Critical Load
Upon Completion
Leased at
December 31,
2010 |
|
MW
Operational |
|
9651 Hornbaker Road |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
233,000 |
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
11 |
% |
|
Manassas, Virginia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Raised
floor square footage is that portion of the gross building area in which tenants locate their computer servers. Raised floor area is considered to be
the net rentable square footage.
- (2)
- Critical
load is the power available for exclusive use of tenants in the property (expressed in terms of megawatts ("MWs")).
35
Table of Contents
The following table provides certain information about our joint venture office properties as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Year Built/
Renovated |
|
Rentable
Square
Feet |
|
Occupancy(1) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue(2) |
|
Annualized
Rental
Revenue per
Occupied
Square
Foot(2)(3) |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7740 Milestone Parkway |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
143,939 |
|
|
6.0 |
% |
$ |
275,428 |
|
$ |
31.79 |
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143,939 |
|
|
6.0 |
% |
$ |
275,428 |
|
$ |
31.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suburban Maryland: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4230 Forbes Boulevard |
|
Lanham |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
55,866 |
|
|
91.0 |
% |
$ |
830,430 |
|
$ |
16.34 |
|
|
|
Prince Georges, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5825 University Research Drive |
|
College Park |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
118,528 |
|
|
74.8 |
% |
|
2,432,546 |
|
|
27.45 |
|
|
|
College Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5850 University Research Drive |
|
College Park |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
123,464 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
3,666,881 |
|
|
29.70 |
|
|
|
College Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297,858 |
|
|
88.3 |
% |
$ |
6,929,857 |
|
$ |
26.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Harrisburg: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2605 Interstate Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1990 |
|
|
79,456 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
1,476,292 |
|
$ |
18.58 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6345 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
69,443 |
|
|
63.0 |
% |
|
631,200 |
|
|
14.42 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6340 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
68,200 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
833,399 |
|
|
12.22 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2601 Market Place |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
65,411 |
|
|
90.0 |
% |
|
1,169,776 |
|
|
19.88 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6400 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1992 |
|
|
52,439 |
|
|
75.5 |
% |
|
542,041 |
|
|
13.69 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6360 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
46,589 |
|
|
46.1 |
% |
|
287,330 |
|
|
13.37 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6385 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1995 |
|
|
32,671 |
|
|
62.6 |
% |
|
299,338 |
|
|
14.63 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6380 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1991 |
|
|
32,668 |
|
|
80.6 |
% |
|
403,544 |
|
|
15.32 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6405 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1991 |
|
|
32,000 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95 Shannon Road |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
21,976 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
330,760 |
|
|
15.05 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 Shannon Road |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
20,887 |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6375 Flank Drive |
|
East Shore |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
19,783 |
|
|
71.3 |
% |
|
304,622 |
|
|
21.59 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85 Shannon Road |
|
East Shore |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
12,863 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
193,601 |
|
|
15.05 |
|
|
|
Harrisburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5035 Ritter Road |
|
West Shore |
|
|
1988 |
|
|
56,556 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
942,866 |
|
|
16.67 |
|
|
|
Mechanicsburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5070 Ritter RoadBuilding A |
|
West Shore |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
31,710 |
|
|
36.4 |
% |
|
167,553 |
|
|
14.51 |
|
|
|
Mechanicsburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5070 Ritter RoadBuilding B |
|
West Shore |
|
|
1989 |
|
|
28,347 |
|
|
82.0 |
% |
|
280,843 |
|
|
12.08 |
|
|
|
Mechanicsburg, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
670,999 |
|
|
74.3 |
% |
$ |
7,863,165 |
|
$ |
15.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,112,796 |
|
|
69.2 |
% |
$ |
15,068,450 |
|
$ |
19.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- This
percentage is based upon all rentable square feet under lease terms that were in effect at December 31, 2010.
- (2)
- Annualized
rental revenue is the monthly contractual base rent as of December 31, 2010 multiplied by 12, plus the estimated annual expense
reimbursements under existing leases.
- (3)
- Annualized
rental revenue per occupied square foot is the property's annualized rental revenue divided by that property's occupied square feet as of
December 31, 2010.
36
Table of Contents
The following table provides certain information about office properties owned through a joint venture that were under development as of
December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Estimated
Rentable
Square Feet
Upon Completion |
|
Huntsville: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redstone Gateway (Building 1) |
|
Huntsville |
|
|
115,000 |
|
|
Huntsville, AL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redstone Gateway (Building 2) |
|
Huntsville |
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
Huntsville, AL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Under Development |
|
|
|
|
235,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table provides certain information about our developable land holdings through joint ventures that were not under construction or
development as of December 31, 2010, including properties under ground lease to us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Location
|
|
Submarket |
|
Acres |
|
Estimated
Developable
Square Feet |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arundel Preserve(1) |
|
BWI Airport |
|
|
56 |
|
|
Up to 1,652,000 |
|
|
|
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suburban Maryland: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Square Research Park(1) |
|
College Park |
|
|
49 |
|
|
510,000 |
|
|
|
College Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Huntsville: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redstone Gateway(1) |
|
Huntsville |
|
|
458 |
|
|
4,360,000 |
|
|
|
Huntsville, AL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indian Head |
|
Charles County |
|
|
192 |
|
|
967,000 |
|
|
|
Charles County, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Land |
|
|
|
|
755 |
|
|
7,489,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- This
land was not owned at December 31, 2010 but was under contract.
37
Table of Contents
Lease Expirations
The following table provides a summary schedule of the lease expirations for leases in place at our wholly owned office properties as
of December 31, 2010, assuming that none of the tenants exercise renewal options. This analysis includes the effect of early renewals completed on existing leases but excludes the effect of new
tenant leases on 266,125 square feet executed but yet to commence as of December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration(1)
|
|
Number of
Leases
Expiring |
|
Square
Footage
of Leases
Expiring |
|
Percentage of
Total Occupied
Square Feet |
|
Annualized
Rental of
Expiring
Leases(2) |
|
Percentage of
Total Annualized
Rental Revenue
Expiring(2) |
|
Total Annualized
Rental Revenue of
Expiring Leases
Per Occupied
Square Foot |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
161 |
|
|
1,922,024 |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
$ |
46,878 |
|
|
10.4 |
% |
$ |
24.39 |
|
2012 |
|
|
144 |
|
|
2,564,566 |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
|
57,306 |
|
|
12.7 |
% |
|
22.35 |
|
2013 |
|
|
131 |
|
|
2,164,148 |
|
|
12.3 |
% |
|
59,939 |
|
|
13.3 |
% |
|
27.70 |
|
2014 |
|
|
108 |
|
|
1,874,195 |
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
49,237 |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
26.27 |
|
2015 |
|
|
123 |
|
|
2,563,807 |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
|
65,119 |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
|
25.40 |
|
2016 |
|
|
58 |
|
|
1,251,370 |
|
|
7.1 |
% |
|
32,654 |
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
26.09 |
|
2017 |
|
|
44 |
|
|
1,306,785 |
|
|
7.4 |
% |
|
37,076 |
|
|
8.2 |
% |
|
28.37 |
|
2018 |
|
|
29 |
|
|
906,744 |
|
|
5.1 |
% |
|
23,020 |
|
|
5.1 |
% |
|
25.39 |
|
2019 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
477,740 |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
10,701 |
|
|
2.4 |
% |
|
22.40 |
|
2020 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
1,032,829 |
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
27,092 |
|
|
6.0 |
% |
|
26.23 |
|
2021 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
318,017 |
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
7,154 |
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
22.49 |
|
2022 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
374,991 |
|
|
2.1 |
% |
|
10,502 |
|
|
2.3 |
% |
|
28.01 |
|
2023 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
52,899 |
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
1,155 |
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
21.84 |
|
2025 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
555,370 |
|
|
3.2 |
% |
|
17,373 |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
31.28 |
|
Other(3) |
|
|
27 |
|
|
262,037 |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
5,361 |
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
20.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Weighted Average |
|
|
883 |
|
|
17,627,522 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
450,568 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
25.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Most
of our leases with the United States Government provide for consecutive one-year terms or provide for early termination rights. All of the
leasing statistics set forth above assumed that the United States Government will remain in the space that it leases through the end of the respective arrangements, without ending consecutive
one-year leases prematurely or exercising early termination rights. We reported the statistics in this manner because we manage our leasing activities using these same assumptions and
believe these assumptions to be probable.
- (2)
- Annualized
rental revenue is the monthly contractual base rent as of December 31, 2010 multiplied by 12, plus the estimated annualized expense
reimbursements under existing office leases.
- (3)
- Other
consists primarily of month-to-month leases and leases that have expired but the tenant remains in holdover as the exact
expiration date is unknown.
38
Table of Contents
The
following table provides a summary schedule of the lease expirations for leases in place at our wholly owned wholesale data center property as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration(1)
|
|
Number of
Leases
Expiring |
|
Raised Floor
Square Footage
Expiring |
|
Critical
Load Leased
(in megawatts) |
|
Critical
Load Used
(in megawatts) |
|
Annualized
Rental of
Expiring Leases(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2019 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
7,172 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
$ |
2,017 |
|
2020 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
12,773 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Weighted Average |
|
|
2 |
|
|
19,945 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
2 |
|
$ |
3,917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
Jim Lemon and Robin Biser, as plaintiffs, initiated a suit on May 12, 2005, in The United States District Court for the District
of Columbia (Case No. 1:05CV00949), against The Secretary of the United States Army, PenMar Development Corporation ("PMDC") and the Company, as defendants, in connection with the then pending
acquisition by the Company of the former army base known as Fort Ritchie located in Cascade, Maryland. The case was dismissed by the United States District Court on September 28, 2006, due to
the plaintiffs' lack of standing. The plaintiffs filed an appeal in the case in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and the Court of Appeals reversed the findings
of the District Court and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. The plaintiffs were unsuccessful in their request for an emergency injunction pending appeal. The Company
acquired from PMDC fee simple title to 500 acres of the 591 acres comprising Fort Ritchie on October 5, 2006 and the remaining 91 acres on November 29, 2007.
On
November 10, 2009, the District Court issued an Order, together with a Memorandum Opinion, which precludes the Company from proceeding with the implementation of its
development plan until the Army either re-issues an amended Record of Environmental Consideration ("REC") or a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ("SEIS") that complies with the
District Court's Memorandum Opinion. The Memorandum Opinion highlights various areas of the existing REC which could be revised to include greater detail on the Army's deliberative process whereby the
Army determined that a SEIS was not necessary. We are working with both the Army's counsel and the Army representative on re-submission of the amended REC to the Court in order to lift the
restrictions imposed by the Court.
On
January 8, 2010, the Army filed an appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and, on January 19, 2011, the appeal was dismissed.
On January 21, 2011, the District Court issued an order for the parties to meet and confer to provide a status report to the Court on or before February 4, 2011 and the Court has
approved an extended filing date of February 18, 2011. In the event that this matter is not favorably resolved, we may be unable to execute our development plans for the property, which could
render us unable to recover some or all of our investment made in the property. As of December 31, 2010, the carrying value of our investment in the property was $27.7 million.
We
are not currently involved in any other material litigation nor, to our knowledge, is any material litigation currently threatened against the Company (other than routine litigation
arising in the ordinary course of business, substantially all of which is expected to be covered by liability insurance).
Item 4. Removed and Reserved
39
Table of Contents
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market Information
Our common shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE") under the symbol "OFC." The table below shows the range of the high and
low sale prices for our common shares as reported on the NYSE, as well as the quarterly common share dividends per share declared:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price Range |
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
Per Share |
|
2009
|
|
Low |
|
High |
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
20.49 |
|
$ |
30.92 |
|
$ |
0.3725 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
23.13 |
|
$ |
33.14 |
|
$ |
0.3725 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
26.87 |
|
$ |
40.59 |
|
$ |
0.3925 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
31.77 |
|
$ |
38.29 |
|
$ |
0.3925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price Range |
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
Per Share |
|
2010
|
|
Low |
|
High |
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
32.69 |
|
$ |
42.44 |
|
$ |
0.3925 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
34.82 |
|
$ |
43.61 |
|
$ |
0.3925 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
35.04 |
|
$ |
39.85 |
|
$ |
0.4125 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
33.33 |
|
$ |
38.96 |
|
$ |
0.4125 |
|
The
number of holders of record of our common shares was 640 as of December 31, 2010. This number does not include shareholders whose shares are held of record by a brokerage
house or clearing agency, but does include any such brokerage house or clearing agency as one record holder.
We
will pay dividends at the discretion of our Board of Trustees. Our ability to pay cash dividends will be dependent upon: (1) the income and cash flow generated from our
operations; (2) cash generated or used by our financing and investing activities; and (3) the annual distribution requirements under the REIT provisions of the Code described above and
such other factors as the Board of Trustees deems relevant. Our ability to make cash dividends will also be limited by the terms of our Operating Partnership Agreement, as well as by limitations
imposed by state law. In addition, we are prohibited from paying cash dividends in excess of the amount necessary for us to qualify for taxation as a REIT if a default or event of default exists
pursuant to the terms of our Revolving Credit Facility; this restriction does not currently limit our ability to pay dividends, and we do not believe that this restriction is reasonably likely to
limit our ability to pay future dividends because we expect to comply with the terms of our Revolving Credit Facility.
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
During the three months ended December 31, 2010, 42,900 of the Operating Partnership's common units were exchanged for 42,900
common shares in accordance with the Operating Partnership's Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, as amended. The issuance of these common shares was effected in reliance upon
the exemption from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
40
Table of Contents
Common Shares Performance Graph
The graph and the table set forth below assume $100 was invested on December 31, 2005 in the common shares of Corporate Office
Properties Trust. The graph and the table compare the cumulative return (assuming reinvestment of dividends) of this investment with a $100 investment at that time in the S&P 500 Index or the
All Equity REIT Index of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts ("NAREIT"):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ended |
|
Index
|
|
12/31/05 |
|
12/31/06 |
|
12/31/07 |
|
12/31/08 |
|
12/31/09 |
|
12/31/10 |
|
Corporate Office Properties Trust |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
145.77 |
|
|
94.04 |
|
|
95.71 |
|
|
119.91 |
|
|
119.34 |
|
S&P 500 |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
115.79 |
|
|
122.16 |
|
|
76.96 |
|
|
97.33 |
|
|
111.99 |
|
NAREIT All Equity REIT Index |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
135.06 |
|
|
113.87 |
|
|
70.91 |
|
|
90.76 |
|
|
116.12 |
|
41
Table of Contents
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following table sets forth summary financial data as of and for each of the years ended December 31, 2006 through 2010. The
table illustrates the significant growth we experienced over the periods reported. Most of this growth, particularly pertaining to revenues from real estate operations and total assets, was
attributable to our addition of properties through acquisition and development activities. We financed most of the acquisition and development activities by incurring debt and issuing common equity,
as indicated by the growth in our interest expense and weighted average common shares outstanding. The growth in our general and administrative expenses reflects, in large part, the growth in
management resources required to support the increased size of our portfolio. Since this information is only a summary, you should refer to our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto and
the section of this report entitled "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" for additional information.
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
(in thousands, except per share data and number of properties)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from real estate operations(1) |
|
$ |
459,800 |
|
$ |
423,984 |
|
$ |
396,760 |
|
$ |
362,770 |
|
$ |
287,815 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
|
104,675 |
|
|
343,087 |
|
|
188,385 |
|
|
41,225 |
|
|
60,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
564,475 |
|
|
767,071 |
|
|
585,145 |
|
|
403,995 |
|
|
347,899 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses(1) |
|
|
179,419 |
|
|
157,154 |
|
|
140,895 |
|
|
122,794 |
|
|
92,187 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization associated with real estate operations(1) |
|
|
123,236 |
|
|
108,529 |
|
|
101,854 |
|
|
103,824 |
|
|
75,469 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
102,302 |
|
|
336,519 |
|
|
184,142 |
|
|
39,793 |
|
|
57,345 |
|
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
24,008 |
|
|
23,240 |
|
|
24,096 |
|
|
20,227 |
|
|
17,441 |
|
|
Business development expenses |
|
|
4,197 |
|
|
3,699 |
|
|
1,233 |
|
|
1,477 |
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
433,162 |
|
|
629,141 |
|
|
452,220 |
|
|
288,115 |
|
|
243,049 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
131,313 |
|
|
137,930 |
|
|
132,925 |
|
|
115,880 |
|
|
104,850 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(101,865 |
) |
|
(82,187 |
) |
|
(86,368 |
) |
|
(88,070 |
) |
|
(73,395 |
) |
Interest and other income |
|
|
9,568 |
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
2,070 |
|
|
3,030 |
|
|
1,077 |
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities and income taxes |
|
|
39,016 |
|
|
60,907 |
|
|
56,728 |
|
|
30,840 |
|
|
32,532 |
|
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities |
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
(147 |
) |
|
(224 |
) |
|
(92 |
) |
Income tax expense |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
(196 |
) |
|
(201 |
) |
|
(569 |
) |
|
(887 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
40,284 |
|
|
59,770 |
|
|
56,380 |
|
|
30,047 |
|
|
31,553 |
|
Discontinued operations(1)(2) |
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
1,529 |
|
|
3,832 |
|
|
3,858 |
|
|
23,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before gain on sales of real estate |
|
|
42,675 |
|
|
61,299 |
|
|
60,212 |
|
|
33,905 |
|
|
55,099 |
|
Gain on sales of real estate, net of income taxes(1)(3) |
|
|
2,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
2,037 |
|
|
889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
61,299 |
|
|
61,316 |
|
|
35,942 |
|
|
55,988 |
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(2,744 |
) |
|
(4,970 |
) |
|
(7,351 |
) |
|
(3,741 |
) |
|
(7,621 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Corporate Office Properties Trust |
|
|
42,760 |
|
|
56,329 |
|
|
53,965 |
|
|
32,201 |
|
|
48,367 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,068 |
) |
|
(15,404 |
) |
Issuance costs associated with redeemed preferred shares(4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,896 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Corporate Office Properties Trust common shareholders |
|
$ |
26,658 |
|
$ |
40,227 |
|
$ |
37,863 |
|
$ |
16,133 |
|
$ |
29,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per common share(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.27 |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.77 |
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
Diluted earnings per common share(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
$ |
0.26 |
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
Weighted average common shares outstandingbasic |
|
|
59,611 |
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
48,132 |
|
|
46,527 |
|
|
41,463 |
|
Weighted average common shares outstandingdiluted |
|
|
59,944 |
|
|
56,407 |
|
|
48,820 |
|
|
47,518 |
|
|
43,031 |
|
42
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
Balance Sheet Data (as of year end): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in real estate |
|
$ |
3,445,455 |
|
$ |
3,029,900 |
|
$ |
2,778,466 |
|
$ |
2,604,836 |
|
$ |
2,111,517 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
3,844,517 |
|
$ |
3,380,022 |
|
$ |
3,114,239 |
|
$ |
2,932,364 |
|
$ |
2,419,329 |
|
Debt |
|
$ |
2,323,681 |
|
$ |
2,053,841 |
|
$ |
1,856,751 |
|
$ |
1,809,610 |
|
$ |
1,478,460 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
2,521,379 |
|
$ |
2,259,390 |
|
$ |
2,031,816 |
|
$ |
1,962,884 |
|
$ |
1,609,034 |
|
Total equity |
|
$ |
1,323,138 |
|
$ |
1,120,632 |
|
$ |
1,082,423 |
|
$ |
969,480 |
|
$ |
810,295 |
|
Other Financial Data (for the year ended): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
$ |
156,436 |
|
$ |
194,817 |
|
$ |
180,892 |
|
$ |
138,391 |
|
$ |
113,358 |
|
|
Investing activities |
|
$ |
(479,167 |
) |
$ |
(349,076 |
) |
$ |
(290,822 |
) |
$ |
(328,404 |
) |
$ |
(254,041 |
) |
|
Financing activities |
|
$ |
324,571 |
|
$ |
155,746 |
|
$ |
92,067 |
|
$ |
206,728 |
|
$ |
137,822 |
|
Numerator for diluted EPS |
|
$ |
25,587 |
|
$ |
39,217 |
|
$ |
37,135 |
|
$ |
15,616 |
|
$ |
28,618 |
|
Diluted funds from operations(6) |
|
$ |
148,645 |
|
$ |
152,626 |
|
$ |
143,592 |
|
$ |
121,371 |
|
$ |
97,165 |
|
Diluted funds from operations per share(6) |
|
$ |
2.30 |
|
$ |
2.46 |
|
$ |
2.52 |
|
$ |
2.17 |
|
$ |
1.89 |
|
Cash dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
1.61 |
|
$ |
1.53 |
|
$ |
1.425 |
|
$ |
1.30 |
|
$ |
1.18 |
|
Property Data (as of year end): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of properties owned(1)(7) |
|
|
252 |
|
|
245 |
|
|
235 |
|
|
227 |
|
|
170 |
|
Total rentable square feet owned(1)(7) |
|
|
19,990 |
|
|
19,086 |
|
|
18,452 |
|
|
17,827 |
|
|
15,050 |
|
- (1)
- Certain
prior period amounts pertaining to properties included in discontinued operations have been reclassified to conform with the current presentation.
These reclassifications did not affect consolidated net income or shareholders' equity.
- (2)
- Includes
income derived from seven operating real estate properties we sold in 2006, four operating real estate properties we sold in 2007, three operating
real estate properties we sold in 2008 and three operating real estate properties we sold in 2010 (see Note 18 to our consolidated financial statements).
- (3)
- Reflects
gain from sales of properties and unconsolidated real estate joint ventures not associated with discontinued operations.
- (4)
- Reflects
a decrease to net income available to common shareholders pertaining to the original issuance costs recognized upon the redemption of the
Series E and Series F preferred shares of beneficial interest in 2006.
- (5)
- Basic
and diluted earnings per common share are calculated based on amounts attributable to common shareholders of Corporate Office Properties Trust.
- (6)
- For
definitions of diluted funds from operations per share and diluted funds from operations and reconciliations of these measures to their comparable
measures under generally accepted accounting principles, you should refer to the section entitled "Funds from Operations" within the section entitled "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations."
- (7)
- Amounts
reported reflect only wholly owned office properties.
43
Table of Contents
Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
You should refer to our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto and our Selected Financial Data table as you read this
section.
This
section contains "forward-looking" statements, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are based on our current expectations, estimates and
projections about future events and financial trends affecting the financial condition and operations of our business. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as "may,"
"will," "should," "could," "believe," "anticipate," "expect," "estimate," "plan" or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, many of
which we cannot predict with accuracy and some of which we might not even anticipate. Although we believe that the expectations, estimates and projections reflected in such forward-looking statements
are based on reasonable assumptions at the time made, we can give no assurance that these expectations, estimates and projections will be achieved. Future events and actual results may differ
materially from those
discussed in the forward-looking statements. Important factors that may affect these expectations, estimates and projections include, but are not limited to:
-
- general economic and business conditions, which will, among other things, affect office property demand and rents, tenant
creditworthiness, interest rates and financing availability;
-
- adverse changes in the real estate markets, including, among other things, increased competition with other companies;
-
- our ability to borrow on favorable terms;
-
- risks of real estate acquisition and development activities, including, among other things, risks that development
projects may not be completed on schedule, that tenants may not take occupancy or pay rent or that development and operating costs may be greater than anticipated;
-
- risks of investing through joint venture structures, including risks that our joint venture partners may not fulfill their
financial obligations as investors or may take actions that are inconsistent with our objectives;
-
- changes in our plans for properties or views of market economic conditions or failure to obtain development rights, either
of which could result in recognition of impairment losses;
-
- our ability to satisfy and operate effectively under Federal income tax rules relating to real estate investment trusts
and partnerships;
-
- governmental actions and initiatives; and
-
- environmental requirements.
We
undertake no obligation to update or supplement forward-looking statements.
Overview
We are a specialty office real estate investment trust ("REIT") that focuses primarily on strategic customer relationships and
specialized tenant requirements in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors. We acquire, develop, manage and lease office and data
center properties that are typically concentrated in large office parks primarily located adjacent to government demand drivers and/or in strong markets that we believe possess growth opportunities.
Most
of our revenues relating to real estate operations are derived from rents and property operating expense reimbursements earned from tenants leasing space in our properties. Most of
our expenses relating to our real estate operations take the form of: (1) property operating costs, such as
44
Table of Contents
real
estate taxes, utilities and repairs and maintenance; (2) interest costs; and (3) depreciation and amortization associated with our operating properties. Much of our profitability
from real estate operations depends on our ability to maintain high levels of occupancy and increase rents, which is affected by a number of factors, including, among other things, our tenants'
ability to fulfill their lease obligations and their continuing space needs based on, among other things, employment levels, business confidence and competition and general economic conditions of the
markets in which we operate.
As
described further in Item 1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K in the section entitled, "Business and Growth Strategies," our strategy for operations and
growth focuses on establishing and nurturing long-term relationships with quality tenants and accommodating their multi-locational needs, particularly tenants in the United States
Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors. As a result of this strategy, a large concentration of our revenue is derived from several large tenants.
At December 31, 2010, 58.1% of our annualized rental revenue (as defined in the section entitled "Concentration of
Operations") from wholly owned office properties was from our 20 largest tenants, 37.3% from our four largest tenants, 21.1% from our largest tenant, the United States Government, and 58.7% from
properties occupied primarily by tenants in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors.
Our
operations in 2009 and 2010 were adversely affected by the challenging economic conditions in the United States. Most of our regions experienced job losses to varying extents, which
resulted in decreased demand for space. This decreased demand for space increased competition for tenants, which collectively placed downward pressure on rental rates. These factors contributed to a
decrease in our occupancy from 93.2% at December 31, 2008 to 88.2% at December 31, 2010 and decreased the extent to which we were able to increase rents on lease renewals and space
retenanting. These factors also contributed to slower than expected leasing on a number of our newly constructed properties and decreased our pace for commencing construction on additional properties.
We expect this challenging lease environment to continue at least through 2011, although we believe that the overall fundamentals for office leasing for us were either at, or near, bottom by year end.
Our
net income attributable to common shareholders decreased $13.6 million, or 34%, from 2009 to 2010. This decrease was due primarily to a $19.7 million increase in
interest expense and a $6.6 million decrease in operating income, which were partially offset by a $6.0 million increase in gains recognized on our equity method investment in The KEYW
Holding Corporation.
One
manner in which we evaluate the operating performance of our properties is through a measure we define as net operating income ("NOI") from real estate operations, which is derived
by subtracting property operating expenses from revenues from real estate operations (please refer to the section below entitled "Results of Operations" for additional information pertaining to this
measure). The amount of NOI from real estate operations included in income from continuing operations is referred to herein as NOI from continuing real estate operations. Our NOI from continuing real
estate operations increased from 2009 to 2010 due primarily to NOI from newly acquired or newly constructed properties. However, this increase was offset by decreases of $8.0 million in NOI
from properties that were owned and 100% operational in 2009 and 2010 (properties that we refer to collectively as "Same Office Properties") and $5.4 million from three vacant properties that
we expect to redevelop.
During
2010, we expanded our portfolio of office properties by:
-
- acquiring three operating office properties totaling 514,000 square feet that were 100% leased upon acquisition and a
shell-complete office property totaling 183,000 square feet for $205.1 million; and
-
- placing into service an aggregate of 816,000 square feet in nine newly constructed office properties that were 77% leased
at December 31, 2010; we expect all of these properties to be
45
Table of Contents
Other
investing activities in 2010 to increase our capacity for future growth included our:
-
- formation of LW Redstone Company, LLC, a joint venture created to develop Redstone Gateway, a 468-acre
master-planned office business park adjacent to Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama;
-
- entry into the Springfield, Virginia submarket by acquiring 15 acres on which we are entitled to develop up to 978,000
square feet adjacent to the new National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA) headquarters at Fort Belvoir; and
-
- acquisition of a partially operational 233,000 square foot wholesale data center for $115.5 million that was 17%
leased on the date of acquisition to two tenants that have a combined initial critical load of three megawatts and further expansion rights of up to a combined five megawatts. We expect to complete
the development of the property to an initial stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts for additional development costs initially estimated at $166 million.
Most
of the investing activities described above were financed using borrowings from our unsecured revolving credit facility (the "Revolving Credit Facility") and construction loan
agreement with an aggregate commitment by the lenders that is restorable (the "Revolving Construction Facility"). Our activities to restore and increase availability under our Revolving Credit
Facility included our:
-
- issuance of a $240.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes due in 2030 and
redeemable by us, or subject to required repurchase upon request of the note holders, in April 2015 or thereafter as defined under the terms of the notes;
-
- issuance of 7.5 million common shares at a public offering price of $34.25 per share for net proceeds of
$245.8 million after underwriting discounts but before offering expenses; and
-
- addition of new lenders under our Revolving Credit Facility to increase the borrowing capacity under the facility by
$200.0 million, from $600.0 million to $800.0 million.
We
expect to satisfy our 2011 debt maturities and fund the construction of properties under construction at December 31, 2010 or expected to be started in 2011 using capacity
under our credit facilities and by accessing the secured debt market, unsecured debt market and/or public equity market.
We
discuss significant factors contributing to changes in our net income attributable to our common shareholders and diluted earnings per share over the last three years in the section
below entitled "Results of Operations." We discuss our 2010 investing and financing activities further in the section below entitled "Investing and Financing Activities During 2010." In addition, the
section below entitled "Liquidity and Capital Resources" includes discussions of, among other things:
-
- how we expect to generate cash for short and long-term capital needs;
-
- our off-balance sheet arrangements in place that are reasonably likely to affect our financial condition; and
-
- our commitments and contingencies.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of
America ("GAAP"), which require us to make certain estimates and assumptions. A summary of our significant accounting policies is provided in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements.
The following section is a summary of certain aspects of those accounting policies involving estimates and assumptions that (1) require our most difficult, subjective or
46
Table of Contents
complex
judgments in accounting for uncertain matters or matters that are susceptible to change and (2) materially affect our reported operating performance or financial condition. It is
possible that the use of different reasonable estimates or assumptions in making these judgments could result in materially different amounts being reported in our consolidated financial statements.
While reviewing this section, you should refer to Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements, including terms defined therein.
Acquisitions
of Properties
When
we acquire properties, we allocate the purchase price to numerous tangible and intangible components. Most of the terms in this bullet section are
discussed in further detail in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements entitled "Acquisitions of Properties." Our process for determining the allocation to these components requires
many estimates and assumptions, including the following: (1) determination of market rental rates; (2) estimation of leasing and tenant improvement costs associated with the remaining
term of acquired leases; (3) assumptions used in determining the in-place lease value, if-vacant value and tenant relationship value, including the rental rates, period
of time that it will take to lease vacant space and estimated tenant improvement and leasing costs; and (4) allocation of the if-vacant value between land and building. A change in
any of the above key assumptions, which are subjective, can materially change not only the presentation of acquired properties in our consolidated financial statements but also our reported results of
operations. The allocation to different components affects the following:
-
- the amount of the purchase price allocated among different categories of assets and liabilities on our consolidated
balance sheets; the amount of costs assigned to individual properties in multiple property acquisitions; and the amount of gain recognized in our consolidated statements of operations should we
determine that the fair value of the acquisition exceeds its cost;
-
- where the amortization of the components appear over time in our consolidated statements of operations. Allocations to
above- and below-market leases are amortized into rental revenue, whereas allocations to most of the other tangible and intangible assets are amortized into depreciation and amortization expense. As a
REIT, this is important to us since much of the investment community evaluates our operating performance using non-GAAP measures such as funds from operations, the computation of which
includes rental revenue but does not include depreciation and amortization expense; and
-
- the timing over which the items are recognized as revenue or expense in our consolidated statements of operations. For
example, for allocations to the as-if vacant value, the land portion is not depreciated and the building portion is depreciated over a longer period of time than the other components
(generally 40 years). Allocations to above- and below-market leases, in-place lease value and tenant relationship value are amortized over significantly shorter timeframes, and if
individual tenants' leases are terminated early, any unamortized amounts remaining associated with those tenants are written off upon termination. These differences in timing can materially affect our
reported results of operations. In addition, we establish lives for tenant relationship values based on our estimates of how long we expect the respective tenants to remain in the properties.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
If
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying values of operating properties, properties in development or land held for future development
may be impaired, we perform a recovery analysis based on the estimated undiscounted future cash flows to be generated from the operations and eventual disposition of such properties. If the analysis
indicates that the carrying value of a tested property is not recoverable from estimated future cash flows, it is written down to its
47
Table of Contents
estimated
fair value and an impairment loss is recognized. Fair values are determined based on estimated future cash flows using appropriate discount and capitalization rates or third-party valuations
or appraisals. The estimated cash flows used for the impairment analysis and determining the fair values are based on our plans for the tested property and our views of market and economic conditions.
The estimates consider matters such as current and future rental rates, occupancies for the tested property and comparable properties, estimated operating and capital expenditures and recent sales
data for comparable properties. Determining the appropriate capitalization rate also requires significant judgment and is typically based on many factors, including the prevailing rate for the market
or submarket, as well as the quality and location of the properties. Changes in the estimated future
cash flows due to changes in our plans for a property, views of market and economic conditions and/or our ability to obtain development rights could result in recognition of impairment losses which,
under the applicable accounting guidance, could be substantial.
Properties
held for sale are carried at the lower of their carrying values (i.e., cost less accumulated depreciation and any impairment loss recognized, where applicable) or
estimated fair values less costs to sell. Accordingly, decisions to sell certain operating properties, properties in development or land held for development will result in impairment losses if
carrying values of the specific properties exceed their estimated fair values less costs to sell. The estimates of fair value consider matters such as recent sales data for comparable properties and,
where applicable, contracts or the results of negotiations with prospective purchasers. These estimates are subject to revision as market conditions, and our assessment of such conditions, change.
Assessment
of Lease Term
As
discussed above, a significant portion of our portfolio is leased to the United States Government, and the majority of those leases consist of a series of
one-year renewal options. Applicable accounting guidance requires us to recognize minimum rental payments on a straight-line basis over the terms of each lease and to assess
the lease terms as including all periods for which failure to renew the lease imposes a penalty on the lessee in such amounts that a renewal appears, at the inception of the lease, to be reasonably
assured. Factors to consider when determining whether a penalty is significant include the uniqueness of the purpose or location of the property, the availability of a comparable replacement property,
the relative importance or significance of the property to the continuation of the lessee's line of business and the existence of leasehold improvements or other assets whose value would be impaired
by the lessee vacating or discontinuing use of the leased property. We have concluded for a number of our leases, based on the factors above, that the United States Government's exercise of all of
those renewal options is reasonably assured. Changes in these assessments could result in the write-off of any recorded assets associated with straight-line rental revenue and
acceleration of depreciation and amortization expense associated with costs we have incurred related to these leases.
Revenue
Recognition on Tenant Improvements
Most
of our leases involve some form of improvements to leased space. When we are required to provide improvements under the terms of a lease, we need to
determine whether the improvements constitute landlord assets or tenant assets. If the improvements are landlord assets, we capitalize the cost of the improvements and recognize depreciation expense
associated with such improvements over the shorter of the useful life of the assets or the term of the lease and recognize any payments from the tenant as rental revenue over the term of the lease. If
the improvements are tenant assets, we defer the cost of improvements funded by us as a lease incentive asset and amortize it as a reduction of rental revenue over the term of the lease. Our
determination of
whether improvements are landlord assets or tenant assets also may affect when we commence revenue recognition in connection with a lease.
48
Table of Contents
In
determining whether improvements constitute landlord or tenant assets, we consider numerous factors that may require subjective or complex judgments, including: whether the
improvements are unique to the tenant or reusable by other tenants; whether the tenant is permitted to alter or remove the improvements without our consent or without compensating us for any lost fair
value; whether the ownership of the improvements remains with us or remains with the tenant at the end of the lease term; and whether the economic substance of the lease terms is properly reflected.
Collectability
of Accounts and Deferred Rent Receivable
Allowances
for doubtful accounts and deferred rent receivable are established based on quarterly analyses of the risk of loss on specific accounts. The
analyses place particular emphasis on past-due accounts and consider information such as the nature and age of the receivables, the payment history of the tenants, the financial condition
of the tenants and our assessment of their ability to meet their lease obligations, the basis for any disputes and the status of related negotiations. Our estimate of the required allowance is subject
to revision as these factors change and is sensitive to the effects of economic and market conditions on tenants.
Accounting
Method for Investments
We
use three different accounting methods to report our investments in entities: the consolidation method; the equity method; and the cost method (see
Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements). We use the consolidation method when we own most of the outstanding voting interests in an entity and can control its operations. We also
consolidate certain entities when control of such entities can be achieved through means other than voting rights ("variable interest entities" or "VIEs") if we are deemed to be the primary
beneficiary. Generally, this applies when either (1) the equity investors (if any) lack one or more of the essential characteristics of a controlling financial interest; (2) the equity
investment at risk is insufficient to finance that entity's activities without additional subordinated financial support; or (3) the equity investors have voting rights that are not
proportionate to their economic interests and the activities of the entity involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor with a disproportionately small voting interest. We use the equity method
of accounting when we own an interest in an entity and can exert significant influence over, but cannot control, the entity's operations.
In
making these determinations, we need to make subjective estimates and judgments regarding the entity's future operating performance, financial condition, future valuation and other
variables that may affect the cash flows of the entity. We must consider both our and our partner's ability to participate in the management of the entity's operations and make decisions that allow
the parties to manage their economic risks. We may also need to estimate the probability of different scenarios taking place over time and their effect on the partners' cash flows. The conclusion
reached as a result of this process affects whether or not we use the consolidation method in accounting for our investment or the equity method. Whether or not we consolidate an investment can
materially affect our consolidated financial statements.
Concentration of Operations
We refer to the measure "annualized rental revenue" in various sections of the Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations section of this Annual Report. Annualized rental revenue is a measure that we use to evaluate the source of our rental revenue as of a point in time. It is computed
by multiplying by 12 the sum of monthly contractual base rents and estimated monthly expense reimbursements under active leases as of a point in time. We consider annualized rental revenue to be a
useful measure for analyzing revenue sources because, since it is point-in-time based, it does not contain increases and decreases in revenue associated with periods in which
lease terms were not in effect; historical revenue under GAAP does contain such fluctuations. We find the measure particularly useful for leasing, tenant, segment and industry analysis.
49
Table of Contents
Customer Concentration of Property Operations
The
following schedule lists our 20 largest tenants in our portfolio of wholly owned office properties based on percentage of annualized rental revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Annualized
Rental Revenue of Wholly
Owned Office Properties
for 20 Largest Tenants
as of December 31, |
|
Tenant
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
United States of America |
|
|
21.1 |
% |
|
18.6 |
% |
|
17.3 |
% |
Northrop Grumman Corporation(1) |
|
|
7.3 |
% |
|
7.9 |
% |
|
7.4 |
% |
Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. |
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
5.0 |
% |
|
5.2 |
% |
Computer Sciences Corporation(1) |
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
2.9 |
% |
|
3.1 |
% |
ITT Corporation(1) |
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
1.7 |
% |
|
1.8 |
% |
The MITRE Corporation |
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
The Aerospace Corporation(1) |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
1.8 |
% |
|
1.9 |
% |
CareFirst, Inc. |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
1.6 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
Wells Fargo & Company(1) |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
1.8 |
% |
|
1.7 |
% |
L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc.(1) |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
1.8 |
% |
|
2.5 |
% |
Integral Systems, Inc.(1) |
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
1.4 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
Comcast Corporation(1) |
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
1.4 |
% |
|
1.7 |
% |
The Boeing Company(1) |
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
1.1 |
% |
|
1.1 |
% |
AT&T Corporation(1) |
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
1.4 |
% |
|
1.4 |
% |
Ciena Corporation |
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
1.0 |
% |
|
1.1 |
% |
General Dynamics Corporation(1) |
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
2.0 |
% |
|
2.0 |
% |
Unisys Corporation |
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
1.1 |
% |
|
2.3 |
% |
The Johns Hopkins Institutions(1) |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
0.8 |
% |
|
0.8 |
% |
Merck & Co., Inc.(1) |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
0.7 |
% |
|
0.7 |
% |
First Mariner Bank(1) |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
BAE Systems PLC(1) |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
0.8 |
% |
Lockheed Martin Corporation |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
Science Applications International Corporation |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
Magellan Health Services, Inc. |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
AARP |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal of 20 largest tenants |
|
|
58.1 |
% |
|
55.4 |
% |
|
55.0 |
% |
All remaining tenants |
|
|
41.9 |
% |
|
44.6 |
% |
|
45.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Includes
affiliated organizations and agencies and predecessor companies.
The
United States Government increased in large part due to it taking occupancy of a significant portion of our newly-constructed square feet placed in service.
Our
properties occupied primarily by tenants in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors accounted for 58.7% of our
annualized rental revenue from wholly owned office properties at December 31, 2010, an increase from 54.9% at December 31, 2009. This increase is due primarily to newly-constructed
properties placed into service and acquisitions of operating properties. We believe that we are well positioned for future growth in the concentration of our revenue derived from customers in these
sectors, as discussed further in the section in Item 1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K entitled "Business and Growth Strategies." We generally classify the revenue from
our leases into sector groupings based solely on our
50
Table of Contents
knowledge
of the tenants' operations in leased space. We do not use independent sources such as Standard Industrial Classification codes for classifying our revenue into industry groupings and if we
did, the resulting groupings would be materially different.
Geographic
Concentration of Property Operations
The
table below sets forth the regional allocation of our annualized rental revenue of wholly owned office properties as of the end of the last three calendar
years:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Annualized
Rental Revenue of Wholly
Owned Office Properties
as of December 31, |
|
Number of
Wholly Owned
Office Properties
as of December 31, |
|
Region
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor |
|
|
44.7 |
% |
|
46.1 |
% |
|
46.7 |
% |
|
111 |
|
|
109 |
|
|
104 |
|
Northern Virginia |
|
|
16.6 |
% |
|
17.7 |
% |
|
18.8 |
% |
|
17 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
15 |
|
Greater Baltimore |
|
|
15.1 |
% |
|
15.7 |
% |
|
13.1 |
% |
|
66 |
|
|
64 |
|
|
63 |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
5.8 |
% |
|
3.6 |
% |
|
2.6 |
% |
|
8 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
5 |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
5.3 |
% |
|
6.0 |
% |
|
5.7 |
% |
|
21 |
|
|
21 |
|
|
17 |
|
Washington, DC - Capitol Riverfront |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
2 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
St. Mary's and King George Counties |
|
|
3.0 |
% |
|
3.3 |
% |
|
3.4 |
% |
|
18 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
18 |
|
Suburban Maryland |
|
|
2.5 |
% |
|
3.4 |
% |
|
4.0 |
% |
|
5 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
5 |
|
Greater Philadelphia |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
1.6 |
% |
|
2.9 |
% |
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
4 |
|
Other |
|
|
2.0 |
% |
|
2.6 |
% |
|
2.8 |
% |
|
2 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
252 |
|
|
245 |
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
most significant changes in our regional allocations set forth above was due to newly-constructed properties placed into service and acquisitions of operating office properties.
Occupancy and Leasing
Office
Properties
The
tables below set forth occupancy information pertaining to our portfolio of wholly owned operating office properties:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Occupancy rates at year end |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
88.2 |
% |
|
90.7 |
% |
|
93.2 |
% |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor |
|
|
89.5 |
% |
|
91.6 |
% |
|
93.4 |
% |
|
Northern Virginia |
|
|
91.9 |
% |
|
96.6 |
% |
|
97.4 |
% |
|
Greater Baltimore |
|
|
85.0 |
% |
|
80.3 |
% |
|
83.1 |
% |
|
San Antonio |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
Colorado Springs |
|
|
76.2 |
% |
|
85.8 |
% |
|
94.3 |
% |
|
Washington, DC - Capitol Riverfront |
|
|
98.5 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
St. Mary's and King George Counties |
|
|
86.8 |
% |
|
97.8 |
% |
|
95.2 |
% |
|
Suburban Maryland |
|
|
71.4 |
% |
|
91.9 |
% |
|
97.7 |
% |
|
Greater Philadelphia |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
Other |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
Average contractual annual rental rate per square foot at year end(1) |
|
$ |
25.56 |
|
$ |
24.63 |
|
$ |
22.40 |
|
- (1)
- Includes
estimated expense reimbursements.
51
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable
Square Feet |
|
Occupied
Square Feet |
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
19,086 |
|
|
17,310 |
|
Square feet vacated upon lease expiration(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
(1,386 |
) |
Square feet retenanted after lease expiration(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
943 |
|
Square feet acquired, constructed or disposed |
|
|
1,112 |
|
|
963 |
|
Other changes |
|
|
(208 |
) |
|
(202 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
19,990 |
|
|
17,628 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Includes
lease terminations and space reductions occurring in connection with lease renewals.
- (2)
- Excludes
retenanting of vacant square feet acquired or developed.
Due
in large part to the challenging economic conditions in the United States, most of our regions experienced job losses to varying extents, prompting businesses to close, downsize
their space requirements or cancel or delay expansion plans. Some tenants with continued space needs were looking to lower their operating expenses and were hesitant to make long-term
leasing commitments given the uncertainty in the economy. Tenants looking to renew leases were at times willing to do so only when the renewal was accompanied by a downsizing of space or reduction of
rent. This decrease in demand for space contributed to occupancy rate decreases in our regions and increased competition for tenants from owners of other properties willing to offer aggressively lower
rental rates or higher cost tenant improvement terms, resulting in downward pressure on rental rates. These factors contributed to the decreases in our occupancy rates reflected above and decreased
the extent to which we were able to increase rental rates. We renewed 68% of the square footage of our lease expirations (including the effect of early renewals) for the year ended December 31,
2010.
Much
of the decrease in occupancy rates for certain of our regions with significant changes from December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2010 can be attributable to a small
number of discrete events, including:
-
- 119,000 square feet vacated in Northern Virginia upon the expiration of one tenant's leases in two properties;
-
- 127,000 newly constructed square feet placed into service in Colorado Springs during 2010 that were unoccupied; and
-
- 149,000 square feet vacated upon the expiration of two large leases in Suburban Maryland.
While
we expect the challenging lease environment to continue at least through 2011, we believe that the overall fundamentals for office leasing for us were either at, or near, bottom by
December 31, 2010. We also believe that our customer and market strategies serve as advantages in the current lease environment since we expect the United States Government and defense
information technology sectors to fuel economic growth in many of our regions. Military and civilian personnel are in the process of being relocated to government installations at Fort
George G. Meade (in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor), Aberdeen Proving Ground (in the Greater Baltimore region), San Antonio, Redstone Arsenal (in Huntsville, Alabama) and Fort Belvoir (in
Springfield, Virginia) in connection with mandates by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission of the United States Congress ("BRAC"). In addition, the newly-formed United States Cyber Command will
be located at Fort George G. Meade. We expect the demand created by these government installations will not only help stabilize the leasing markets in these regions but also expect it will
provide future growth for us due to the installations' proximity to many of our properties. While there has been increased speculation regarding future reductions in United States defense spending, we
do not believe that such spending
52
Table of Contents
decreases,
were they to occur, would significantly affect defense information technology, which is the primary nature of the activities for tenants in our sector concentration described above. On the
contrary, we believe that United States spending for defense information technology could increase due to the increasing significance of these activities to national security.
At
December 31, 2010, we had 1.0 million square feet under construction that was 32% leased. We are constructing this space in anticipation of demand from the United States
Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers serving such sectors. We believe that we need to commence construction on properties that are not pre-leased to a
certain extent to enable us to meet demand from these sectors in a short timeframe.
We
believe that our continuing exposure to the challenging leasing environment is mitigated to a certain extent by the generally long-term nature of our leases and the
staggered timing of our future lease expirations. Our weighted average lease term for wholly owned office properties at December 31, 2010 was approximately 4.9 years. The table below
sets forth as of December 31, 2010 our scheduled lease expirations of wholly owned office properties by region in terms of percentage of annualized rental revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration of Annualized Rental
Revenue of Wholly Owned Office Properties |
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
2012 |
|
2013 |
|
2014 |
|
2015 |
|
Thereafter/
Other(1) |
|
Total |
|
Baltimore/Washington Corridor |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
6.7 |
% |
|
8.3 |
% |
|
4.3 |
% |
|
6.5 |
% |
|
14.2 |
% |
|
44.7 |
% |
Northern Virginia |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
1.1 |
% |
|
0.9 |
% |
|
3.1 |
% |
|
4.9 |
% |
|
5.1 |
% |
|
16.6 |
% |
Greater Baltimore |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
2.4 |
% |
|
1.8 |
% |
|
1.2 |
% |
|
1.5 |
% |
|
6.5 |
% |
|
15.1 |
% |
San Antonio |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.3 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
5.5 |
% |
|
5.8 |
% |
Colorado Springs |
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
0.4 |
% |
|
0.5 |
% |
|
0.8 |
% |
|
0.4 |
% |
|
2.6 |
% |
|
5.3 |
% |
Washington, DC - Capitol Riverfront |
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
1.3 |
% |
|
0.7 |
% |
|
0.3 |
% |
|
0.3 |
% |
|
3.5 |
% |
St. Mary's and King George Counties |
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
1.1 |
% |
|
0.4 |
% |
|
0.2 |
% |
|
0.3 |
% |
|
0.4 |
% |
|
3.0 |
% |
Suburban Maryland |
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
0.1 |
% |
|
0.1 |
% |
|
0.6 |
% |
|
0.6 |
% |
|
0.7 |
% |
|
2.5 |
% |
Greater Philadelphia |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.6 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.9 |
% |
|
1.5 |
% |
Other |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
2.0 |
% |
|
2.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
10.4 |
% |
|
12.7 |
% |
|
13.3 |
% |
|
10.9 |
% |
|
14.5 |
% |
|
38.2 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Other
includes 1.2% representing primarily month-to-month leases and leases that have expired but the tenant remains in holdover as
the exact expiration date is unknown.
As
noted above, most of the leases with our largest tenant, the United States Government, provide for consecutive one-year terms or provide for early termination rights; all
of the leasing
statistics set forth above assume that the United States Government will remain in the space that they lease through the end of the respective arrangements, without ending consecutive
one-year leases prematurely or exercising early termination rights.
53
Table of Contents
The
table below sets forth occupancy information pertaining to operating office properties in which we have a partial ownership interest:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy Rates at
December 31, |
|
|
|
Ownership
Interest |
|
Geographic Region
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Greater Harrisburg, Pennsylvania(1) |
|
|
20.0 |
% |
|
74.3 |
% |
|
79.0 |
% |
|
89.4 |
% |
Suburban Maryland(2) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
88.3 |
% |
|
84.1 |
% |
|
94.8 |
% |
Baltimore/Washington Corridor(3) |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
|
6.0 |
% |
|
6.0 |
% |
|
N/A |
|
- (1)
- Includes
16 properties totaling 671,000 square feet.
- (2)
- Includes
three properties totaling 298,000 operational square feet at December 31, 2010 and 2009 (we had a 50% interest in 298,000 square feet at
December 31, 2010, and a 45% interest in 242,000 square feet and 50% interest in 56,000 square feet at December 31, 2009). Includes two properties totaling 97,000 operational square feet
at December 31, 2008 (we had a 50% interest in 56,000 square feet and a 45% interest in 41,000 square feet).
- (3)
- Includes
one property with 144,000 operational square feet at December 31, 2010 and 2009.
Wholesale
Data Center Property
Our
shell-complete wholesale data center property was 17% leased at December 31, 2010 through at least 2019 to tenants with an initial critical load of
three megawatts and further expansion rights of up to a combined five megawatts. We expect to complete the development of the property to an initial stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts. We
believe that the property is in a strong market and expect it to be fully leased in two to three years.
Results of Operations
As discussed above, one manner in which we evaluate the operating performance of our properties is through a measure we define as NOI
from real estate operations, which is derived by subtracting property operating expenses from revenues from real estate operations. We believe that NOI from real estate operations is an important
supplemental measure of performance for a REIT's operating real estate because it provides a measure of the core operations that is unaffected by depreciation, amortization, financing and general and
administrative expenses; this measure is particularly useful in our opinion in evaluating the performance of geographic segments, same-office property groupings and individual properties.
The amount of NOI from real estate operations included in income from continuing operations is referred to herein as NOI from continuing real estate operations. We view our NOI from continuing real
estate operations as being comprised of the following primary categories:
-
- operating properties owned and 100% operational throughout the two years being compared. We define these as changes from
"Same Office Properties." For further discussion of the concept of "operational," you should refer to the section of Note 2 of the consolidated financial statements entitled "Properties"
-
- operating properties acquired during the two years being compared; and
-
- constructed properties placed into service that were not 100% operational throughout the two years being compared.
In
addition to owning real estate properties, we provide construction contract and other services. The primary manner in which we evaluate the operating performance of our construction
contract and other services is through a measure we define as NOI from service operations, which is based on the net of the revenues and expenses from these activities. The revenues and expenses from
these activities
54
Table of Contents
consist
primarily of subcontracted costs that are reimbursed to us by customers along with a management fee. The operating margins from these activities are small relative to the revenue. We believe
NOI from service operations is a useful measure in assessing both our level of activity and our profitability in conducting such operations.
We
believe that operating income, as reported on our consolidated statements of operations, is the most directly comparable GAAP measure for both NOI from continuing real estate
operations and NOI from service operations. Since both of these measures exclude certain items includable in operating income, reliance on these measures has limitations; management compensates for
these limitations by using the measures simply as supplemental measures that are considered alongside other GAAP and non-GAAP measures.
The
table below reconciles NOI from continuing real estate operations and NOI from service operations to operating income reported on our consolidated statement of operations (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
NOI from continuing real estate operations |
|
$ |
280,381 |
|
$ |
266,830 |
|
$ |
255,865 |
|
NOI from service operations |
|
|
2,373 |
|
|
6,568 |
|
|
4,243 |
|
Depreciation and amortization associated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
with continuing real estate operations |
|
|
(123,236 |
) |
|
(108,529 |
) |
|
(101,854 |
) |
General and administrative expense |
|
|
(24,008 |
) |
|
(23,240 |
) |
|
(24,096 |
) |
Business development expenses |
|
|
(4,197 |
) |
|
(3,699 |
) |
|
(1,233 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
131,313 |
|
$ |
137,930 |
|
$ |
132,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55
Table of Contents
Comparison of the Year Ended December 31, 2010 to the Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from real estate operations |
|
$ |
459,800 |
|
$ |
423,984 |
|
$ |
35,816 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
|
104,675 |
|
|
343,087 |
|
|
(238,412 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
564,475 |
|
|
767,071 |
|
|
(202,596 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
179,419 |
|
|
157,154 |
|
|
22,265 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization associated with real estate operations |
|
|
123,236 |
|
|
108,529 |
|
|
14,707 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
102,302 |
|
|
336,519 |
|
|
(234,217 |
) |
|
General and administrative expense |
|
|
24,008 |
|
|
23,240 |
|
|
768 |
|
|
Business development expenses |
|
|
4,197 |
|
|
3,699 |
|
|
498 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
433,162 |
|
|
629,141 |
|
|
(195,979 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
131,313 |
|
|
137,930 |
|
|
(6,617 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(101,865 |
) |
|
(82,187 |
) |
|
(19,678 |
) |
Interest and other income |
|
|
9,568 |
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
4,404 |
|
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities |
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
2,317 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
(196 |
) |
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
40,284 |
|
|
59,770 |
|
|
(19,486 |
) |
Discontinued operations |
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
1,529 |
|
|
862 |
|
Gain on sales of real estate, net of income taxes |
|
|
2,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
61,299 |
|
|
(15,795 |
) |
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(2,744 |
) |
|
(4,970 |
) |
|
2,226 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
26,658 |
|
$ |
40,227 |
|
$ |
(13,569 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56
Table of Contents
NOI from Continuing Real Estate Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Office Properties |
|
$ |
401,498 |
|
$ |
404,490 |
|
$ |
(2,992 |
) |
|
Acquired properties |
|
|
29,935 |
|
|
4,150 |
|
|
25,785 |
|
|
Constructed properties placed in service |
|
|
26,222 |
|
|
7,702 |
|
|
18,520 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
2,145 |
|
|
7,642 |
|
|
(5,497 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
459,800 |
|
|
423,984 |
|
|
35,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Office Properties |
|
|
152,393 |
|
|
147,394 |
|
|
4,999 |
|
|
Acquired properties |
|
|
11,880 |
|
|
1,153 |
|
|
10,727 |
|
|
Constructed properties placed in service |
|
|
9,420 |
|
|
3,233 |
|
|
6,187 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
5,726 |
|
|
5,374 |
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179,419 |
|
|
157,154 |
|
|
22,265 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from continuing real estate operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Office Properties |
|
|
249,105 |
|
|
257,096 |
|
|
(7,991 |
) |
|
Acquired properties |
|
|
18,055 |
|
|
2,997 |
|
|
15,058 |
|
|
Constructed properties placed in service |
|
|
16,802 |
|
|
4,469 |
|
|
12,333 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
(3,581 |
) |
|
2,268 |
|
|
(5,849 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
280,381 |
|
$ |
266,830 |
|
$ |
13,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
the table above indicates, much of our change in NOI from continuing real estate operations was attributable to the additions of properties through acquisition and construction
activities. In addition, the lines in the table entitled "Other" include the effects of vacancies in three properties that we expect to redevelop, including approximately 300,000 square feet at two
properties in Greater Philadelphia; we experienced a $5.4 million decrease in NOI from continuing real estate operations attributable to these properties.
With
regard to changes in NOI from continuing real estate operations attributable to Same Office Properties:
-
- the decrease in revenues included the following:
-
- a $8.7 million decrease in rental revenue attributable primarily to changes in occupancy and rental rates between
the two years (the average occupancy rate of Same Office Properties decreased from 91.7% in 2009 to 88.9% in 2010); and
-
- a $1.2 million decrease in net revenue from the early termination of leases, most of which was due to the early
termination of one lease at a property in Northern Virginia in 2009; offset in part by
-
- a $6.9 million increase in tenant recoveries and other revenue due primarily to the increase in property operating
expenses described below.
-
- the increase in property operating expenses included the following:
-
- a $3.0 million increase in snow removal costs due primarily to record snowfall in Maryland and Northern Virginia;
and
57
Table of Contents
-
- a $1.5 million increase in heating and air conditioning repairs and maintenance, a significant portion of which was
attributable to an increase in heating and air conditioning systems utilization at a property in San Antonio; partially offset by
-
- a $1.4 million decrease in bad debt expense.
NOI from Service Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
$ |
104,675 |
|
$ |
343,087 |
|
$ |
(238,412 |
) |
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
102,302 |
|
|
336,519 |
|
|
(234,217 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from service operations |
|
$ |
2,373 |
|
$ |
6,568 |
|
$ |
(4,195 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI
from service operations decreased due primarily to a lower volume of construction activity in connection with one large construction contract that was nearing completion. As
evidenced in the changes set forth above, our volume of construction contract activity is inherently subject to significant variability depending on the volume and nature of projects undertaken by us
(primarily on behalf of tenants). We view our service operations as an ancillary component of our overall operations that should generally be a small contributor to our operating income relative to
our real estate operations.
Depreciation and Amortization Associated with Real Estate Operations
Depreciation and amortization expense associated with real estate included in continuing operations increased due primarily to expense
attributable to properties added into operations through acquisition and construction activities.
Interest Expense
The table below sets forth the components of our interest expense included in continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Interest on mortgage and other secured loans |
|
$ |
82,634 |
|
$ |
70,624 |
|
$ |
12,010 |
|
Interest on Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
19,348 |
|
|
9,207 |
|
|
10,141 |
|
Interest on Revolving Credit Facility |
|
|
5,661 |
|
|
6,040 |
|
|
(379 |
) |
Interest expense recognized on interest rate swaps |
|
|
3,689 |
|
|
6,941 |
|
|
(3,252 |
) |
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
5,871 |
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
1,657 |
|
Other interest |
|
|
1,186 |
|
|
622 |
|
|
564 |
|
Capitalized interest |
|
|
(16,524 |
) |
|
(15,461 |
) |
|
(1,063 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
101,865 |
|
$ |
82,187 |
|
$ |
19,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
increase in interest expense included the effect of a $319.2 million increase in our average outstanding debt resulting from our financing of acquisition and construction activities. Also
included was an increase in our weighted average interest rates of debt from 4.86% to 5.01%. The increase in the proportion of our interest expense attributable to Exchangeable Senior Notes resulted
from our issuance of a $240.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes in April 2010.
58
Table of Contents
Interest and Other Income
Interest and other income increased due primarily to:
-
- a $6.0 million increase in gains recognized in connection with our investment in The KEYW Holding Corporation
("KEYW"), an entity supporting the intelligence community's operations and transformation to Cyber Age mission by providing engineering services and integrated platforms that support the intelligence
process. We account for our investment in common stock of KEYW using the equity method of accounting. Under the equity method of accounting, additional issuances of equity by KEYW to parties other
than us are accounted for as if we sold a proportionate share of our investment and, accordingly, result in our recognition of gain or loss. Most of the increase in gains recognized was attributable
to additional equity issued by KEYW in connection with its initial public offering of common stock in 2010. This gain was partially offset by
-
- a $2.2 million decrease in interest income in connection with a mortgage loan receivable that was outstanding from
August 2008 until October 2009.
Gain on sales of real estate, net of income taxes
The increase in gain on sales of real estate was attributable to the sale of a land parcel in Central New Jersey in 2010.
Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
Interests in our Operating Partnership are in the form of preferred and common units. The line entitled net income attributable to
noncontrolling interests includes primarily income allocated to preferred and common units not owned by us. Income is allocated to noncontrolling preferred unitholders in an amount equal to the
priority return from the Operating Partnership to which they are entitled. Income is allocated to noncontrolling common unitholders based on income earned by the Operating Partnership, after
allocation to preferred unitholders, multiplied by the percentage of the common units in the Operating Partnership owned by those common unitholders.
Net
income attributable to noncontrolling interests decreased due primarily to: (1) a decrease in net income available to allocate to noncontrolling holders of common units in the
Operating Partnership primarily resulting from the reasons set forth above; and (2) a decrease in the percentage of the Operating Partnership owned by noncontrolling interests resulting
primarily from:
-
- the issuance of additional units to us as we issued unrestricted common shares during 2009 and 2010 due to the fact that
we receive common units in the Operating Partnership each time we issue unrestricted common shares; and
-
- the exchange of common units for our common shares by certain noncontrolling unitholders.
59
Table of Contents
Comparison
of the Year Ended December 31, 2009 to the Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from real estate operations |
|
$ |
423,984 |
|
$ |
396,760 |
|
$ |
27,224 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
|
343,087 |
|
|
188,385 |
|
|
154,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
767,071 |
|
|
585,145 |
|
|
181,926 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
157,154 |
|
|
140,895 |
|
|
16,259 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization associated with real estate operations |
|
|
108,529 |
|
|
101,854 |
|
|
6,675 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
336,519 |
|
|
184,142 |
|
|
152,377 |
|
|
General and administrative expense |
|
|
23,240 |
|
|
24,096 |
|
|
(856 |
) |
|
Business development expenses |
|
|
3,699 |
|
|
1,233 |
|
|
2,466 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
629,141 |
|
|
452,220 |
|
|
176,921 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
137,930 |
|
|
132,925 |
|
|
5,005 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(82,187 |
) |
|
(86,368 |
) |
|
4,181 |
|
Interest and other income |
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
2,070 |
|
|
3,094 |
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
8,101 |
|
|
(8,101 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated entities |
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
(147 |
) |
|
(794 |
) |
Income tax expense |
|
|
(196 |
) |
|
(201 |
) |
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
59,770 |
|
|
56,380 |
|
|
3,390 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
1,529 |
|
|
3,832 |
|
|
(2,303 |
) |
Gain on sales of real estate, net of income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
(1,104 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
61,299 |
|
|
61,316 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(4,970 |
) |
|
(7,351 |
) |
|
2,381 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
40,227 |
|
$ |
37,863 |
|
$ |
2,364 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
Table of Contents
NOI from Continuing Real Estate Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Office Properties |
|
$ |
378,384 |
|
$ |
367,450 |
|
$ |
10,934 |
|
|
Constructed properties placed in service |
|
|
29,293 |
|
|
17,465 |
|
|
11,828 |
|
|
Acquired properties |
|
|
9,919 |
|
|
2,939 |
|
|
6,980 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
6,388 |
|
|
8,906 |
|
|
(2,518 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
423,984 |
|
|
396,760 |
|
|
27,224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Office Properties |
|
|
139,602 |
|
|
133,174 |
|
|
6,428 |
|
|
Constructed properties placed in service |
|
|
9,680 |
|
|
5,021 |
|
|
4,659 |
|
|
Acquired properties |
|
|
2,999 |
|
|
905 |
|
|
2,094 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
4,873 |
|
|
1,795 |
|
|
3,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
157,154 |
|
|
140,895 |
|
|
16,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from real estate operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Office Properties |
|
|
238,782 |
|
|
234,276 |
|
|
4,506 |
|
|
Constructed properties placed in service |
|
|
19,613 |
|
|
12,444 |
|
|
7,169 |
|
|
Acquired properties |
|
|
6,920 |
|
|
2,034 |
|
|
4,886 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
1,515 |
|
|
7,111 |
|
|
(5,596 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
266,830 |
|
$ |
255,865 |
|
$ |
10,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
the table above indicates, most of our increase in NOI from continuing real estate operations was attributable to the additions of properties through construction and acquisition
activities. In addition, the lines in the table above entitled "Other" include the effects of approximately 500,000 square feet of vacancy at three properties in Greater Philadelphia (one was
redeveloped and then placed into service in 2010 and two are expected to be redeveloped); we recognized a $3.4 million decrease in NOI from continuing real estate operations attributable to
these properties.
With
regard to changes in NOI from continuing real estate operations attributable to Same Office Properties:
-
- the increase in revenues included the following:
-
- a $4.9 million increase in tenant recoveries and other revenue due primarily to the increase in property operating
expenses described below;
-
- a $4.1 million increase in net revenue from the early termination of leases, most of which was due to the early
termination of one lease at a property in Northern Virginia; and
-
- a $1.9 million increase in rental revenue attributable primarily to changes in rental rates and occupancy between
the two years.
-
- the increase in property operating expenses included the following:
-
- a $2.8 million increase in snow removal due primarily to increased snow and ice in most of our regions;
-
- a $1.6 million increase in electric utilities expense, which included the effects of: (1) increased usage at
certain properties due to increased occupancy at such properties; and (2) rate increases;
61
Table of Contents
-
- a $1.3 million increase in costs for asset and property management operations, much of which was due to an increase
in compensation related expenses for existing employees and an increase in the size of the employee base supporting such operations;
-
- a $797,000 increase in bad debt expense; and
-
- a $693,000 increase in cleaning services and related supplies due in large part to increased contract rates and increased
occupancy at certain properties.
NOI from Service Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
$ |
343,087 |
|
$ |
188,385 |
|
$ |
154,702 |
|
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
336,519 |
|
|
184,142 |
|
|
152,377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from service operations |
|
$ |
6,568 |
|
$ |
4,243 |
|
$ |
2,325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI
from service operations increased due primarily to a high volume of construction activity in connection with one large construction contract.
Depreciation and Amortization Associated with Real Estate Operations
Depreciation and amortization expense associated with real estate included in continuing operations increased due primarily to expense
attributable to properties added into operations through construction and acquisition activities.
Interest Expense
The table below sets forth the components of our interest expense included in continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Variance |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Interest on mortgage and other secured loans |
|
$ |
70,624 |
|
$ |
70,918 |
|
$ |
(294 |
) |
Interest on Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
9,207 |
|
|
10,866 |
|
|
(1,659 |
) |
Interest on Revolving Credit Facility |
|
|
6,040 |
|
|
15,390 |
|
|
(9,350 |
) |
Interest expense recognized on interest rate swaps |
|
|
6,941 |
|
|
3,120 |
|
|
3,821 |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
3,843 |
|
|
371 |
|
Other interest |
|
|
622 |
|
|
543 |
|
|
79 |
|
Capitalized interest |
|
|
(15,461 |
) |
|
(18,312 |
) |
|
2,851 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
82,187 |
|
$ |
86,368 |
|
$ |
(4,181 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense decreased primarily due to a decrease in the weighted average interest rates of debt from 5.2% to 4.9%. The events in the economy contributed towards significant reductions in
interest rates on our variable debt from 2008 to 2009, including interest on our Revolving Credit Facility.
Gain on Early Extinguishment of Debt
Gain on early extinguishment of debt recognized in 2008 was attributable to the repurchase in that year of a $37.5 million
aggregate principal amount of our 3.5% Exchangeable Senior Notes for $26.7 million.
62
Table of Contents
Interest and Other Income
Interest and other income increased due primarily to:
-
- an increase in interest income of $2.2 million in connection with a mortgage loan receivable that was outstanding
from August 2008 until October 2009; and
-
- a $587,000 gain recognized on changes in the value of warrants to purchase additional common shares of KEYW.
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations decreased due primarily to gain from sales of real estate recognized in 2008. See Note 18 to the
consolidated financial statements for a summary of the income components of discontinued operations.
Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests decreased due primarily to a decrease in the percentage of the Operating
Partnership owned by noncontrolling interests.
Earnings
before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization ("EBITDA") interest coverage ratio and EBITDA fixed charge coverage ratio
EBITDA
is net income adjusted for the effects of interest expense, depreciation and amortization and income taxes. We believe that EBITDA is a useful
supplemental measure for assessing our un-levered performance. We believe that net income, as reported on our consolidated statements of operations, is the most directly comparable GAAP
measure to EBITDA. EBITDA excludes items that are included in net income, including some that require cash outlays; we compensate for this limitation by using the measure simply as a supplemental
measure that is considered alongside other GAAP and non-GAAP measures. It should not be used as an alternative to net income when evaluating our financial performance or to cash flow from
operating, investing and financing activities when evaluating our liquidity or ability to make cash distributions or pay debt service.
We
use EBITDA to calculate EBITDA Interest Coverage Ratio and EBITDA Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio. We calculate EBITDA interest coverage by dividing EBITDA by interest expense on
continuing and discontinued operations (excluding amortization of deferred financing costs and amortization of discounts on our Exchangeable Senior Notes, net of amounts capitalized). We calculate
EBITDA fixed charge coverage ratio by dividing EBITDA by the sum of: (1) interest expense on continuing and
discontinued operations (excluding amortization of deferred financing costs and amortization of discounts on our Exchangeable Senior Notes, net of amounts capitalized); (2) dividends on
preferred shares; and (3) distributions on preferred units in the Operating Partnership not owned by us.
63
Table of Contents
The
tables below sets forth the computation of our EBITDA interest and fixed charge coverage ratios and reconciliations of EBITDA to net income reported on our consolidated statements of
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
45,504 |
|
$ |
61,299 |
|
$ |
61,316 |
|
Interest expense(1) |
|
|
102,128 |
|
|
82,420 |
|
|
86,921 |
|
Income tax expense(2) |
|
|
119 |
|
|
196 |
|
|
779 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
125,819 |
|
|
111,811 |
|
|
104,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA |
|
$ |
273,570 |
|
$ |
255,726 |
|
$ |
253,984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense(1) |
|
$ |
102,128 |
|
$ |
82,420 |
|
$ |
86,921 |
|
Less: Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
(5,871 |
) |
|
(4,214 |
) |
|
(3,843 |
) |
Less: Amortization of discount on Exchangeable Senior Notes, net of amounts capitalized |
|
|
(5,314 |
) |
|
(2,955 |
) |
|
(3,225 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for interest coverage |
|
$ |
90,943 |
|
$ |
75,251 |
|
$ |
79,853 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
16,102 |
|
|
16,102 |
|
|
16,102 |
|
Preferred distributions |
|
|
660 |
|
|
660 |
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for fixed charge coverage |
|
$ |
107,705 |
|
$ |
92,013 |
|
$ |
96,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA interest coverage ratio |
|
|
3.01x |
|
|
3.40x |
|
|
3.18x |
|
EBITDA fixed charge coverage ratio |
|
|
2.54x |
|
|
2.78x |
|
|
2.63x |
|
- (1)
- Includes
interest from continuing operations and discontinued operations.
- (2)
- Includes
income taxes from continuing operations, discontinued operations and gains on sales of real estate.
Funds
From Operations
Funds
from operations ("FFO") is defined as net income computed using GAAP, excluding gains on sales of previously depreciated operating properties, plus real
estate-related depreciation and amortization. Gains from sales of newly-developed properties less accumulated depreciation, if any, required under GAAP are included in FFO on the basis that
development services are the primary revenue generating activity; we believe that inclusion of these development gains is in accordance with the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts
("NAREIT") definition of FFO, although others may interpret the definition differently and, accordingly, our presentation of FFO may differ from those of other REITs. We believe that FFO is useful to
management and investors as a supplemental measure of operating performance because, by excluding gains related to sales of previously depreciated operating properties and excluding real
estate-related depreciation and amortization, FFO can help one compare our operating performance between periods. In addition, since most equity REITs provide FFO information to the investment
community, we believe that FFO is useful to investors as a supplemental measure for comparing our results to those of other equity REITs. We believe that net income is the most directly comparable
GAAP measure to FFO.
Since
FFO excludes certain items includable in net income, reliance on the measure has limitations; management compensates for these limitations by using the measure simply as a
supplemental measure that is weighed in the balance with other GAAP and non GAAP measures. FFO is not necessarily an indication of our cash flow available to fund cash needs. Additionally, it should
not be used as an alternative to net income when evaluating our financial performance or to cash flow
64
Table of Contents
from
operating, investing and financing activities when evaluating our liquidity or ability to make cash distributions or pay debt service.
Basic
FFO available to common share and common unit holders ("Basic FFO") is FFO adjusted to subtract (1) preferred share dividends, (2) income attributable to
noncontrolling interests through ownership of preferred units in the Operating Partnership or interests in other consolidated entities not
owned by us, (3) depreciation and amortization allocable to noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities, (4) Basic FFO allocable to restricted shares and (5) issuance
costs associated with redeemed preferred shares. With these adjustments, Basic FFO represents FFO available to common shareholders and common unitholders. Common units in the Operating Partnership are
substantially similar to our common shares and are exchangeable into common shares, subject to certain conditions. We believe that Basic FFO is useful to investors due to the close correlation of
common units to common shares. We believe that net income is the most directly comparable GAAP measure to Basic FFO. Basic FFO has essentially the same limitations as FFO; management compensates for
these limitations in essentially the same manner as described above for FFO.
Diluted
FFO available to common share and common unit holders ("Diluted FFO") is Basic FFO adjusted to add back any changes in Basic FFO that would result from the assumed conversion of
securities that are convertible or exchangeable into common shares. We believe that Diluted FFO is useful to investors because it is the numerator used to compute Diluted FFO per share, discussed
below. We believe that the numerator for diluted EPS is the most directly comparable GAAP measure to Diluted FFO. Since Diluted FFO excludes certain items includable in the numerator to diluted EPS,
reliance on the measure has limitations; management compensates for these limitations by using the measure simply as a supplemental measure that is weighed in the balance with other GAAP and
non-GAAP measures. Diluted FFO is not necessarily an indication of our cash flow available to fund cash needs. Additionally, it should not be used as an alternative to net income when
evaluating our financial performance or to cash flow from operating, investing and financing activities when evaluating our liquidity or ability to make cash distributions or pay debt service.
Diluted
FFO, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt is defined as Diluted FFO adjusted to exclude these items. We believe that operating
property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt are not reflective of normal operations and, as a result, we believe that a measure that excludes these items is a useful
supplemental measure in evaluating our operating performance. We believe that the numerator to diluted EPS is the most directly comparable GAAP measure to this non-GAAP measure. This
measure has essentially the same limitations as Diluted FFO, as well as the further limitation of not reflecting the effects of the excluded items; we compensate for these limitations in essentially
the same manner as described above for Diluted FFO.
Diluted
FFO per share is (1) Diluted FFO divided by (2) the sum of the (a) weighted average common shares outstanding during a period, (b) weighted average
common units outstanding during a period and (c) weighted average number of potential additional common shares that would have been outstanding during a period if other securities that are
convertible or exchangeable into common shares were converted or exchanged. We believe that Diluted FFO per share is useful to investors because it provides investors with a further context for
evaluating our FFO results in the same manner that investors use earnings per share ("EPS") in evaluating net income available to common shareholders. In addition, since most equity REITs provide
Diluted FFO per share information to the investment community, we believe that Diluted FFO per share is a useful supplemental measure for comparing us to other equity REITs. We believe that diluted
EPS is the most directly comparable GAAP measure to Diluted FFO per share. Diluted FFO per share has most of the same limitations as Diluted FFO (described above); management compensates for these
limitations in essentially the same manner as described above for Diluted FFO.
65
Table of Contents
Diluted
FFO per share, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt is (1) Diluted FFO, excluding operating property acquisition costs
and gain on early extinguishment of debt divided by (2) the sum of the (a) weighted average common shares outstanding during a period, (b) weighted average common units
outstanding during a period and (c) weighted average number of potential additional common shares that would have been outstanding during a period if other securities that are convertible or
exchangeable into common shares were converted or exchanged. We believe that this measure is useful to investors because it provides investors with a further context for evaluating our FFO results. We
believe that diluted EPS is the most directly comparable GAAP measure to this per share measure. This measure has most of the same limitations as Diluted FFO (described above) as well as the further
limitation of not reflecting the effects of the excluded items; we compensate for these limitations in essentially the same manner as described above for Diluted FFO.
The
computations for all of the above measures on a diluted basis assume the conversion of common units in our Operating Partnership but do not assume the conversion of other securities
that are convertible into common shares if the conversion of those securities would increase per share measures in a given period.
We
use a measure called diluted FFO payout ratio, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt as a supplemental measure of our ability to make
distributions to investors. This measure is defined as (1) the sum of (a) dividends on common shares and (b) distributions to holders of interests in the Operating Partnership and
dividends on convertible preferred shares when such distributions and dividends are included in Diluted FFO divided by (2) Diluted FFO, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain
on early extinguishment of debt.
66
Table of Contents
The table below sets forth the computation of the above stated measures for the years ended December 31, 2006 through 2010 and provides reconciliations to
the GAAP measures associated with such measures (dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
45,504 |
|
$ |
61,299 |
|
$ |
61,316 |
|
$ |
35,942 |
|
$ |
55,988 |
|
Add: Real estate-related depreciation and amortization |
|
|
123,243 |
|
|
109,386 |
|
|
102,772 |
|
|
106,260 |
|
|
78,631 |
|
Add: Depreciation and amortization on unconsolidated real estate entities |
|
|
631 |
|
|
640 |
|
|
648 |
|
|
666 |
|
|
910 |
|
Less: Gain on sales of previously depreciated operating properties, net of income taxes |
|
|
(1,077 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(2,630 |
) |
|
(3,827 |
) |
|
(17,644 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFO |
|
|
168,301 |
|
|
171,325 |
|
|
162,106 |
|
|
139,041 |
|
|
117,885 |
|
Less: Noncontrolling interests-preferred units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
(660 |
) |
|
(660 |
) |
|
(660 |
) |
|
(660 |
) |
|
(660 |
) |
Less: Noncontrolling interests-other consolidated entities |
|
|
32 |
|
|
185 |
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
122 |
|
|
136 |
|
Less: Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,068 |
) |
|
(15,404 |
) |
Less: Issuance costs associated with redeemed preferred shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,896 |
) |
Less: Depreciation and amortization allocable to noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
(1,402 |
) |
|
(493 |
) |
|
(270 |
) |
|
(188 |
) |
|
(163 |
) |
Less: Basic and Diluted FFO allocable to restricted shares |
|
|
(1,524 |
) |
|
(1,629 |
) |
|
(1,310 |
) |
|
(876 |
) |
|
(733 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and Diluted FFO |
|
$ |
148,645 |
|
$ |
152,626 |
|
$ |
143,592 |
|
$ |
121,371 |
|
$ |
97,165 |
|
Operating property acquisition costs |
|
|
3,424 |
|
|
1,967 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,101 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt allocable to restricted shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted FFO, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
$ |
152,069 |
|
$ |
154,593 |
|
$ |
135,566 |
|
$ |
121,371 |
|
$ |
97,165 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares |
|
|
59,611 |
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
48,132 |
|
|
46,527 |
|
|
41,463 |
|
Conversion of weighted average common units |
|
|
4,608 |
|
|
5,717 |
|
|
8,107 |
|
|
8,296 |
|
|
8,511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares/unitsBasic FFO |
|
|
64,219 |
|
|
61,647 |
|
|
56,239 |
|
|
54,823 |
|
|
49,974 |
|
Dilutive effect of share-based compensation awards |
|
|
333 |
|
|
477 |
|
|
688 |
|
|
991 |
|
|
1,568 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares/unitsDiluted FFO |
|
|
64,552 |
|
|
62,124 |
|
|
56,927 |
|
|
55,814 |
|
|
51,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted FFO per share |
|
$ |
2.30 |
|
$ |
2.46 |
|
$ |
2.52 |
|
$ |
2.17 |
|
$ |
1.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted FFO per share, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
$ |
2.36 |
|
$ |
2.49 |
|
$ |
2.38 |
|
$ |
2.17 |
|
$ |
1.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Numerator for diluted EPS |
|
$ |
25,587 |
|
$ |
39,217 |
|
$ |
37,135 |
|
$ |
15,616 |
|
$ |
28,618 |
|
Add: Income allocable to noncontrolling interests-common units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
2,116 |
|
|
4,495 |
|
|
6,519 |
|
|
3,203 |
|
|
7,097 |
|
Add: Real estate-related depreciation and amortization |
|
|
123,243 |
|
|
109,386 |
|
|
102,772 |
|
|
106,260 |
|
|
78,631 |
|
Add: Depreciation and amortization of unconsolidated real estate entities |
|
|
631 |
|
|
640 |
|
|
648 |
|
|
666 |
|
|
910 |
|
Add: Numerator for diluted EPS allocable to restricted shares |
|
|
1,071 |
|
|
1,010 |
|
|
728 |
|
|
517 |
|
|
449 |
|
Less: Depreciation and amortization allocable to noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
(1,402 |
) |
|
(493 |
) |
|
(270 |
) |
|
(188 |
) |
|
(163 |
) |
Less: Basic and diluted FFO allocable to restricted shares |
|
|
(1,524 |
) |
|
(1,629 |
) |
|
(1,310 |
) |
|
(876 |
) |
|
(733 |
) |
Less: Gain on sales of previously depreciated operating properties, net of income taxes |
|
|
(1,077 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(2,630 |
) |
|
(3,827 |
) |
|
(17,644 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and Diluted FFO |
|
$ |
148,645 |
|
$ |
152,626 |
|
$ |
143,592 |
|
$ |
121,371 |
|
$ |
97,165 |
|
Operating property acquisition costs |
|
|
3,424 |
|
|
1,967 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,101 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt allocable to restricted shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted FFO, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
$ |
152,069 |
|
$ |
154,593 |
|
$ |
135,566 |
|
$ |
121,371 |
|
$ |
97,165 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for diluted EPS |
|
|
59,944 |
|
|
56,407 |
|
|
48,820 |
|
|
47,518 |
|
|
43,031 |
|
Weighted average common units |
|
|
4,608 |
|
|
5,717 |
|
|
8,107 |
|
|
8,296 |
|
|
8,511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for diluted FFO per share measures |
|
|
64,552 |
|
|
62,124 |
|
|
56,927 |
|
|
55,814 |
|
|
51,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends on common shares |
|
|
98,510 |
|
|
87,596 |
|
|
70,836 |
|
|
61,331 |
|
|
49,670 |
|
Common unit distributions |
|
|
7,266 |
|
|
7,962 |
|
|
11,510 |
|
|
10,682 |
|
|
9,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for diluted FFO payout ratio, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
105,776 |
|
|
95,558 |
|
|
82,346 |
|
|
72,013 |
|
|
59,666 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted FFO payout ratio, excluding operating property acquisition costs and gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
69.6 |
% |
|
61.8 |
% |
|
60.7 |
% |
|
59.3 |
% |
|
61.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing
and Financing Activities During 2010
We
acquired three operating office properties totaling 514,000 square feet that were 100% leased upon acquisition and a shell-complete office property totaling
183,000 square feet for $205.1 million. These acquisitions were financed primarily using an assumed $70.1 million mortgage loan having a fair
68
Table of Contents
value
at assumption of $73.3 million with a stated fixed interest rate of 5.35% (effective interest rate of 3.95%) that matures in March 2014 and borrowings from our Revolving Credit Facility.
We
acquired a 233,000 square foot wholesale data center known as Power Loft @ Innovation in Manassas, Virginia, for $115.5 million on September 14, 2010. This property, the
shell of which was completed in early 2010, was 17% leased on the date of acquisition to two tenants that have a combined initial critical load of three megawatts and further expansion rights of up to
a combined five megawatts. We expect to complete the development of the property to an initial stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts for additional development costs initially estimated at
$166 million. Full critical load of the property is expected to be up to 30 megawatts. This acquisition was financed primarily using borrowings from our Revolving Credit Facility.
We
placed into service an aggregate of 816,000 square feet in newly constructed space in nine office properties that were 77% leased at December 31, 2010; we expect all of these
properties to be certified either LEED Silver or Gold. These properties included six properties totaling 803,000 square feet that became fully operational in 2010 (94,000 of these square feet were
placed into service in 2009). Costs incurred on these fully operational properties through December 31, 2010 totaled $148.9 million, of which $13.1 million were incurred in 2010
that were financed using primarily borrowings from our Revolving Credit Facility and Revolving Construction Facility.
In
March 2010, we entered into a new submarket with the formation of LW Redstone Company, LLC, a joint venture created to develop Redstone Gateway, a 468-acre land
parcel adjacent to Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama. The land is owned by the U.S. Government and is under a long term master lease to the joint venture. Through this master lease, the joint
venture will create a business park that we expect will total approximately 4.6 million square feet of office and retail space when completed, including approximately 4.4 million square
feet of Class A office space. In addition, the business park will include hotel and other amenities. Development and construction of the business park is expected to take place over a 15 to
20-year period. Our joint venture partner does not have any funding obligations under the terms of the joint venture agreement.
We
also entered into an additional new submarket in 2010 by acquiring 15 acres on which we are entitled to develop up to 978,000 square feet in Springfield, Virginia. The property, which
is known as Patriot Ridge, is located adjacent to the new 2.4 million square foot National Geospatial Intelligence Agency headquarters currently under construction at Fort Belvoir.
The
table below sets forth the major components of our additions to the line entitled "Total Properties, net" on our consolidated balance sheets for 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Construction, development and redevelopment |
|
$ |
303,586 |
|
$ |
181,986 |
|
Acquisitions of operating properties |
|
|
187,052 |
|
|
119,249 |
|
Tenant improvements on operating properties(1) |
|
|
23,781 |
|
|
13,497 |
|
Capital improvements on operating properties |
|
|
10,991 |
|
|
16,269 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
525,410 |
|
$ |
331,001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Tenant
improvement costs incurred on newly-constructed properties are classified in this table as construction, development and redevelopment.
On
September 8, 2010, we sold two office properties in Dayton, New Jersey totaling 201,000 square feet for $20.9 million and recognized a gain of $780,000. We also sold on
September 8, 2010 a land parcel that was contiguous to these properties for $3.0 million and recognized a gain of
69
Table of Contents
$2.5 million.
The net proceeds from this sale after transaction costs totaled approximately $23.6 million, which we used primarily to repay our Revolving Credit Facility.
On
April 7, 2010, the Operating Partnership issued a $240.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2030. Interest on the notes is payable
on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The notes have an exchange settlement feature that provides that the notes may, under certain circumstances, be exchangeable for cash and, at the
Operating Partnership's discretion, our common shares at an exchange rate (subject to adjustment) of 20.7891 shares per $1,000 principal amount of the notes (exchange rate is as of December 31,
2010 and is equivalent to an exchange price of $48.10 per common share). The initial exchange rate of the notes was based on a 20% premium over the closing price on the NYSE on the transaction pricing
date. On or after April 20, 2015, the Operating Partnership may redeem the notes in cash in whole or in part. The holders of the notes have the right to require us to repurchase the notes in
cash in whole or in part on each of April 15, 2015, April 15, 2020 and April 15, 2025, or in the event of a "fundamental change," as defined under the terms of the notes, for a
repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest. Prior to April 20, 2015, subject to certain exceptions, if (1) a "fundamental
change" occurs as a result of certain forms of transactions or series of transactions and (2) a holder elects to exchange its notes in connection with such "fundamental change," we will
increase the applicable exchange rate for the notes surrendered for exchange by a number of additional shares of our common shares as a "make whole premium." The notes are general unsecured senior
obligations of the Operating Partnership and rank equally in right of payment with all other senior unsecured indebtedness of the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership's obligations under
the notes are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by us. We used the $234.3 million in net proceeds available after transaction costs from this issuance for general corporate purposes,
including the application of $224.0 million to pay down borrowings under our Revolving Credit Facility.
In
November 2010, we issued 7.5 million common shares at a public offering price of $34.25 per share, for net proceeds of $245.8 million after underwriting discounts but
before offering expenses. The net proceeds were used to pay down our Revolving Credit Facility and for general corporate purposes.
In
2010, we increased the capacity under our Revolving Credit Facility by $200.0 million, from $600.0 million to $800.0 million, by adding new lenders under the
facility.
During
2010, we entered into the following interest rate swap agreements, all of which are designated as hedges of interest payments on variable rate debt:
-
- $40.0 million notional amount, amortizing to $36.2 million, on November 2, 2010 that fixes the
one-month LIBOR base rate at 3.83% effective on November 2, 2010 and expiring on November 2, 2015;
-
- $100.0 million notional amount on December 8, 2010 that fixes the one-month LIBOR base rate at
0.5025% effective on January 3, 2011 and expiring on January 3, 2012; and
-
- $50.0 million notional amount on December 22, 2010 that fixes the one-month LIBOR base rate at
0.44% effective on January 4, 2011 and expiring on January 3, 2012.
Cash
Flows
Our
cash flow from operations decreased $38.4 million from 2009 to 2010 due primarily to the timing of cash flow associated with third-party
construction projects and increased cash paid for interest. We expect to continue to use cash flow provided by operations as the primary source to meeting our short-term capital needs,
including all property operating expenses, general and administrative expenses, interest expense, scheduled principal amortization of debt, dividends to our shareholders, distributions to our
noncontrolling interest holders of preferred and common units in the Operating Partnership and capital improvements and leasing costs.
70
Table of Contents
Our net cash flow used in investing activities increased $130.1 million from 2009 to 2010 due primarily to increased acquisition activity in 2010. Our cash
flow provided by financing activities increased $168.8 million from 2009 to 2010 due primarily to a $173.1 million increase in net proceeds from our issuance of common shares.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary cash requirements are for operating expenses, debt service, development of new properties, improvements to existing
properties and acquisitions. While we may experience increasing challenges discussed elsewhere herein due to the current economic environment, we believe that our liquidity and capital resources are
adequate for our near-term and longer-term requirements. We maintain sufficient cash and cash equivalents to meet our operating cash requirements and short term investing and
financing cash requirements. When we determine that the amount of cash and cash equivalents on hand is more than we need to meet such requirements, we may pay down our Revolving Credit Facility or
forgo borrowing under construction loan credit facilities to fund development activities.
We
rely primarily on fixed-rate, non-recourse mortgage loans from banks and institutional lenders to finance most of our operating properties. We have also made
use of the public equity and debt markets to meet our capital needs, principally to repay or refinance corporate and property secured debt and to provide funds for project development and
acquisitions.
Our
Revolving Credit Facility provides for borrowings of up to $800 million, $503.1 million of which was available at December 31, 2010; this facility is available
through September 2011 and may be extended by one year at our option, provided that there is no default under the facility and we pay an extension fee of 0.125% of the total availability of the
facility. In 2011, we expect to either create a new facility to replace the existing one or extend the maturity date of the existing facility by one year. We often use our Revolving Credit Facility
initially to finance much of our investing activities. We then pay down the facility using proceeds generated from long-term borrowings and equity issuances. Amounts available under the
facility are computed based on 65% of our unencumbered asset value, as defined in the agreement.
In
addition, we have a Revolving Construction Facility, which provides for borrowings of up to $225.0 million, $82.7 million of which was available at December 31,
2010 to fund future construction costs; this facility is available until May 2012, including a one-year extension obtained in January 2011.
We
expect to satisfy our 2011 debt maturities and fund the construction of properties under construction at year end or expected to be started in 2011 using capacity under our credit
facilities and by accessing the secured debt market, unsecured debt market and/or public equity market. We are continually evaluating sources of capital and believe that there are satisfactory sources
available to meet our capital requirements without necessitating property sales. However, selective dispositions of operating properties and other assets may provide capital resources in 2011 and in
future years.
Certain
of our debt instruments require that we comply with a number of restrictive financial covenants, including maximum leverage ratio, unencumbered leverage ratio, minimum net worth,
minimum fixed charge coverage, minimum unencumbered interest coverage ratio, minimum debt service and maximum secured indebtedness ratio. As of December 31, 2010, we were in compliance with
these financial covenants.
71
Table of Contents
Contractual
Obligations
The
following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
Contractual obligations(1)
|
|
2011 |
|
2012 |
|
2013 |
|
2014 |
|
2015 |
|
Thereafter |
|
Total |
|
Debt(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balloon payments due upon maturity |
|
$ |
718,856 |
|
$ |
257,523 |
|
$ |
134,843 |
|
$ |
202,697 |
|
$ |
390,734 |
|
$ |
575,265 |
|
$ |
2,279,918 |
|
|
Scheduled principal payments |
|
|
14,883 |
|
|
13,867 |
|
|
11,206 |
|
|
7,528 |
|
|
5,739 |
|
|
7,255 |
|
|
60,478 |
|
Interest on debt(3) |
|
|
98,842 |
|
|
82,420 |
|
|
69,921 |
|
|
59,148 |
|
|
44,045 |
|
|
29,347 |
|
|
383,723 |
|
New construction, development and redevelopment obligations(4)(5) |
|
|
69,920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
73,920 |
|
Third-party construction and development obligations(5)(6) |
|
|
67,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,872 |
|
Capital expenditures for operating properties(5)(7) |
|
|
28,399 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,399 |
|
Operating leases(8) |
|
|
706 |
|
|
534 |
|
|
476 |
|
|
383 |
|
|
333 |
|
|
27,080 |
|
|
29,512 |
|
Other purchase obligations(9) |
|
|
3,520 |
|
|
3,521 |
|
|
3,154 |
|
|
2,093 |
|
|
1,707 |
|
|
1,530 |
|
|
15,525 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual cash obligations |
|
$ |
1,002,998 |
|
$ |
357,865 |
|
$ |
219,600 |
|
$ |
271,849 |
|
$ |
446,558 |
|
$ |
640,477 |
|
$ |
2,939,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- The
contractual obligations set forth in this table generally exclude individual contracts that had a value of less than $20,000. Also excluded are
contracts associated with the operations of our properties that may be terminated with notice of one month or less, which is the arrangement that applies to most of our property operations contracts.
- (2)
- Represents
scheduled principal amortization payments and maturities only and therefore excludes a net discount of $16.7 million. We expect to
refinance the balloon payments that are due in 2011 and 2012 using primarily a combination of borrowings under our credit facilities and by accessing the secured debt market, unsecured debt market
and/or public equity market. The principal maturities occurring in 2011 include $142.3 million that were extended to 2012 in January 2011 and an additional $311.8 million that may also
be extended for one year, subject to certain conditions.
- (3)
- Represents
interest costs for debt at December 31, 2010 for the terms of such debt. For variable rate debt, the amounts reflected above used
December 31, 2010 interest rates on variable rate debt in computing interest costs for the terms of such debt.
- (4)
- Represents
primarily contractual obligations pertaining to new construction, development and redevelopment activities. We expect to finance these costs
using primarily a combination of borrowings under our credit facilities and by accessing the secured debt market, unsecured debt
72
Table of Contents
market
and/or public equity market. Construction, development and redevelopment activities underway at December 31, 2010 included the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activity
|
|
Number of
Properties |
|
Square Feet
(in thousands)
or Critical Load |
|
Estimated Remaining Costs (in millions) |
|
Expected Year For Costs to be Incurred Through |
|
Construction of new office properties |
|
|
10 |
|
|
1,041 |
|
$ |
95.1 |
|
|
2012 |
|
Development of new office properties |
|
|
9 |
|
|
1,326 |
|
|
293.4 |
|
|
2014 |
|
Redevelopment of existing office properties |
|
|
4 |
|
|
873 |
|
|
42.5 |
|
|
2012 |
|
Completion of wholesale data center |
|
|
1 |
|
|
18 MW |
|
|
152.1 |
|
|
2012 |
|
- (5)
- Because
of the long-term nature of certain construction and development contracts, some of these costs will be incurred beyond 2011.
- (6)
- Represents
contractual obligations pertaining to projects for which we are acting as construction manager on behalf of unrelated parties who are our
clients. We expect to be reimbursed in full for these costs by our clients.
- (7)
- Represents
contractual obligations pertaining to capital expenditures for our operating properties. We expect to finance all of these costs using cash flow
from operations.
- (8)
- We
expect to pay these items using cash flow from operations.
- (9)
- Primarily
represents contractual obligations pertaining to managed-energy service contracts in place for certain of our operating properties. We expect to
pay these items using cash flow from operations.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
During
2010, we owned an investment in an unconsolidated real estate joint venture accounted for using the equity method of accounting. This real estate joint
venture was entered into in 2005 to enable us to contribute office properties that were previously wholly owned by us into the joint venture in order to partially dispose of our interest in the
properties. We manage the real estate joint venture's property operations and any required construction projects. This real estate joint venture has a two-member management committee that
is responsible for making major decisions (as defined in the joint venture agreement) and we control one of the management committee positions.
We
and our partner may receive returns in proportion to our investments in the joint venture. As part of our obligations under the joint venture arrangement, we entered into standard
nonrecourse loan guarantees (environmental indemnifications and guarantees against fraud and misrepresentation, including springing guarantees of partnership debt in the event of a voluntary
bankruptcy of the partnership). The maximum amount we could be required to pay under the guarantees is approximately $66 million. We are entitled to recover 20% of any amounts paid under the
guarantees from an affiliate of the general partner pursuant to an indemnity agreement so long as we continue to manage the properties. In the event that we no longer manage the properties, the
percentage that we are entitled to recover is increased to 80%. Management estimates that the aggregate fair value of the guarantees is not material and would not exceed the amounts included in
distributions received in excess of investment in unconsolidated real estate joint venture reported on the consolidated balance sheets.
We
have distributions in excess of our investment in this unconsolidated real estate joint venture of $5.5 million at December 31, 2010 due to our not recognizing gain on
the contribution of properties
73
Table of Contents
into
the joint venture; we did not recognize a gain on the contribution since we have the contingent obligations described above. We recognized equity in the losses of this joint venture of $457,000
in 2010.
We
had no other material off-balance sheet arrangements during 2010.
Inflation
Most of our tenants are obligated to pay their share of a building's operating expenses to the extent such expenses exceed amounts
established in their leases, based on historical expense levels. Some of our tenants are obligated to pay their full share of a building's operating expenses. These arrangements somewhat reduce our
exposure to increases in such costs resulting from inflation.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
We adopted amended guidance issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") effective January 1, 2010 related to the
accounting and disclosure requirements for the consolidation of VIEs. This guidance requires an enterprise to perform a qualitative analysis when determining whether or not it must consolidate a VIE
based primarily on whether the entity (1) has the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the activities of the VIE and (2) has the obligation to absorb losses or the
right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The guidance also requires an enterprise to continuously reassess whether it must consolidate a VIE.
Additionally, the standard requires enhanced disclosures about an enterprise's involvement with VIEs and any significant change in risk exposure due to that involvement, as well as how its involvement
with VIEs impacts the enterprise's financial statements. As discussed further in Note 6 to the consolidated financial statements, the adoption of this guidance did not affect our financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
We are exposed to certain market risks, the most predominant of which is change in interest rates. Increases in interest rates can
result in increased interest expense under our Revolving Credit Facility and other variable rate debt. Increases in interest rates can also result in increased interest expense when our fixed rate
debt matures and needs to be refinanced. Our capital strategy favors long-term, fixed-rate, secured debt over variable-rate debt to minimize the risk of
short-term increases in interest rates.
The
following table sets forth as of December 31, 2010 our debt obligations and weighted average interest rates for fixed rate debt by expected maturity date (dollars in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ending December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2011(1) |
|
2012 |
|
2013 |
|
2014 |
|
2015 |
|
Thereafter |
|
Total |
|
Long term debt: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate(2) |
|
$ |
278,361 |
|
$ |
48,647 |
|
$ |
144,616 |
|
$ |
162,009 |
|
$ |
359,596 |
|
$ |
582,520 |
|
$ |
1,575,749 |
|
|
Weighted average interest rate |
|
|
4.35 |
% |
|
6.36 |
% |
|
5.62 |
% |
|
6.40 |
% |
|
4.72 |
% |
|
6.02 |
% |
|
5.44 |
% |
|
Variable rate |
|
$ |
455,378 |
|
$ |
222,743 |
|
$ |
1,433 |
|
$ |
48,216 |
|
$ |
36,877 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
764,647 |
|
- (1)
- Includes
$142.3 million in maturities that were extended to 2012 in January 2011 and an additional $311.8 million that may also be extended
for one year, subject to certain conditions.
- (2)
- Represents
principal maturities only and therefore excludes net discounts of $16.7 million.
74
Table of Contents
The
fair market value of our debt was $2.3 billion at December 31, 2010 and $2.0 billion at December 31, 2009. If interest rates had been 1% lower, the fair
value of our fixed-rate debt would have increased by $65.8 million at December 31, 2010 and $62.6 million at December 31, 2009.
The
following table sets forth information pertaining to our interest rate swap contracts in place as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and their respective fair values (dollars in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at
December 31, |
|
|
|
One-Month LIBOR Base |
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
Amount
|
|
Effective Date |
|
Expiration Date |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
$ |
120,000 |
|
|
1.7600 |
% |
|
1/2/2009 |
|
|
5/1/2012 |
|
$ |
(2,062 |
) |
$ |
(669 |
) |
|
100,000 |
|
|
1.9750 |
% |
|
1/1/2010 |
|
|
5/1/2012 |
|
|
(2,002 |
) |
|
(1,068 |
) |
|
50,000 |
|
|
0.5025 |
% |
|
1/3/2011 |
|
|
1/3/2012 |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
0.5025 |
% |
|
1/3/2011 |
|
|
1/3/2012 |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
0.4400 |
% |
|
1/4/2011 |
|
|
1/3/2012 |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
(1) |
|
3.8300 |
% |
|
11/2/2010 |
|
|
11/2/2015 |
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3,582 |
) |
$ |
(1,737 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- The
notional amount of this instrument is scheduled to amortize to $36.2 million.
Based
on our variable-rate debt balances, including the effect of interest rate swap contracts, our interest expense would have increased by $2.5 million in 2010 and
$4.1 million in 2009 if short-term interest rates were 1% higher.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
This item is included in a separate section at the end of this report beginning on page F-1.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of December 31, 2010. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2010 were functioning effectively to provide reasonable assurance that the information required
to be disclosed by us in reports filed or submitted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is (i) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC's
rules and forms, and (ii) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as
appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
- II.
- Internal
Control Over Financial Reporting
- (a)
- Management's
Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management's
Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included in a separate section at the end of this report on page F-2.
75
Table of Contents
- (b)
- Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm is included in a separate section at the end of this report on page F-3.
- (c)
- Change
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
No
change in our internal control over financial reporting occurred during the most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information
None.
76
Table of Contents
PART III
Items 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance; Executive
Compensation; Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters; Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence; and Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
For
the information required by Item 10, Item 11, Item 12, Item 13 and Item 14, you should refer to our definitive proxy statement relating to the 2011
Annual Meeting of our Shareholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K.
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
- (a)
- The
following documents are filed as exhibits to this Form 10-K:
- 1.
- Financial Statements. See "Index to consolidated financial statements" on
page F-1 of this Form 10-K.
- 2.
- Financial Statement Schedule. See "Index to consolidated financial statements" on
page F-1 of this Form 10-K.
- 3.
- See section below entitled "Exhibits."
- (b)
- Exhibits. Refer
to the Exhibit Index that follows. Unless otherwise noted, the file number of all documents incorporated by reference is
1-14023.
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
3.1.1 |
|
Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust of Registrant (filed with the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 (Commission File No. 333-45649) and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.2 |
|
Articles of Amendment of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (filed on March 22, 2002 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001 and incorporated herein by
reference). |
|
3.1.3 |
|
Articles of Amendment of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K on December 29, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.4 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, dated July 2, 1999 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K on July 7, 1999
and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.5 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K on December 29, 2004 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.6 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series D Convertible Preferred Shares (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K on December 29, 2004 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.7 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series E Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, dated April 3, 2001 (filed with the Registrant's Current Report on Form 8-K
on April 4, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference). |
77
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
3.1.8 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series F Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, dated September 13, 2001 (filed with the Registrant's Amended Current Report on
Form 8-K on September 14, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.9 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series G Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, dated August 6, 2003 (filed with the Registrant's Registration Statement on
Form 8-A on August 7, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.10 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series H Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, dated December 11, 2003 (filed with the Current Report on Form 8-K on
December 12, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.11 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares of Beneficial Interest (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
July 19, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.12 |
|
Articles Supplementary of Corporate Office Properties Trust relating to the Series K Cumulative Redeemable Convertible Preferred Shares of Beneficial Interest (filed with the Company's Current Report on
Form 8-K dated January 16, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.13 |
|
Articles of Amendment of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 28, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.1.14 |
|
Articles of Amendment of Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 19, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.2 |
|
Bylaws of the Registrant, as amended and restated on December 3, 2009 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 9, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
3.3 |
|
Form of certificate for the Registrant's Common Shares of Beneficial Interest, $0.01 par value per share (filed with the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 (Commission File No. 333-45649) and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
4.1 |
|
Indenture, dated as of September 18, 2006, among Corporate Office Properties, L.P., as issuer, Corporate Office Properties Trust, as guarantor, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee (filed
with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 22, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
4.2 |
|
3.50% Exchangeable Senior Note due 2026 of Corporate Office Properties, L.P. (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 22, 2006 and incorporated herein by
reference). |
|
4.3 |
|
Indenture, dated as of April 7, 2010, among Corporate Office Properties, L.P., as issuer, Corporate Office Properties Trust, as guarantor, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee (filed with
the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 16, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
78
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
4.4 |
|
4.25% Exchangeable Senior Note due 2030 of Corporate Office Properties, L.P. (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 16, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.1 |
|
Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated December 7, 1999 (filed on March 16, 2000 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1999 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.2 |
|
First Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated December 21, 1999 (filed on March 16, 2000 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1999 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.3 |
|
Second Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated December 21, 1999 (filed with the Company's Post Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form S-3
dated November 1, 2000 (Registration Statement No. 333-71807) and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.4 |
|
Third Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated September 29, 2000 (filed with the Company's Post Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form S-3
dated November 1, 2000 (Registration Statement No. 333-71807) and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.5 |
|
Fourth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated November 27, 2000 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.6 |
|
Fifth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated January 25, 2001 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.7 |
|
Sixth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated April 3, 2001 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 4, 2001
and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.8 |
|
Seventh Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated August 30, 2001 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.9 |
|
Eighth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated September 14, 2001 (filed with the Company's Amended Current Report on Form 8-K dated
September 14, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.10 |
|
Ninth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated October 6, 2001 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
79
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
10.1.11 |
|
Tenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated December 29, 2001 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.12 |
|
Eleventh Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of the Operating Partnership, dated December 15, 2002 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.13 |
|
Twelfth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated June 2, 2003 (filed on August 12, 2003 with the Registrant's Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.14 |
|
Thirteenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated August 11, 2003 (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.15 |
|
Fourteenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated December 18, 2003 (filed on March 11, 2004 with the Company's Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.16 |
|
Fifteenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated January 31, 2004 (filed on March 11, 2004 with the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.17 |
|
Sixteenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated April 15, 2004 (filed on May 7, 2004 with the Company's Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended March 31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.18 |
|
Seventeenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated September 23, 2004 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
dated September 23, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.19 |
|
Eighteenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated April 18, 2005 (filed with the Company's Form 8-K on April 22, 2005 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.20 |
|
Nineteenth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated July 8, 2005 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K on
July 14, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.21 |
|
Twentieth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated June 29, 2006 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
July 6, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
80
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
10.1.22 |
|
Twenty-First Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated July 20, 2006 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
July 26, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.23 |
|
Twenty-Second Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated January 9, 2007 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
dated January 16, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.24 |
|
Twenty-Third Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated April 6, 2007 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
April 12, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.25 |
|
Twenty-Fourth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated November 2, 2007 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
dated November 5, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.26 |
|
Twenty-Fifth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated December 31, 2008 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
dated January 5, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1.27 |
|
Twenty-Sixth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Corporate Office Properties, L.P., dated March 4, 2010 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
March 10, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.2 |
|
Stock Option Plan for Directors (filed with Royale Investments, Inc.'s Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1993 (Commission File No. 0-20047) and incorporated herein by
reference). |
|
10.3.1 |
* |
Corporate Office Properties Trust 1998 Long Term Incentive Plan (filed with the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-4 (Commission File No. 333-45649) and incorporated herein by
reference). |
|
10.3.2 |
* |
Amendment No. 1 to Corporate Office Properties Trust 1998 Long Term Incentive Plan (filed on August 13, 1999 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1999 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.3.3 |
* |
Amendment No. 2 to Corporate Office Properties Trust 1998 Long Term Incentive Plan (filed on March 22, 2002 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.4 |
* |
Corporate Office Properties Trust Supplemental Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan (filed with the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Commission File No. 333-87384) and incorporated herein
by reference). |
|
10.5.1 |
* |
Employment Agreement, dated July 13, 2005, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P. Corporate Office Properties Trust and Randall M. Griffin (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
dated July 19, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference). |
81
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
10.5.2 |
* |
Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated May 30, 2006, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust and Randall M. Griffin (filed with the Company's Current Report on
Form 8-K dated June 1, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.5.3 |
* |
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated December 31, 2008, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust and Randall M. Griffin (filed with the Company's Current
Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.5.4 |
* |
Third Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated September 16, 2010, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust and Randall M. Griffin (filed on October 29, 2010
with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.6.1 |
* |
Employment Agreement, dated September 12, 2002, between the Operating Partnership, COPT and Roger A. Waesche, Jr. (filed on March 27, 2003 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.6.2 |
* |
Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated March 4, 2005, between the Operating Partnership, COPT and Roger A. Waesche, Jr. (filed on March 16, 2005 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.6.3 |
* |
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated May 30, 2006, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust, and Roger A. Waesche, Jr. (filed with the Company's
Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 1, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.6.4 |
* |
Third Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated July 31, 2006, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust, and Roger A. Waesche, Jr. (filed with the Company's
Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 1, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.6.5 |
* |
Fourth Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated March 2, 2007, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust, and Roger A. Waesche, Jr. (filed with the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K dated February 29, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.6.6 |
* |
Fifth Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated September 16, 2010, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust, and Roger A. Waesche, Jr. (filed on October 29,
2010 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.7.1 |
* |
Employment Agreement, dated May 15, 2003, between Corporate Development Services, LLC, Corporate Office Properties Trust and Dwight Taylor (filed on August 12, 2003 with the Registrant's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 and incorporated herein by reference). |
82
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
10.7.2 |
* |
Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated March 4, 2005, between Corporate Development Services, LLC, Corporate Office Properties Trust and Dwight Taylor (filed on March 16, 2005 with the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.7.3 |
* |
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated March 2, 2007, between Corporate Development Services, LLC, Corporate Office Properties Trust and Dwight S. Taylor (filed with the Company's Annual Report
on Form 10-K dated February 29, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.8 |
* |
Employment Agreement, dated November 28, 2005, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P. Corporate Office Properties Trust and Karen M. Singer (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
on December 1, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.9.1 |
* |
Employment Agreement, dated July 31, 2006, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust and Stephen E. Riffee (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
dated August 1, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.9.2 |
* |
First Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated December 31, 2008, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust and Stephen E. Riffee (filed with the Company's Current
Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.9.3 |
* |
Second Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated September 16, 2010, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust and Stephen E. Riffee (filed on October 29, 2010
with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.10.1 |
* |
Employment Agreement, dated December 31, 2008, between Corporate Development Services, LLC, Corporate Office Properties Trust and Wayne Lingafelter (filed with the Company's Annual Report on Form 8-K
dated January 5, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.10.2 |
* |
First Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated September 16, 2010, between Corporate Development Services, LLC, Corporate Office Properties Trust and Wayne Lingafelter (filed on October 29, 2010 with
the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.11 |
|
Promissory Note, dated October 22, 1998, between Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America and the Operating Partnership (filed on November 13, 1998 with the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1998 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.12 |
|
Indemnity Deed of Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement, dated October 22, 1998, by affiliates of the Operating Partnership for the benefit of Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of
America (filed on November 13, 1998 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1998 and incorporated herein by reference). |
83
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
10.13 |
|
Promissory Note, dated September 30, 1999, between Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America and the Operating Partnership (filed on November 8, 1999 with the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.14 |
|
Indemnity Deed of Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement, dated September 30, 1999, by affiliates of the Operating Partnership for the benefit of Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association
of America (filed on October 29, 2010 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.15 |
|
Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement, dated March 16, 1998, for the benefit of certain shareholders of the Company (filed on August 12, 1998 with the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1998 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.16 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated January 25, 2001, for the benefit of Barony Trust Limited (filed on March 22, 2001 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.17 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated September 18, 2006, among Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust, Banc of America Securities LLC and J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc. (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 22, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.18 |
|
Option Agreement, dated March 1998, between the Operating Partnership and Blue Bell Land, L.P. (filed on March 16, 2000 with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1999 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.19 |
|
Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated October 1, 2007, among Corporate Office Properties, L.P.; Corporate Office Properties Trust; KeyBanc Capital Markets; Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC;
KeyBank National Association; Wachovia Bank, National Association; Bank of America, N.A.; Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company; and Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania (filed on October 29, 2010 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.20 |
* |
Retirement and Consulting Agreement, dated April 12, 2005, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P. and Clay W. Hamlin, III (filed with the Company's Form 8-K on April 15, 2005 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.21.1 |
* |
Corporate Office Properties Trust Supplemental Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2008 and incorporated herein by
reference). |
|
10.21.2 |
* |
First Amendment to the Corporate Office Properties Trust Supplemental Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan dated December 4, 2008 (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
December 10, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.22 |
|
Common Stock Delivery Agreement dated as of September 18, 2006, between Corporate Office Properties, L.P. and Corporate Office Properties Trust (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
September 22, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
84
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
10.23 |
|
Purchase Agreement and Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated December 21, 2006, by and among the Corporate Office Properties Trust; Corporate Office Properties, L.P.; W&M Business Trust; and Nottingham Village,
Inc. (filed on October 29, 2010 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.24 |
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement of Ownership Interests, dated December 21, 2006, by and between Corporate Office Properties, L.P. and Nottingham Properties, Inc. (filed on October 29, 2010 with the
Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.25 |
|
Construction Loan Agreement dated as of May 2, 2008 by and among Corporate Office Properties, L.P., as borrower, Corporate Office Properties Trust, as parent, Keybanc Capital Markets, Inc. as arranger,
Keybank National Association, as administrative agent, Bank of America, N.A., as syndication agent, Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, as documentation agent, and the financial institutions initially signatory thereto and their assignees
pursuant to Section 12.5 thereof, as lenders (filed on October 29, 2010 with the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.26.1 |
* |
Corporate Office Properties Trust 2008 Omnibus Equity and Incentive Plan (included in Appendix A to the Company's Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 9, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.26.2 |
* |
Corporate Office Properties Trust Amended and Restated 2008 Omnibus Equity and Incentive Plan (included in Annex A to the Company's Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 30, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.27 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated April 7, 2010, among Corporate Office Properties, L.P., Corporate Office Properties Trust, J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. and RBC Capital Markets Corporation
(filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 16, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.28 |
|
Common Stock Delivery Agreement, dated April 7, 2010, among Corporate Office Properties, L.P. and Corporate Office Properties Trust (filed with the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
April 16, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
12.1 |
|
Statement regarding Computation of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Share Dividends (filed herewith). |
|
21.1 |
|
Subsidiaries of Registrant (filed herewith). |
|
23.1 |
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (filed herewith). |
|
31.1 |
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of Corporate Office Properties Trust required by Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (filed herewith). |
|
31.2 |
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of Corporate Office Properties Trust required by Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (filed herewith). |
85
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION |
|
32.1 |
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of Corporate Office Properties Trust required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. (This exhibit shall not be deemed "filed" for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Further, this exhibit shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.) (Furnished herewith.) |
|
32.2 |
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of Corporate Office Properties Trust required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. (This exhibit shall not be deemed "filed" for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Further, this exhibit shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.) (Furnished herewith.) |
|
101.INS |
|
XBRL Instance Document (furnished herewith). |
|
101.SCH |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document (furnished herewith). |
|
101.CAL |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document (furnished herewith). |
|
101.LAB |
|
XBRL Extension Labels Linkbase (furnished herewith). |
|
101.PRE |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document (furnished herewith). |
|
101.DEF |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document (furnished herewith). |
- *
- Indicates
a compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed as an exhibit to this Form 10-K.
(c) Not applicable.
86
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this
report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORPORATE OFFICE PROPERTIES TRUST |
Date: February 11, 2011 |
|
By: |
|
/s/ RANDALL M. GRIFFIN
Randall M. Griffin Chief Executive Officer |
Date: February 11, 2011 |
|
By: |
|
/s/ STEPHEN E. RIFFEE
Stephen E. Riffee Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer |
87
Table of Contents
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on
the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAY H. SHIDLER
(Jay H. Shidler) |
|
Chairman of the Board and Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ CLAY W. HAMLIN, III
(Clay W. Hamlin, III) |
|
Vice Chairman of the Board
and Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ RANDALL M. GRIFFIN
(Randall M. Griffin) |
|
Chief Executive Officer and Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ STEPHEN E. RIFFEE
(Stephen E. Riffee) |
|
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer) |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ GREGORY J. THOR
(Gregory J. Thor) |
|
Vice President and Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ THOMAS F. BRADY
(Thomas F. Brady) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ ROBERT L. DENTON
(Robert L. Denton) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ DAVID M. JACOBSTEIN
(David M. Jacobstein) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ STEVEN D. KESLER
(Steven D. Kesler) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ KENNETH S. SWEET, JR.
(Kenneth S. Sweet, Jr.) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ RICHARD SZAFRANSKI
(Richard Szafranski) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
/s/ KENNETH D. WETHE
(Kenneth D. Wethe) |
|
Trustee |
|
February 11, 2011 |
88
Table of Contents
CORPORATE OFFICE PROPERTIES TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
F-1
Table of Contents
Management's Report On Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, and for performing an
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Our internal
control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions
and dispositions of our assets; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and trustees; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements. Because of its inherent
limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Management
performed an assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010 based upon criteria in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission ("COSO"). Based on our assessment, management determined that our internal
control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2010 based on the criteria in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the COSO.
The
effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent
registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.
F-2
Table of Contents
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To
the Board of Trustees and Shareholders of Corporate Office Properties Trust:
In
our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the accompanying index 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Corporate Office
Properties Trust and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the
accompanying index 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company's management is responsible for these financial statements
and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective
internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying "Management's Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting". Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company's internal control over financial
reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing
the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting
included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness
of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinions.
A
company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures
that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and
expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Baltimore,
MD
February 11, 2011
F-3
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties, net: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating properties, net |
|
$ |
2,802,773 |
|
$ |
2,510,277 |
|
|
Properties held for sale, net |
|
|
|
|
|
18,533 |
|
|
Projects under construction or development |
|
|
642,682 |
|
|
501,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total properties, net |
|
|
3,445,455 |
|
|
3,029,900 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
10,102 |
|
|
8,262 |
|
Restricted cash and marketable securities |
|
|
22,582 |
|
|
16,549 |
|
Accounts receivable (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $2,796 and $2,516, respectively) |
|
|
18,938 |
|
|
17,459 |
|
Deferred rent receivable |
|
|
79,160 |
|
|
71,805 |
|
Intangible assets on real estate acquisitions, net |
|
|
113,735 |
|
|
100,671 |
|
Deferred leasing and financing costs, net |
|
|
60,649 |
|
|
51,570 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
|
93,896 |
|
|
83,806 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
3,844,517 |
|
$ |
3,380,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt, net |
|
$ |
2,323,681 |
|
$ |
2,053,841 |
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
99,699 |
|
|
116,455 |
|
|
Rents received in advance and security deposits |
|
|
31,603 |
|
|
32,177 |
|
|
Dividends and distributions payable |
|
|
32,986 |
|
|
28,440 |
|
|
Deferred revenue associated with operating leases |
|
|
14,802 |
|
|
14,938 |
|
|
Distributions in excess of investment in unconsolidated real estate joint venture |
|
|
5,545 |
|
|
5,088 |
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
13,063 |
|
|
8,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
2,521,379 |
|
|
2,259,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 21) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate Office Properties Trust's shareholders' equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Shares of beneficial interest with an aggregate liquidation preference of $216,333 at December 31, 2010 and 2009
(Note 12) |
|
|
81 |
|
|
81 |
|
|
Common Shares of beneficial interest ($0.01 par value; 125,000,000 shares authorized and 66,931,582 shares issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2010; 75,000,000 shares authorized and 58,342,673 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2009) |
|
|
669 |
|
|
583 |
|
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
1,511,844 |
|
|
1,238,704 |
|
|
Cumulative distributions in excess of net income |
|
|
(281,794 |
) |
|
(209,941 |
) |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(4,163 |
) |
|
(1,907 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Corporate Office Properties Trust's shareholders' equity |
|
|
1,226,637 |
|
|
1,027,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
69,337 |
|
|
73,892 |
|
|
Preferred units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
8,800 |
|
|
8,800 |
|
|
Other consolidated entities |
|
|
18,364 |
|
|
10,420 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries |
|
|
96,501 |
|
|
93,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
1,323,138 |
|
|
1,120,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
3,844,517 |
|
$ |
3,380,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental revenue |
|
$ |
376,112 |
|
$ |
352,813 |
|
$ |
334,234 |
|
|
Tenant recoveries and other real estate operations revenue |
|
|
83,688 |
|
|
71,171 |
|
|
62,526 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
|
104,675 |
|
|
343,087 |
|
|
188,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
564,475 |
|
|
767,071 |
|
|
585,145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
179,419 |
|
|
157,154 |
|
|
140,895 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization associated with real estate operations |
|
|
123,236 |
|
|
108,529 |
|
|
101,854 |
|
|
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
102,302 |
|
|
336,519 |
|
|
184,142 |
|
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
24,008 |
|
|
23,240 |
|
|
24,096 |
|
|
Business development expenses |
|
|
4,197 |
|
|
3,699 |
|
|
1,233 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
433,162 |
|
|
629,141 |
|
|
452,220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
131,313 |
|
|
137,930 |
|
|
132,925 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(101,865 |
) |
|
(82,187 |
) |
|
(86,368 |
) |
Interest and other income |
|
|
9,568 |
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
2,070 |
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities and income taxes |
|
|
39,016 |
|
|
60,907 |
|
|
56,728 |
|
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities |
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
(147 |
) |
Income tax expense |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
(196 |
) |
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
40,284 |
|
|
59,770 |
|
|
56,380 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
1,529 |
|
|
3,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before gain on sales of real estate |
|
|
42,675 |
|
|
61,299 |
|
|
60,212 |
|
Gain on sales of real estate, net of income taxes |
|
|
2,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
61,299 |
|
|
61,316 |
|
Less net income attributable to noncontrolling interests: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
(2,116 |
) |
|
(4,495 |
) |
|
(6,519 |
) |
|
Preferred units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
(660 |
) |
|
(660 |
) |
|
(660 |
) |
|
Other consolidated entities |
|
|
32 |
|
|
185 |
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Corporate Office Properties Trust |
|
|
42,760 |
|
|
56,329 |
|
|
53,965 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Corporate Office Properties Trust common shareholders |
|
$ |
26,658 |
|
$ |
40,227 |
|
$ |
37,863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Corporate Office Properties Trust: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
40,551 |
|
$ |
54,948 |
|
$ |
50,711 |
|
|
Discontinued operations, net |
|
|
2,209 |
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
3,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Corporate Office Properties Trust |
|
$ |
42,760 |
|
$ |
56,329 |
|
$ |
53,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per common share(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
0.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per common share(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
0.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Basic
and diluted earnings per common share are calculated based on amounts attributable to common shareholders of Corporate Office Properties Trust.
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-5
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Equity
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
Shares |
|
Common
Shares |
|
Additional
Paid-in
Capital |
|
Cumulative
Distributions in
Excess of Net
Income |
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss |
|
Non-
controlling
Interests |
|
Total |
|
Balance at December 31, 2007 (47,366,475 common shares outstanding) |
|
$ |
81 |
|
$ |
474 |
|
$ |
971,459 |
|
$ |
(129,599 |
) |
$ |
(2,372 |
) |
$ |
129,437 |
|
$ |
969,480 |
|
Conversion of common units to common shares (258,917 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
7,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,508 |
) |
|
|
|
Common shares issued to the public (3,737,500 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
138,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
138,923 |
|
Exercise of share options (180,239 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,835 |
|
Share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
9,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,036 |
|
Restricted common share redemptions (61,258 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,320 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,320 |
) |
Adjustments to noncontrolling interests resulting from changes in ownership of Operating Partnership by COPT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,716 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,716 |
|
|
|
|
Adjustments related to derivatives designated as cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,377 |
) |
|
(330 |
) |
|
(2,707 |
) |
Increase in tax benefit from share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,053 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,351 |
|
|
61,316 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(86,938 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(86,938 |
) |
Distributions to owners of common and preferred units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,170 |
) |
|
(12,170 |
) |
Contributions from noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,248 |
|
|
3,248 |
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(255 |
) |
|
(255 |
) |
Acquisition of noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2008 (51,790,442 common shares outstanding) |
|
|
81 |
|
|
518 |
|
|
1,112,734 |
|
|
(162,572 |
) |
|
(4,749 |
) |
|
136,411 |
|
|
1,082,423 |
|
Conversion of common units to common shares (2,841,394 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
61,627 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(61,655 |
) |
|
|
|
Common shares issued to the public (2,990,000 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
71,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71,825 |
|
Exercise of share options (464,601 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
5,222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,226 |
|
Share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
10,599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,602 |
|
Restricted common share redemptions (79,343 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,049 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,049 |
) |
Adjustments to noncontrolling interests resulting from changes in ownership of Operating Partnership by COPT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21,072 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,072 |
|
|
|
|
Adjustments related to derivatives designated as cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,842 |
|
|
585 |
|
|
3,427 |
|
Decrease in tax benefit from share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(152 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(152 |
) |
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,970 |
|
|
61,299 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(103,698 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(103,698 |
) |
Distributions to owners of common and preferred units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,622 |
) |
|
(8,622 |
) |
Contributions from noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
786 |
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(435 |
) |
|
(435 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 (58,342,673 common shares outstanding) |
|
|
81 |
|
|
583 |
|
|
1,238,704 |
|
|
(209,941 |
) |
|
(1,907 |
) |
|
93,112 |
|
|
1,120,632 |
|
Issuance of 4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,149 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,149 |
|
Conversion of common units to common shares (663,498 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
9,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,567 |
) |
|
|
|
Common shares issued to the public (7,475,000 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
245,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
245,621 |
|
Exercise of share options (278,656 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
4,572 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,575 |
|
Share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
11,843 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,845 |
|
Restricted common share redemptions (105,215 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,913 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,913 |
) |
Adjustments to noncontrolling interests resulting from changes in ownership of Operating Partnership by COPT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,274 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,274 |
|
|
|
|
Adjustments related to derivatives designated as cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,256 |
) |
|
472 |
|
|
(1,784 |
) |
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,744 |
|
|
45,504 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(114,613 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(114,613 |
) |
Distributions to owners of common and preferred units in the Operating Partnership |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,926 |
) |
|
(7,926 |
) |
Contributions from noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,510 |
|
|
9,510 |
|
Acquisition of noncontrolling interests in other consolidated entities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,344 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,118 |
) |
|
(4,462 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 (66,931,582 common shares outstanding) |
|
$ |
81 |
|
$ |
669 |
|
$ |
1,511,844 |
|
$ |
(281,794 |
) |
$ |
(4,163 |
) |
$ |
96,501 |
|
$ |
1,323,138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-6
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
45,504 |
|
$ |
61,299 |
|
$ |
61,316 |
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and other amortization |
|
|
125,819 |
|
|
111,811 |
|
|
104,968 |
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
5,871 |
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
3,843 |
|
|
|
Increase in deferred rent receivable |
|
|
(5,706 |
) |
|
(1,296 |
) |
|
(10,594 |
) |
|
|
Amortization of above or below market leases |
|
|
(2,078 |
) |
|
(2,126 |
) |
|
(2,064 |
) |
|
|
Amortization of net debt discounts |
|
|
5,841 |
|
|
3,412 |
|
|
3,873 |
|
|
|
Gain on sales of real estate |
|
|
(3,917 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(4,208 |
) |
|
|
Gain on equity method investment |
|
|
(6,406 |
) |
|
(442 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Share-based compensation |
|
|
11,845 |
|
|
10,602 |
|
|
9,036 |
|
|
|
Gain on redemption of 3.5% Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,101 |
) |
|
|
Other |
|
|
(1,794 |
) |
|
(3,567 |
) |
|
(3,610 |
) |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in accounts receivable |
|
|
(1,680 |
) |
|
(3,634 |
) |
|
11,128 |
|
|
|
Decrease (increase) in restricted cash and marketable securities and prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
|
3,799 |
|
|
(2,745 |
) |
|
(15,061 |
) |
|
|
(Decrease) increase in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
(19,644 |
) |
|
15,787 |
|
|
31,136 |
|
|
|
(Decrease) increase in rents received in advance and security deposits |
|
|
(1,018 |
) |
|
1,502 |
|
|
(770 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
156,436 |
|
|
194,817 |
|
|
180,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of and additions to properties |
|
|
(480,587 |
) |
|
(251,565 |
) |
|
(280,639 |
) |
|
Proceeds from sales of properties |
|
|
27,576 |
|
|
65 |
|
|
33,412 |
|
|
Mortgage and other loan receivables funded or acquired |
|
|
(5,588 |
) |
|
(82,413 |
) |
|
(25,251 |
) |
|
Leasing costs paid |
|
|
(14,403 |
) |
|
(8,786 |
) |
|
(7,670 |
) |
|
Investment in unconsolidated entities |
|
|
(6,600 |
) |
|
(3,000 |
) |
|
(6,000 |
) |
|
Purchases of furniture, fixtures and equipment |
|
|
(1,447 |
) |
|
(2,287 |
) |
|
(3,581 |
) |
|
Other |
|
|
1,882 |
|
|
(1,090 |
) |
|
(1,093 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(479,167 |
) |
|
(349,076 |
) |
|
(290,822 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from debt, including issuance of exchangeable senior notes |
|
|
1,022,912 |
|
|
1,066,413 |
|
|
1,080,999 |
|
|
Repayments of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduled principal amortization |
|
|
(13,996 |
) |
|
(11,489 |
) |
|
(13,668 |
) |
|
|
Other repayments |
|
|
(799,663 |
) |
|
(863,243 |
) |
|
(988,945 |
) |
|
Repurchase of 3.5% Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,238 |
) |
|
Deferred financing costs paid |
|
|
(8,570 |
) |
|
(3,388 |
) |
|
(6,461 |
) |
|
Net proceeds from issuance of common shares |
|
|
250,196 |
|
|
77,052 |
|
|
141,758 |
|
|
Acquisition of noncontrolling interests in consolidated entities |
|
|
(4,462 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid |
|
|
(109,894 |
) |
|
(100,095 |
) |
|
(83,753 |
) |
|
Distributions paid |
|
|
(8,099 |
) |
|
(9,579 |
) |
|
(12,002 |
) |
|
Restricted share redemptions |
|
|
(3,913 |
) |
|
(2,049 |
) |
|
(1,320 |
) |
|
Other |
|
|
60 |
|
|
2,124 |
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
324,571 |
|
|
155,746 |
|
|
92,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
1,487 |
|
|
(17,863 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
8,262 |
|
|
6,775 |
|
|
24,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
10,102 |
|
$ |
8,262 |
|
$ |
6,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Continued)
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Supplemental disclosures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid, net of capitalized interest |
|
$ |
87,978 |
|
$ |
73,389 |
|
$ |
81,335 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes paid |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
317 |
|
$ |
1,115 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancellation of mortgage loans receivable in connection with acquisition of properties |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
102,575 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt and other liabilities assumed in connection with acquisitions |
|
$ |
74,244 |
|
$ |
3,085 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in accrued capital improvements, leasing and other investing activity costs |
|
$ |
4,576 |
|
$ |
6,256 |
|
$ |
(14,799 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in property and noncontrolling interests in connection with property contribution by a noncontrolling interest in a joint venture |
|
$ |
9,000 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
3,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in property and decrease in prepaid and other assets in connection with the consolidation of a joint venture |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
10,859 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Decrease) increase in fair value of derivatives applied to AOCL and noncontrolling interests |
|
$ |
(1,846 |
) |
$ |
3,365 |
|
$ |
(2,769 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends/distribution payable |
|
$ |
32,986 |
|
$ |
28,440 |
|
$ |
25,794 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in noncontrolling interests and increase in shareholders' equity in connection with the conversion of common units into common shares |
|
$ |
9,567 |
|
$ |
61,654 |
|
$ |
7,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to noncontrolling interests resulting from changes in ownership of Operating Partnership by COPT |
|
$ |
10,274 |
|
$ |
21,072 |
|
$ |
16,716 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-8
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
1. Organization
Corporate Office Properties Trust ("COPT") and subsidiaries (collectively, the "Company," "we" or "us") is a fully-integrated and self-managed real estate investment trust
("REIT") that focuses primarily on strategic customer relationships and specialized tenant requirements in the United States Government and defense information technology sectors and data centers
serving such sectors. We acquire, develop, manage and lease office and data center properties that are typically concentrated in large office parks primarily located adjacent to government demand
drivers and/or in strong markets that we believe possess growth opportunities. As of December 31, 2010, our investments in real estate included the following:
-
- 252 wholly owned operating office properties totaling 20.0 million square feet;
-
- 21 wholly owned office properties under construction, development or redevelopment that we estimate will total
approximately 3.0 million square feet upon completion, including five partially operational properties included above;
-
- wholly owned land parcels totaling 1,497 acres that we believe are potentially developable into approximately
14.4 million square feet;
-
- a wholly owned, partially operational, wholesale data center which upon completion is expected to have an initial
stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts; and
-
- partial ownership interests in a number of other real estate projects in operations, under development or held for future
development.
We
conduct almost all of our operations through our operating partnership, Corporate Office Properties, L.P. (the "Operating Partnership"), of which we are the managing general
partner. The Operating Partnership owns real estate both directly and through subsidiary partnerships and limited liability companies ("LLCs"). A summary of our Operating Partnership's forms of
ownership and the percentage of those ownership forms owned by COPT as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Common Units |
|
|
94 |
% |
|
92 |
% |
Series G Preferred Units |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
100 |
% |
Series H Preferred Units |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
100 |
% |
Series I Preferred Units |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
0 |
% |
Series J Preferred Units |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
100 |
% |
Series K Preferred Units |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
100 |
% |
Three
of our trustees also controlled, either directly or through ownership by other entities or family members, an additional 5% of the Operating Partnership's common units of the
Operating Partnership ("common units") as of December 31, 2010.
In
addition to owning real estate, the Operating Partnership also owns entities that provide real estate services such as property management, construction and development and heating
and air conditioning services primarily for our properties but also for third parties.
F-9
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of COPT, the Operating Partnership, their subsidiaries and other entities in
which we have a majority voting interest and control. We also consolidate certain entities when control of such entities can be achieved through means other than voting rights ("variable interest
entities" or "VIEs") if we are deemed to be the primary beneficiary of such entities. We eliminate all significant intercompany balances and transactions in consolidation.
We
use the equity method of accounting when we own an interest in an entity and can exert significant influence over the entity's operations but cannot control the entity's operations.
We
use the cost method of accounting when we own an interest in an entity and cannot exert significant influence over its operations.
Reclassification
We reclassified certain amounts from prior periods to conform to the current period presentation of our consolidated financial
statements with no effect on previously reported net income or equity.
Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements
We make estimates and assumptions when preparing financial statements under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). These
estimates and assumptions affect various matters, including:
-
- the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets at the dates of the financial
statements;
-
- the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements; and
-
- the reported amounts of revenues and expenses in our consolidated statements of operations during the reporting periods.
Significant
estimates are inherent in the presentation of our financial statements in a number of areas, including the evaluation of the collectability of accounts and notes receivable,
the allocation of property acquisition costs, the determination of estimated useful lives of assets, the determination of lease terms, the evaluation of impairment of long-lived assets,
the amount of revenue recognized relating to tenant improvements and the level of expense recognized in connection with share-based compensation. Actual results could differ from these and other
estimates.
Acquisitions of Properties
Upon completion of property acquisitions, we allocate the purchase price to tangible and intangible assets and liabilities associated
with such acquisitions based on our estimates of their fair values. We determine these fair values by using market data and independent appraisals available to us and making numerous estimates and
assumptions. We allocate property acquisitions to the following components:
-
- properties based on a valuation performed under the assumption that the property is vacant upon acquisition (the "if
vacant value"). The if-vacant value is allocated between land and buildings. We also allocate additional amounts to properties for in-place tenant improvements
F-10
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
Properties
We report properties to be developed or held and used in operations at our depreciated cost, reduced for impairment losses, where
appropriate. The preconstruction stage of the development or redevelopment of an operating property includes efforts and related costs to secure land control and zoning, evaluate feasibility and
complete other initial tasks which are essential to development. We capitalize interest expense, real estate taxes, direct and indirect project costs and other costs associated with properties, or
portions thereof, undergoing construction, development and redevelopment activities. We continue to capitalize these costs while construction, development or redevelopment activities are underway
until a property becomes "operational," which occurs upon the earlier of when leases commence or one year after the cessation of major construction activities. When leases commence on portions of a
newly-constructed or redeveloped property in the period prior to one year from the cessation of major construction activities, we consider that property to be "partially operational." When a property
is partially operational, we allocate the costs associated with the property between the portion that is operational and the portion under construction. We start depreciating newly-constructed and
redeveloped properties as they become operational.
Most
of our leases involve some form of improvements to leased space. When we are required to provide improvements under the terms of a lease, we determine whether the improvements
constitute landlord assets or tenant assets. We capitalize the cost of the improvements when we deem the
F-11
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
improvements
to be landlord assets. In determining whether improvements constitute landlord or tenant assets, we consider numerous factors, including: whether the improvements are unique to the tenant
or reusable by other tenants; whether the tenant is permitted to alter or remove the improvements without our consent or without compensating us for any lost fair value; whether the ownership of the
improvements remains with us or remains with the tenant at the end of the lease term; and whether the economic substance of the lease terms is properly reflected.
We
depreciate our fixed assets using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives as follows:
|
|
|
Buildings and building improvements |
|
10-40 years |
Land improvements |
|
10-20 years |
Tenant improvements on operating properties |
|
Related lease terms |
Equipment and personal property |
|
3-10 years |
If
events or circumstances indicate that a property to be held and used may be impaired, we perform a recoverability analysis based on the estimated undiscounted cash flows to be
generated by the property. If the analysis indicates that the carrying value of the property is not recoverable from future cash flows, the property is written down to fair value and an impairment
loss is recognized. Fair values are determined based on estimated future cash flows using market-based discount and capitalization rates.
When
we determine that a property is held for sale, we discontinue the recording of depreciation expense on the property and estimate the fair value, net of selling costs; if we then
determine that the estimated fair value, net of selling costs, is less than the net book value of the property, we recognize an impairment loss equal to the difference and reduce the net book value of
the property.
When
we sell an operating property, or determine that an operating property is held for sale, and determine that we have no significant continuing involvement in such property, we
classify the results of operations for such property as discontinued operations. Interest expense that is specifically identifiable to properties included in discontinued operations is used in the
computation of interest expense attributable to discontinued operations. When properties classified as discontinued operations are included in computations that determine the amount of our borrowing
capacity under certain debt instruments (including our Revolving Credit Facility), we allocate a portion of such debt instruments' interest expense to discontinued operations; we compute this
allocation based on the percentage that the related properties represent of all properties included in determining the amount of our borrowing capacity under such debt instruments.
We
expense property maintenance and repair costs when incurred.
Sales of Interests in Real Estate
We recognize gains from sales of interests in real estate using the full accrual method, provided that various criteria relating to the
terms of sale and any subsequent involvement by us with the real estate sold are met. We recognize gains relating to transactions that do not meet the requirements of the full accrual method of
accounting when the full accrual method of accounting criteria are met.
F-12
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include all cash and liquid investments that mature three months or less from when they are purchased. Cash
equivalents are reported at cost, which approximates fair value. We maintain our cash in bank accounts in amounts that may exceed Federally insured limits at times. We have not experienced any losses
in these accounts in the past and believe that we are not exposed to significant credit risk because our accounts are deposited with major financial institutions.
Revenue Recognition
We recognize minimum rents, net of abatements, on a straight-line basis over the non-cancelable term of tenant
leases (including periods under bargain renewal options). The non-cancelable term of a lease includes periods when a tenant: (1) may not terminate its lease obligation early; or
(2) may terminate its lease obligation early in exchange for a fee or penalty that we consider material enough such that termination would not be probable. We report the amount by which our
minimum rental revenue recognized on a straight-line basis under leases exceeds the contractual rent billings associated with such leases as deferred rent receivable on our consolidated
balance sheets. Amounts by which our minimum rental revenue recognized on a straight-line basis under leases are less than the contractual rent billings associated with such leases are
included in deferred revenue associated with operating leases on our consolidated balance sheets.
In
connection with a tenant's entry into, or modification of, a lease, if we make cash payments to, or on behalf of, the tenant for purposes other than funding the construction of
landlord assets, we defer the amount of such payments as lease incentives. We amortize lease incentives as a reduction of rental revenue over the term of the lease.
We
recognize tenant recovery revenue in the same periods in which we incur the related expenses. Tenant recovery revenue includes payments from tenants as reimbursement for property
taxes, utilities and other property operating expenses.
We
recognize fees received for lease terminations as revenue and write off against such revenue any (1) deferred rents receivable, and (2) deferred revenue, lease
incentives and intangible assets that are amortizable into rental revenue associated with the leases; the resulting net amount is the net revenue from the early termination of the leases. When a
tenant's lease for space in a property is terminated early but the tenant continues to lease such space under a new or modified lease in the property, the net revenue from the early termination of the
lease is recognized evenly over the remaining life of the new or modified lease in place on that property.
We
recognize fees for services provided by us once services are rendered, fees are determinable and collectability is assured. We recognize revenue under construction contracts using the
percentage of completion method when the revenue and costs for such contracts can be estimated with reasonable accuracy; when these criteria do not apply to a contract, we recognize revenue on that
contract using the completed contract method. Under the percentage of completion method, we recognize a percentage of the total estimated revenue on a contract based on the cost of services provided
on the contract as of a point in time relative to the total estimated costs on the contract.
F-13
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
Accounts and Deferred Rents Receivable and Mortgage and Other Investing Receivables
We maintain allowances for estimated losses resulting from the failure of our customers or borrowers to satisfy their payment
obligations. We use judgment in estimating these allowances based primarily upon the payment history and credit status of the entities associated with the individual receivables. We write off these
receivables when we believe the facts and circumstances indicate that continued pursuit of collection is no longer warranted. When we earn interest income in connection with receivables for which we
have established allowances, we establish allowances in connection with such interest income that is unpaid. When cash is received in connection with receivables for which we have established
allowances, we reduce the amount of losses recognized in connection with the receivables' allowance.
Intangible Assets and Deferred Revenue on Real Estate Acquisitions
We capitalize intangible assets and deferred revenue on real estate acquisitions as described in the section above entitled
"Acquisitions of Properties." We amortize the intangible assets and deferred revenue as follows:
|
|
|
Above- and below-market leases |
|
Related lease terms |
In-place lease assets |
|
Related lease terms |
Tenant relationship value |
|
Estimated period of time that tenant will lease space in property |
Above- and below- market cost
arrangements |
|
Term of arrangements |
Market concentration premium |
|
40 years |
We
recognize the amortization of acquired above-market and below-market leases as adjustments to rental revenue. We recognize the amortization of above- and below- market cost
arrangements as adjustments to property operating expenses. We recognize the amortization of other intangible assets on real estate acquisitions as amortization expense.
Deferred Leasing and Financing Costs, net
We defer costs that we incur to obtain new tenant leases or extend existing tenant leases. We amortize these costs evenly over the
lease terms. When tenant leases are terminated early, we expense any unamortized deferred leasing costs associated with those leases over the remaining life of the lease.
We
defer costs for financing arrangements and recognize these costs as interest expense over the related loan terms on a straight-line basis, which approximates the
amortization that would occur under the effective interest method of amortization. We expense any unamortized loan costs when loans are retired early.
Interest Rate Derivatives
Our primary objectives in using interest rate derivatives are to add stability to interest expense and to manage exposure to interest
rate movements. To accomplish this objective, we primarily use interest rate swaps as part of our interest rate risk management strategy. Interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges involve the
receipt of variable-rate amounts from a counterparty in exchange for our
F-14
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
making
fixed-rate payments over the life of the agreements without exchange of the underlying notional amount. Derivatives are used to hedge the variable cash flows associated with
existing as well as future variable-rate debt. We recognize all derivatives as assets or liabilities in the balance sheet at fair value. We defer the effective portion of changes in fair
value of the designated cash flow hedges to accumulated other comprehensive loss ("AOCL") and reclassify such deferrals to interest expense as interest expense is recognized on the
hedged forecasted transactions. We recognize the ineffective portion of the change in fair value of interest rate derivatives directly in interest expense. We do not use interest rate derivatives for
trading or speculative purposes. We manage counter-party risk by only entering into contracts with major financial institutions based upon their credit ratings and other risk factors.
We
use standard market conventions and techniques such as discounted cash flow analysis, option pricing models, replacement cost and termination cost in computing the fair value of
derivatives at each balance sheet date.
Please
refer to Note 11 for additional information pertaining to interest rate derivatives.
Share-Based Compensation
Prior to 2010, we had historically issued two forms of share-based compensation: options to purchase common shares of beneficial
interest ("options") and restricted common shares ("restricted shares"). In 2010, we also issued a new form of share-based compensation called performance share units ("PSUs"). We account for
share-based compensation in accordance with authoritative guidance provided by the FASB that establishes standards for the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity
instruments for goods or services, focusing primarily on accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. The guidance requires us to
measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based generally on the fair value of the award on the grant date; such cost is then recognized over the
period during which the employee is required to provide service in exchange for the award. No compensation cost is recognized for equity instruments for which employees do not render the requisite
service. The guidance also requires that share-based compensation be computed based on awards that are ultimately expected to vest; as a result, future forfeitures of awards are estimated at the time
of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. We capitalize costs associated with share-based compensation attributable to employees
engaged in construction and development activities.
When
we adopted the authoritative guidance on accounting for share-based compensation, we elected to adopt the alternative transition method for calculating the tax effects of
share-based compensation. The alternative transition method enabled us to use a simplified method to establishing the beginning balance of the additional paid-in capital pool related to
the tax effects of employee share-based compensation, which was available to absorb tax deficiencies recognized subsequent to the adoption of this guidance.
We
compute the fair value of options using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Under that model, the risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in
effect at the time of grant. The expected option life is based on our historical experience of employee exercise behavior. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of our common shares of
beneficial interest ("common
F-15
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
shares").
Expected dividend yield is based on the average historical dividend yield on our common shares over a period of time ending on the grant date of the options.
We
compute the fair value of PSUs using a Monte Carlo model. Under that model, the baseline common share value is based on the market value on the grant date. The risk-free
interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of our common shares.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
We adopted amended guidance issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") effective January 1, 2010 related to the
accounting and disclosure requirements for the consolidation of VIEs. This guidance requires an enterprise to perform a qualitative analysis when determining whether or not it must consolidate a VIE
based primarily on whether the entity (1) has the power to direct matters that most significantly impact the activities of the VIE and (2) has the obligation to absorb losses or the
right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The guidance also requires an enterprise to continuously reassess whether it must consolidate a VIE.
Additionally, the standard requires enhanced disclosures about an enterprise's involvement with VIEs and any significant change in risk exposure due to that involvement, as well as how its involvement
with VIEs impacts the enterprise's financial statements. As discussed further in Note 6, the adoption of this guidance did not affect our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
We
adopted guidance issued by the FASB effective January 1, 2010 that requires new disclosures and clarifications to existing disclosures pertaining to transfers in and out of
Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements, presentation of activity within Level 3 fair value measurements and details of valuation techniques and inputs utilized. Our adoption
of this guidance did not have a material effect on our financial statements or disclosures.
3. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Accounting standards define fair value as the exit price, or the amount that would be received upon sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants as of the measurement date. The standards also establish a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of
unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability developed based on
market data obtained from
sources independent of us. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect our assumptions about the factors market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability developed based upon the best
information available in the circumstances. The hierarchy of these inputs is broken down into three levels: Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets
or liabilities; Level 2 inputs include (1) quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, (2) quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in
markets that are not active and (3) inputs (other than quoted prices) that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly; and Level 3 inputs are unobservable
inputs for the asset or liability. Categorization within the valuation hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is most significant to the fair value measurement.
F-16
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
3. Fair Value of Financial Instruments (Continued)
The
assets held in connection with our non-qualified elective deferred compensation plan (comprised primarily of mutual funds and equity securities) and the corresponding
liability to the participants are measured at fair value on a recurring basis on our consolidated balance sheet using quoted market prices, as are other marketable securities that we hold. The
deferred compensation plan assets and other marketable securities are included in the line entitled restricted cash and marketable securities on our consolidated balance sheets. The offsetting
liability associated with the deferred compensation plan is adjusted to fair value at the end of each accounting period based on the fair value of the plan assets and reported in other liabilities on
our consolidated balance sheets. The assets and corresponding liability of our non-qualified elective deferred compensation plan and other marketable securities that we hold are classified
in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.
The
valuation of our interest rate derivatives is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each
derivative. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate market data and implied
volatilities in such interest rates. While we determined that the majority of the inputs used to value our derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation
adjustments associated with our interest rate derivatives also utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads to evaluate the likelihood of default. However, as of
December 31, 2010, we assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of our derivatives and determined that these adjustments are not
significant. As a result, we determined that our interest rate derivative valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
As
discussed in Note 9, we own warrants to purchase common shares in The KEYW Holding Corporation ("KEYW"), an equity method investee. We acquired these warrants in March 2010 and
began accounting for such warrants as derivatives in November 2010 when KEYW became a publicly-traded company. We compute the fair value of these warrants using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
Under that model, the risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect as of the valuation date. The expected life is based on the period of time until the
expiration of the warrants. Expected volatility is based on an average of the historical volatility of companies in KEYW's industry that we deem to be comparable. Expected dividend yield is based on
the dividend yield on KEYW's common shares as of the date of valuation. The warrants are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
F-17
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
3. Fair Value of Financial Instruments (Continued)
The
tables below sets forth our financial assets and liabilities that are accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and the hierarchy level
of inputs used in measuring their respective fair values under applicable accounting standards (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1) |
|
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2) |
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3) |
|
Total |
|
December 31, 2010: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketable securities in deferred compensation plan(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mutual funds |
|
$ |
6,114 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
6,114 |
|
|
|
Common stocks |
|
|
1,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,132 |
|
|
|
Preferrred stocks |
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
Common stock(1) |
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
Interest rate derivative(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
Warrants to purchase common shares in KEYW(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
$ |
8,551 |
|
$ |
1,110 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
9,661 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liability(3) |
|
$ |
8,188 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
8,188 |
|
|
Interest rate derivatives(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
4,226 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
$ |
8,188 |
|
$ |
4,226 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
12,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketable securities in deferred compensation plan(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mutual funds |
|
$ |
5,092 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
5,092 |
|
|
|
Common stocks |
|
|
620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
620 |
|
|
|
Preferrred stocks |
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
$ |
6,685 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
6,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liability(3) |
|
$ |
6,685 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
6,685 |
|
|
Interest rate derivatives(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
1,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
$ |
6,685 |
|
$ |
1,737 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
8,422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Included
in the line entitled "restricted cash and marketable securities" on our consolidated balance sheet.
- (2)
- Included
in the line entitled "prepaid expenses and other assets" on our consolidated balance sheet.
- (3)
- Included
in the line entitled "other liabilities" on our consolidated balance sheet.
F-18
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
3. Fair Value of Financial Instruments (Continued)
The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivables, other assets (excluding mortgage loans receivable) and accounts payable and accrued expenses are
reasonable estimates of their fair values because of the short maturities of these instruments. We estimated the fair values of our mortgage loans receivable by using discounted cash flow analyses
based on an appropriate market rate for a similar type of instrument. We estimated fair values of our debt based on quoted market prices for publicly-traded debt and on the discounted estimated future
cash payments to be made for other debt; the discount rates used approximate current market rates for loans, or groups of
loans, with similar maturities and credit quality, and the estimated future payments include scheduled principal and interest payments. Fair value estimates are made at a specific point in time, are
subjective in nature and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment. Settlement of such fair value amounts may not be possible and may not be a prudent management decision.
We
owned other warrants to purchase KEYW common shares that we accounted for as derivatives in 2009 until December 2009 when the terms of the warrants were amended; we exercised these
warrants in March 2010. The valuation of these warrants was determined using the Flexible Monte Carlo valuation technique. This technique factors in the price and volatility of the underlying common
stock, the exercise price of the warrant agreements, the risk-free rate of return, the probability of exercise and the effect of sub-optimal exercise behaviors. The various
inputs used in the valuation of the warrants fall within each of the three levels of the fair value hierarchy. After considering the weighted effect of the various inputs on the valuations of the
warrants, we determined that these valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The table below sets forth the changes in the warrants during the portion
of 2009 in which they were accounted for as derivatives and classified as Level 3 financial instruments (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended
December 31,
2009 |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
636 |
|
Net realized gain included in interest and other income |
|
|
587 |
|
Transfers in and out of Level 3 |
|
|
(1,223 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Ending Balance |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
additional fair value information, please refer to Note 9 for mortgage loans receivable, Note 10 for debt and Note 11 for interest rate derivatives.
4. Concentration of Rental Revenue
We derived large concentrations of our revenue from real estate operations from certain tenants during the periods set forth in our consolidated statements of operations. The following
table summarizes the percentage of our rental revenue (which excludes tenant recoveries and other real estate operations revenue) earned from (1) individual tenants that accounted for at least
5% of our
F-19
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
4. Concentration of Rental Revenue (Continued)
rental
revenue from continuing and discontinued operations and (2) the aggregate of the five tenants from which we recognized the most rental revenue in the respective years:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
United States Government |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
15 |
% |
|
15 |
% |
Northrop Grumman Corporation(1) |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
8 |
% |
|
8 |
% |
Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
6 |
% |
|
6 |
% |
Five largest tenants |
|
|
35 |
% |
|
34 |
% |
|
35 |
% |
- (1)
- Includes
affiliated organizations and agencies and predecessor companies.
We
also derived in excess of 90% of our construction contract revenue from the United States Government in each of the years set forth on the consolidated statements of operations.
In
addition, we derived large concentrations of our total revenue from real estate operations (defined as the sum of rental revenue and tenant recoveries and other real estate operations
revenue) from certain geographic regions. These concentrations are set forth in the segment information provided in Note 16. Several of these regions, including the Baltimore/Washington
Corridor, Northern Virginia, Greater Baltimore, Maryland ("Greater Baltimore"), Suburban Maryland, Washington, DC-Capitol Riverfront and St. Mary's & King George Counties, are within
close proximity to each other, and all but two of our regions with real estate operations (Colorado Springs, Colorado ("Colorado Springs") and San Antonio, Texas ("San Antonio")) are located in the
Mid-Atlantic region of the United States.
5. Properties, net
Operating properties, net consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Land |
|
$ |
501,210 |
|
$ |
479,545 |
|
Buildings and improvements |
|
|
2,804,595 |
|
|
2,445,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,305,805 |
|
|
2,925,320 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(503,032 |
) |
|
(415,043 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,802,773 |
|
$ |
2,510,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
of December 31, 2009, 431 and 437 Ridge Road, two office properties in Dayton, New Jersey totaling 201,000 square feet, and a contiguous land parcel that we were under contract
to sell, were classified as held for sale. We completed the sale of the office properties on September 8, 2010 for $20.9 million and recognized a gain of $780,000. We also completed the
sale of the contiguous land
F-20
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
5. Properties, net (Continued)
parcel
on September 8, 2010 for $3.0 million and recognized a gain of $2.5 million. Components associated with these properties as of December 31, 2009 included the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Land, operating properties |
|
$ |
3,498 |
|
Land, development |
|
|
512 |
|
Buildings and improvements |
|
|
21,509 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
583 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,102 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(7,569 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
18,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
Projects
we had under construction or development consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Land |
|
$ |
256,487 |
|
$ |
231,297 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
386,195 |
|
|
269,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
642,682 |
|
$ |
501,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Acquisitions
Our acquisitions in 2010 included:
-
- 1550 Westbranch Drive, a 152,000 square foot office property in McLean, Virginia that was 100% leased, for
$40.0 million on June 28, 2010;
-
- 9651 Hornbaker Road, a 233,000 square foot wholesale data center known as Power Loft @ Innovation in Manassas, Virginia,
for $115.5 million on September 14, 2010. Rents for this property are based on the amount of megawatts of power made available for the exclusive use of tenants in the property; we refer
to this power as critical load. This property, the shell of which was completed in early 2010, was 17% leased on the date of acquisition to two tenants that have a combined initial critical load of
three megawatts and further expansion rights of up to a combined five megawatts. We expect to complete the development of the property to an initial stabilization critical load of 18 megawatts for
additional development costs initially estimated at $166 million. Full critical load of the property is expected to be up to 30 megawatts;
-
- two office properties totaling 362,000 square feet at 1201 M Street SE and 1220 12th Street SE (known
as Maritime Plaza I and II) in Washington, DC that were 100% leased for $122.1 million on September 28, 2010. The buildings are subject to ground leases that expire in 2099 and
2100. In connection with this acquisition, we assumed a $70.1 million mortgage loan having a fair value at assumption of $73.3 million with a stated fixed interest rate of 5.35%
(effective interest rate of 3.95%) that matures in March 2014; and
-
- 3120 Fairview Park Drive, a 183,000 square foot, shell-complete office property in Falls Church, Virginia for
$43.0 million on November 23, 2010.
F-21
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
5. Properties, net (Continued)
The
table below sets forth the allocation of the aggregate acquisition costs of these properties (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Land, operating properties |
|
$ |
13,265 |
|
Land, development |
|
|
5,545 |
|
Building and improvements |
|
|
173,589 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
85,525 |
|
Intangible assets on real estate acquisitions |
|
|
42,896 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
320,820 |
|
Below-market leases |
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total acquisition cost |
|
$ |
320,589 |
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible
assets recorded in connection with the above acquisitions included the following (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in Years) |
|
In-place lease value |
|
$ |
21,616 |
|
|
4 |
|
Tenant relationship value |
|
|
14,450 |
|
|
10 |
|
Above-market cost arrangements |
|
|
6,193 |
|
|
40 |
|
Above-market leases |
|
|
637 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
42,896 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We
expensed $3.4 million in costs in connection with acquisitions in 2010 that are included in business development expenses on our consolidated statements of operations.
2010 Construction, Development and Redevelopment Activities
During 2010, we had six newly constructed office properties totaling 803,000 square feet (two in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor, two
in Colorado Springs and two in San Antonio) become fully operational (94,000 of these square feet were placed into service in 2009) and placed into service 107,000 square feet in three partially
operational office properties.
As
of December 31, 2010, we had construction underway on ten office properties totaling 1.0 million square feet (five in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor, three in Greater
Baltimore, one in San Antonio and one in St. Mary's and King George Counties) (including 107,000 square feet placed into service in three partially operational properties). We also had
development activities underway on nine office properties totaling 1.3 million square feet, including two through a consolidated real estate joint venture (three in the Baltimore/Washington
Corridor, two in San Antonio, two in Huntsville, Alabama, one in Greater Baltimore and one in Northern Virginia). In addition, we had redevelopment underway on four office properties totaling 873,000
square feet (two in Greater Philadelphia, one in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor and one in Northern Virginia).
F-22
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
5. Properties, net (Continued)
2009 Acquisitions
Through a series of transactions in October 2009, we acquired a 474,000 square foot office tower, a parking lot, a utility distribution
center, four waterfront lots and riparian rights, all of which are part of the Canton Crossing planned unit development in Baltimore, Maryland for $123.2 million. These properties are referred
to collectively herein as the "Canton Properties." The office building was 89.6% leased on the date of acquisition.
Other
acquisitions in 2009 included:
-
- 12515 Academy Ridge, a recently constructed 61,000 square foot operating property located in Colorado Springs that we
believe can also support up to 90,000 additional developable square feet for $12.5 million on June 26, 2009; and
-
- 1550 West Nursery Road, a newly constructed 162,000 square foot office property located in Linthicum, Maryland (in the
Baltimore/Washington Corridor), and a 0.9 acre adjacent land parcel that we believe can support a retail or bank pad for $38.0 million on October 28, 2009.
The
table below sets forth the allocation of the acquisition costs of these properties (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Land, operating properties |
|
$ |
50,747 |
|
Land, development |
|
|
17,941 |
|
Building and improvements |
|
|
68,502 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
5,100 |
|
Intangible assets on real estate acquisitions |
|
|
32,883 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
175,173 |
|
Below-market leases |
|
|
(1,462 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total acquisition cost |
|
$ |
173,711 |
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible
assets recorded in connection with the above acquisitions included the following (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in Years) |
|
In-place lease value |
|
$ |
23,172 |
|
|
9 |
|
Tenant relationship value |
|
|
2,141 |
|
|
13 |
|
Above-market leases |
|
|
1,348 |
|
|
8 |
|
Above-market cost arrangements |
|
|
6,222 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
32,883 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We
expensed $2.0 million in costs in connection with the above acquisitions in 2009 that are included in business development expenses on our consolidated statements of
operations.
2009 Construction and Development Activities
During 2009, we had seven newly-constructed buildings totaling 750,000 square feet (three in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor, two in
Colorado Springs and two in Suburban Maryland) become fully
F-23
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
5. Properties, net (Continued)
operational
(85,000 of these square feet were placed into service in 2008) and placed into service 94,000 square feet in three partially operational properties (two in Colorado Springs and one in the
Baltimore/Washington Corridor).
6. Real Estate Joint Ventures
During the periods included herein, we had an investment in one unconsolidated real estate joint venture accounted for using the equity method of accounting. Information pertaining to
this joint venture investment is set forth below (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment Balance at(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2010 |
|
December 31,
2009 |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
Ownership |
|
Nature of Activity |
|
Maximum
Exposure
to Loss(1) |
|
$ |
(5,545 |
) |
$ |
(5,088 |
) |
|
9/29/2005 |
|
|
20 |
% |
Operates 16 buildings |
|
$ |
|
|
- (1)
- Derived
from the sum of our investment balance and maximum additional unilateral capital contributions or loans required from us. Not reported above are
additional amounts that we and our partner are required to fund when needed by this joint venture; these funding requirements are proportional to our respective ownership percentages. Also not
reported above are additional unilateral contributions or loans from us, the amounts of which are uncertain, that we would be required to make if certain contingent events occur (see Note 21).
- (2)
- The
carrying amount of our investment in this joint venture was lower than our share of the equity in the joint venture by $5.2 million at
December 31, 2010 and 2009 due to our deferral of gain on the contribution by us of real estate into the joint venture upon its formation. A difference will continue to exist to the extent the
nature of our continuing involvement in the joint venture remains the same.
Net
cash flows of the joint venture are distributed to the partners in proportion to their respective ownership interests. We recognized fees from the joint venture totaling $119,000 in
2009 and $268,000 in 2008 for property management, construction and leasing services.
The
following table sets forth condensed balance sheets for this unconsolidated real estate joint venture (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Operating properties, net |
|
$ |
61,521 |
|
$ |
62,990 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
4,174 |
|
|
5,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
65,695 |
|
$ |
68,138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
$ |
67,454 |
|
$ |
67,611 |
|
Owners' equity |
|
|
(1,759 |
) |
|
527 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners' equity |
|
$ |
65,695 |
|
$ |
68,138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-24
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
6. Real Estate Joint Ventures (Continued)
The
following table sets forth condensed statements of operations for this unconsolidated real estate joint venture (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
8,405 |
|
$ |
9,031 |
|
$ |
9,593 |
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
(3,600 |
) |
|
(3,438 |
) |
|
(3,371 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(3,937 |
) |
|
(3,981 |
) |
|
(3,992 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization expense |
|
|
(3,154 |
) |
|
(3,198 |
) |
|
(3,242 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(2,286 |
) |
$ |
(1,586 |
) |
$ |
(1,012 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
table below sets forth information pertaining to our investments in consolidated real estate joint ventures at December 31, 2010 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010(1) |
|
|
|
Date
Acquired |
|
Ownership
% at
12/31/2010 |
|
Nature of Activity |
|
Total
Assets |
|
Pledged
Assets |
|
Total
Liabilities |
|
M Square Associates, LLC |
|
|
6/26/2007 |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
Operating two buildings and developing others(2) |
|
$ |
60,028 |
|
$ |
49,295 |
|
$ |
44,784 |
|
Arundel Preserve #5, LLC |
|
|
7/2/2007 |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
Operating one building(3) |
|
|
29,666 |
|
|
29,362 |
|
|
16,810 |
|
LW Redstone Company, LLC |
|
|
3/23/2010 |
|
|
85.0 |
% |
Developing land parcel(4) |
|
|
19,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
129 |
|
COPT-FD Indian Head, LLC |
|
|
10/23/2006 |
|
|
75.0 |
% |
Developing land parcel(5) |
|
|
7,452 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MOR Forbes 2 LLC |
|
|
12/24/2002 |
|
|
50.0 |
% |
Operating one building(6) |
|
|
3,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
120,458 |
|
$ |
78,657 |
|
$ |
61,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Excludes
amounts eliminated in consolidation.
- (2)
- This
joint venture's properties are in College Park, Maryland (in the Suburban Maryland region).
- (3)
- This
joint venture's property is in Hanover, Maryland (in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor).
- (4)
- This
joint venture's property is in Huntsville, Alabama.
- (5)
- This
joint venture's property is in Charles County, Maryland.
- (6)
- This
joint venture's property is in Lanham, Maryland (in the Suburban Maryland region).
We determined that all of our real estate joint ventures were VIEs under applicable accounting standards. As discussed in Note 2, we
adopted amended guidance issued by the FASB effective January 1, 2010 related to the accounting and disclosure requirements for the consolidation of VIEs. Upon adoption of this standard on
January 1, 2010, we re-evaluated our existing:
-
- unconsolidated real estate joint venture and determined that we should continue to account for our investment using the
equity method of accounting primarily because our partner has: (1) the power to direct the matters that most significantly impact the activities of the joint venture, including the management
and operations of the properties and disposal rights with respect to such properties; and (2) the right to receive benefits and absorb losses that could be significant to the VIE through its
proportionately larger investment; and
F-25
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
6. Real Estate Joint Ventures (Continued)
-
- consolidated real estate joint ventures and determined that we should continue to consolidate each of them because we
have: (1) the power to direct the matters that most significantly impact the activities of the joint ventures, including development, leasing and management of the properties constructed by the
VIEs; and (2) both the obligation to fund the activities of the ventures to the extent that third-party financing is not obtained and the right to receive returns on our fundings, which could
be potentially significant to the VIEs.
Therefore,
the adoption of this guidance did not affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In
March 2010, we completed the formation of LW Redstone Company, LLC ("Redstone"), a joint venture created to develop Redstone Gateway, a 468-acre land parcel
adjacent to Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama. The land is owned by the U.S. Government and is under a long term master lease to the joint venture. Through this master lease, the joint venture
will create a
business park that we expect will total approximately 4.6 million square feet of office and retail space when completed, including approximately 4.4 million square feet of Class A
office space. In addition, the business park will include hotel and other amenities.
We
anticipate funding certain infrastructure costs (up to a maximum of $76.0 million) that we expect will be reimbursed by the City of Huntsville; as of December 31, 2010,
we advanced $4.6 million to the City to fund such costs which is included in prepaid expenses and other assets on our consolidated balance sheet. We also expect to fund additional development
and construction costs through equity contributions to the extent that third party financing is not obtained. Our partner is not required to make any future contributions to the joint venture. Net
cash flow distributions to the partners of Redstone vary depending on the source of the funds distributed and the nature of the capital fundings outstanding at the time of distribution. In the case of
all distribution sources, we are first entitled to repayment of operating deficits funded by us and preferred returns on such fundings. We are also generally entitled to repayment of infrastructure
and vertical construction costs funded by us and preferred returns on such fundings before our partner is entitled to receive repayment of its equity contribution of $9.0 million. In addition,
we will be entitled to 85% of distributable cash in excess of preferred returns.
We
determined that Redstone is a VIE under applicable accounting standards and that we should consolidate it because: (1) we control the activities that are most significant to
the VIE (we hold two of three positions on the joint venture's management committee, and we are responsible for the development, construction, leasing and management of the office properties to be
constructed by the VIE); and (2) we have both the obligation to provide significant funding for the project, as noted above, and the right to receive returns on our funding.
With
regard to our other consolidated joint ventures:
-
- For M Square Associates, LLC, we had a 45% ownership interest at December 31, 2009, and in July 2010, we
acquired an additional 5% ownership interest in this entity. Net cash flows of this entity will be distributed to the partners as follows: (1) member loans and accrued interest; (2) our
preferred return and capital contributions used to fund infrastructure costs; (3) the partners' preferred returns and capital contributions used to fund all other costs, including the base land
value credit, in proportion to the accrued returns and capital accounts; and (4) residual amounts distributed 50% to each member.
F-26
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
6. Real Estate Joint Ventures (Continued)
-
- For Arundel Preserve #5, LLC, net cash flows will be distributed to the partners as follows: (1) member
loans and accrued interest; (2) preferred returns in proportion to the partners' respective capital accounts; (3) repayment of any building operating reserves funded by us; and
(4) residual cash flows in proportion to the partners' respective ownership interests.
-
- For COPT-FD Indian Head, LLC, net cash flows will be distributed to the partners in proportion to their
respective ownership interests.
-
- For MOR Forbes 2 LLC, net cash flows will be distributed to the partners in proportion to their respective
ownership interests.
-
- At December 31, 2009, we had a 92.5% ownership interest in COPT Opportunity Invest I, LLC, an entity that is
redeveloping a property in Hanover, Maryland; in February 2010, we acquired the remaining 7.5% ownership interest in this entity.
Our
commitments and contingencies pertaining to our real estate joint ventures are disclosed in Note 21.
7. Intangible Assets on Real Estate Acquisitions
Intangible assets on real estate acquisitions consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Gross Carrying
Amount |
|
Accumulated
Amortization |
|
Net Carrying
Amount |
|
Gross Carrying
Amount |
|
Accumulated
Amortization |
|
Net Carrying
Amount |
|
In-place lease value |
|
$ |
162,708 |
|
$ |
92,380 |
|
$ |
70,328 |
|
$ |
141,408 |
|
$ |
70,659 |
|
$ |
70,749 |
|
Tenant relationship value |
|
|
50,320 |
|
|
21,603 |
|
|
28,717 |
|
|
35,909 |
|
|
16,322 |
|
|
19,587 |
|
Above-market cost arrangements |
|
|
12,415 |
|
|
1,387 |
|
|
11,028 |
|
|
6,222 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,222 |
|
Above-market leases |
|
|
10,802 |
|
|
8,193 |
|
|
2,609 |
|
|
10,165 |
|
|
7,138 |
|
|
3,027 |
|
Market concentration premium |
|
|
1,333 |
|
|
280 |
|
|
1,053 |
|
|
1,333 |
|
|
247 |
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
237,578 |
|
$ |
123,843 |
|
$ |
113,735 |
|
$ |
195,037 |
|
$ |
94,366 |
|
$ |
100,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of the intangible asset categories set forth above totaled $28.3 million in 2010, $24.1 million in 2009 and $24.0 million in
2008. The approximate weighted average amortization periods of the categories set forth above follow: in-place lease value: seven years; tenant relationship value: eight years;
above-market cost arrangements: 25 years; above-market leases: five years; and market concentration premium: 32 years. The approximate weighted average amortization period for all of the
categories combined is nine years. Estimated amortization expense associated with the intangible asset categories set forth above for the next five years is: $24.3 million for 2011;
$18.0 million for 2012; $13.5 million for 2013; $11.3 million for 2014 and $9.9 million for 2015.
F-27
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
8. Deferred Leasing and Financing Costs
Deferred leasing and financing costs, net consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Deferred leasing costs |
|
$ |
88,265 |
|
$ |
79,370 |
|
Deferred financing costs |
|
|
31,784 |
|
|
23,255 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120,049 |
|
|
102,625 |
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(59,400 |
) |
|
(51,055 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred leasing and financing costs, net |
|
$ |
60,649 |
|
$ |
51,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets
Prepaid expenses and other assets consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Investment in KEYW |
|
$ |
22,779 |
|
$ |
9,461 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
|
19,995 |
|
|
19,769 |
|
Mortgage and other investing receivables |
|
|
18,870 |
|
|
12,773 |
|
Furniture, fixtures and equipment, net |
|
|
11,504 |
|
|
12,633 |
|
Construction contract costs incurred in excess of billings |
|
|
9,372 |
|
|
19,556 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
11,376 |
|
|
9,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
$ |
93,896 |
|
$ |
83,806 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in KEYW
Our investment in KEYW reflected above consists of common stock and warrants to purchase additional shares of common stock of KEYW, an
entity supporting the intelligence community's operations and transformation to Cyber Age mission by providing engineering services and integrated platforms that support the intelligence process. At
December 31, 2010, we owned 3.1 million shares, or approximately 12%, of KEYW's common stock, and our Chief Executive Officer served on its Board of Directors. In October 2010, KEYW
completed an initial public offering of its common stock. We use the equity method of accounting for our investment in the common stock. Since the results of operations and financial condition of KEYW
are not consistently available to us when we issue our financial statements, our equity in KEYW's income or loss is recognized on a one-quarter lag basis. The carrying value of our equity
method investment in these common shares was $22.3 million at December 31, 2010 and $9.5 million at December 31, 2009. In connection with this investment, we recognized
equity in income (loss) on our consolidated statements of operations as follows: income of $1.8 million in 2010; loss of $623,000 in 2009; and income of $55,000 in 2008. In addition, under the
equity method of accounting, additional issuances of equity by KEYW to parties other than us are accounted for as if we sold a proportionate share of our investment and, accordingly, result in our
recognition of gain or loss; in connection with issuances of equity by KEYW, including their initial public offering in November 2010, we recognized gains of $6.4 million in 2010 and $442,000
in 2009 that are included in interest and other income on our consolidated statements of operations.
F-28
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
9. Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets (Continued)
We
acquired warrants to purchase 50,000 additional shares of KEYW common stock at an exercise price of $9.25 per share in March 2010 for $210,000 and began accounting for such warrants
as derivatives in November 2010 when KEYW became a publicly-traded company. As a result, we report these warrants at fair value, which, as discussed in Note 3, we estimate using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The estimated fair value of these warrants was $466,000, or $9.32 per warrant, at December 31, 2010. We recognized an increase in the warrants' fair value of
$256,000 in interest and other income on our consolidated statements of operations for 2010.
We
owned other warrants to purchase KEYW common shares that we accounted for as derivatives in 2009 until December 2009 when the terms of the warrants were amended; we exercised these
warrants in March 2010. As discussed in Note 3, the valuation of these warrants was determined using the Flexible Monte Carlo valuation technique. During the period of time in 2009 in which we
accounted for these warrants as derivatives, we recognized increases in the warrants' fair value of $587,000 as interest and other income on our consolidated statements of operations.
We
recognized revenue from a lease with KEYW in one of our properties of $668,000 in 2010 and $315,000 in 2009.
Mortgage and Other Investing Receivables
Mortgage and other investing receivables consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Mortgage loans receivable |
|
$ |
14,227 |
|
$ |
12,773 |
|
Note receivable from City of Huntsville |
|
|
4,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
18,870 |
|
$ |
12,773 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our
mortgage loans receivable reflected above consist of two loans secured by properties in the Baltimore/Washington Corridor. Our note receivable from the City of Huntsville was to fund
infrastructure costs in connection with our Redstone joint venture (see Note 6). We do not have an allowance for credit losses in connection with theses receivables at December 31, 2010.
The fair value of our mortgage and other investing receivables totaled $18.8 million at December 31, 2010 and $15.1 million at December 31, 2009.
Operating Notes Receivable
At December 31, 2010, we had receivables due from tenants with terms exceeding one year totaling $655,000, of which we had
allowances for estimated losses of $531,000.
F-29
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
10. Debt
Our debt consisted of the following (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying Value at
December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduled
Maturity
Dates at
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
Maximum
Availability at
December 31, 2010 |
|
Stated Interest Rates
at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Mortgage and Other Secured Loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate mortgage loans(1) |
|
|
N/A |
|
$ |
1,173,358 |
|
$ |
1,166,443 |
|
|
5.20% - 7.87%(2 |
) |
|
2011 - 2034(3) |
|
Revolving Construction Facility |
|
$ |
225,000 |
|
|
142,339 |
|
|
76,333 |
|
|
LIBOR + 1.60% to 2.00%(4 |
) |
|
May 2, 2011(5) |
|
Variable rate secured loans |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
310,555 |
|
|
271,146 |
|
|
LIBOR + 2.25% to 3.00%(6 |
) |
|
2012-2014(7) |
|
Other construction loan facility |
|
|
23,400 |
|
|
16,753 |
|
|
16,753 |
|
|
LIBOR + 2.75%(8 |
) |
|
2011(7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage and other secured loans |
|
|
|
|
|
1,643,005 |
|
|
1,530,675 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revolving Credit Facility |
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
295,000 |
|
|
365,000 |
|
|
LIBOR + 0.75% to 1.25%(9 |
) |
|
September 30, 2011(7) |
Unsecured notes payable(9) |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
1,947 |
|
|
2,019 |
|
|
0%(10 |
) |
|
2026 |
Exchangeable Senior Notes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
223,846 |
|
|
|
|
|
4.25% |
|
|
April 2030(11) |
|
3.5% Exchangeable Senior Notes |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
159,883 |
|
|
156,147 |
|
|
3.50% |
|
|
September 2026(11) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt |
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,323,681 |
|
$ |
2,053,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Several
of the fixed rate mortgages carry interest rates that were above or below market rates upon assumption and therefore were recorded at their fair
value based on applicable effective interest rates. The carrying values of these loans reflect net unamortized premiums totaling $3.2 million at December 31, 2010 and $371,000 at
December 31, 2009.
- (2)
- The
weighted average interest rate on these loans was 6.0% at December 31, 2010.
- (3)
- A
loan with a balance of $4.6 million at December 31, 2010 that matures in 2034 may be repaid in March 2014, subject to certain conditions.
- (4)
- The
weighted average interest rate on this loan was 1.86% at December 31, 2010.
- (5)
- In
January 2011, the maturity date of this loan was extended to 2012.
- (6)
- Certain
of the loans in this category at December 31, 2010 were subject to floor interest rates ranging from 4.25% to 5.50%.
- (7)
- Includes
amounts that may be extended for a one-year period at our option, subject to certain conditions.
- (8)
- The
interest rate on this loan was 3.0% at December 31, 2010.
- (9)
- The
weighted average interest rate on the Revolving Credit Facility was 1.11% at December 31, 2010.
- (10)
- These
notes carry interest rates that were below market rates upon assumption and therefore were recorded at their fair value based on applicable effective
interest rates. The carrying value of these notes reflects unamortized discount totaling $1.1 million at December 31, 2010 and $1.2 million at December 31, 2009.
- (11)
- Refer
to paragraph below that discusses the issuance of these notes, for descriptions of provisions for early redemption and repurchase of these notes.
Our Revolving Credit Facility is with a group of lenders for which KeyBanc Capital Markets and Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC act as
co-lead arrangers, KeyBank National Association as
F-30
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
10. Debt (Continued)
administrative
agent and Wachovia Bank, National Association as syndication agent. The lenders' aggregate commitment under the facility is $800.0 million, including a $200.0 million
increase that took effect in 2010, which includes a $50.0 million letter of credit subfacility and a $50.0 million swingline facility (same-day draw requests). Amounts
available under the facility are computed based on 65% of our unencumbered asset value, as defined in the agreement. The facility matures on September 30, 2011, and may be extended by one year
at our option, provided that there is no default under the facility and we pay an extension fee equal to 0.125% of the total availability of the facility. As of December 31, 2010, the maximum
amount of borrowing capacity under this facility totaled $800.0 million of which $503.1 million was available.
We
have a construction loan agreement with a group of lenders for which KeyBanc Capital Markets, Inc. act as arranger, KeyBank National Association as administrative agent, Bank
of America, N.A. as syndication agent and Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company as documentation agent; this loan is referred to in the table above as the "Revolving Construction Facility." The
construction loan agreement provides for an aggregate commitment by the lenders of $225.0 million, with a right for us to further increase the lenders' aggregate commitment during the term to a
maximum of $325.0 million, subject to certain conditions. Ownership interests in the properties for which construction costs are being financed through loans under the agreement are pledged as
collateral. Borrowings are generally available for properties included in this construction loan agreement based on 85% of the total budgeted costs of construction of the applicable improvements for
such properties as set forth in the properties' construction budgets, subject to certain other loan-to-value and debt coverage requirements. As loans for properties under the
construction loan agreement are repaid in full and the ownership interests in such properties are no longer pledged as collateral, capacity under the construction loan agreement's aggregate commitment
will be restored, giving us the ability to obtain new loans for other construction properties in which we pledge the ownership interests as collateral. The construction loan agreement was scheduled to
mature on May 2, 2011 but was extended by one year in January 2011. The construction loan agreement also carries a quarterly fee that is based on the unused amount of the commitment multiplied
by a per annum rate of 0.125% to 0.20%.
In
2006, our Operating Partnership issued a $200.0 million aggregate principal amount of 3.50% Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2026. The notes have an exchange settlement feature
that provides that the notes may, under certain circumstances, be exchangeable for cash (up to the principal amount of the notes) and, with respect to any excess exchange value, may be exchangeable
into (at our option) cash, our common shares or a combination of cash and our common shares at an exchange rate (subject to adjustment) of 19.1911 shares per one thousand dollar principal amount of
the notes (exchange rate is as of December 31, 2010 and is equivalent to an exchange price of $52.11 per common share). On or after September 20, 2011, the Operating Partnership may
redeem the notes in cash in whole or in part. The holders of the notes have the right to require us to repurchase the notes in cash in whole or in part on each of September 15, 2011,
September 15, 2016 and September 15, 2021, or in the event of a "fundamental change," as defined under the terms of the notes, for a repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal
amount of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest. Prior to September 11, 2011, subject to certain exceptions, if (1) a "fundamental change" occurs as a result of certain forms of
transactions or series of transactions and (2) a holder elects to exchange its notes in connection with such a "fundamental change," we will increase the applicable exchange rate for the notes
surrendered for exchange by a number of additional shares of our common shares as a "make whole premium." The notes are general unsecured senior obligations of the Operating
F-31
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
10. Debt (Continued)
Partnership
and rank equally in right of payment with all other senior unsecured indebtedness of the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership's obligations under the notes are fully and
unconditionally guaranteed by us. In November 2008, we repurchased a $37.5 million aggregate principal amount of our 3.5% Exchangeable Senior Notes for $26.7 million from which we
recognized a gain of $8.1 million, net of unamortized loan issuance costs. The carrying value of these notes included an unamortized discount totaling $2.6 million at December 31,
2010 and $6.4 million at December 31, 2009. The effective interest rate under the notes, including amortization of the discount, was 5.97%. Because the closing price of our common shares
at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was less than the exchange price per common share applicable to these notes, the if-converted value of the notes did not exceed the principal
amount. The table below sets forth interest expense recognized on these notes before deductions for amounts capitalized (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Interest expense at stated interest rate |
|
$ |
5,687 |
|
$ |
5,687 |
|
$ |
6,850 |
|
Interest expense associated with amortization of discount |
|
|
3,736 |
|
|
3,520 |
|
|
4,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
9,423 |
|
$ |
9,207 |
|
$ |
10,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
April 7, 2010, the Operating Partnership issued a $240.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Exchangeable Senior Notes due 2030. Interest on the notes is payable
on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The notes have an exchange settlement feature that provides that the notes may, under certain circumstances, be exchangeable for cash and, at the
Operating Partnership's discretion, our common shares at an exchange rate (subject to adjustment) of 20.7891 shares per one thousand dollar principal amount of the notes (exchange rate is as of
December 31, 2010 and is equivalent to an exchange price of $48.10 per common share) (the initial exchange rate of the notes was based on a 20% premium over the closing price on the NYSE on the
transaction pricing date). On or after April 20, 2015, the Operating Partnership may redeem the notes in cash in whole or in part. The holders of the notes have the right to require us to
repurchase the notes in cash in whole or in part on each of April 15, 2015, April 15, 2020 and April 15, 2025, or in the event of a "fundamental change," as defined under the
terms of the notes, for a repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes plus accrued and unpaid interest. Prior to April 20, 2015, subject to certain exceptions, if
(1) a "fundamental change" occurs as a result of certain forms of transactions or series of transactions and (2) a holder elects to exchange its notes in connection with such
"fundamental change," we will increase the applicable exchange rate for the notes surrendered for exchange by a number of additional shares of our common shares as a "make whole premium." The notes
are general unsecured senior obligations of the Operating Partnership and rank equally in right of payment with all other senior unsecured indebtedness of the Operating Partnership. The Operating
Partnership's obligations under the notes are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by us. The initial liability component of this debt issuance was $221.4 million and the equity component was
$18.6 million. In addition, we recognized $450,000 of the financing fees incurred in relation to these notes in equity. The carrying value of these notes included an unamortized discount
totaling $16.2 million at December 31, 2010. The effective interest rate on the liability component, including amortization of the issuance costs, is 6.05%. Because the closing price of
our common shares at December 31, 2010 was less than the exchange price per common share applicable to these notes, the if-converted value of the notes did
F-32
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
10. Debt (Continued)
not
exceed the principal amount. The table below sets forth interest expense recognized on these notes before deductions for amounts capitalized in 2010 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense at stated interest rate |
|
$ |
7,480 |
|
Interest expense associated with amortization of discount |
|
|
2,445 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
9,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
In
the case of each of our mortgage loans, we have pledged certain of our real estate assets as collateral. Many of our real estate properties were pledged on loan obligations as of
December 31, 2010. Certain of our debt instruments require that we comply with a number of restrictive financial covenants, including maximum leverage ratio, unencumbered leverage ratio,
minimum net worth, minimum fixed charge coverage, minimum unencumbered interest coverage ratio, minimum debt service and maximum secured indebtedness ratio. As of December 31, 2010, we were in
compliance with these financial covenants.
Our
debt matures on the following schedule (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
$ |
733,739 |
(1) |
2012 |
|
|
271,390 |
|
2013 |
|
|
146,049 |
|
2014 |
|
|
210,225 |
|
2015 |
|
|
396,473 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
582,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,340,396 |
(2) |
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- Includes
$142.3 million in maturities that were extended to 2012 in January 2011 and an additional $311.8 million that may also be extended
for one year, subject to certain conditions.
- (2)
- Represents
scheduled principal amortization and maturities only and therefore excludes net discounts of $16.7 million.
Weighted
average borrowings under our Revolving Credit Facility totaled $337.2 million in 2010 and $384.7 million in 2009. The weighted average interest rate on this credit
facility was 2.14% in 2010 and 2.75% in 2009.
We
capitalized interest costs of $16.5 million in 2010, $15.5 million in 2009 and $18.3 million in 2008.
F-33
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
10. Debt (Continued)
The following table sets forth information pertaining to the fair value of our debt (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Carrying
Amount |
|
Estimated
Fair Value |
|
Carrying
Amount |
|
Estimated
Fair Value |
|
Fixed-rate debt |
|
$ |
1,559,034 |
|
$ |
1,579,022 |
|
$ |
1,324,609 |
|
$ |
1,252,126 |
|
Variable-rate debt |
|
|
764,647 |
|
|
769,247 |
|
|
729,232 |
|
|
704,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,323,681 |
|
$ |
2,348,269 |
|
$ |
2,053,841 |
|
$ |
1,956,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11. Interest Rate Derivatives
The following table sets forth the key terms and fair values of our interest rate swap derivatives at December 31, 2010 and 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at
December 31, |
|
Notional
Amount |
|
One-Month
LIBOR Base |
|
Effective
Date |
|
Expiration
Date |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
$ |
120,000 |
|
|
1.7600 |
% |
|
1/2/2009 |
|
|
5/1/2012 |
|
$ |
(2,062 |
) |
$ |
(669 |
) |
|
100,000 |
|
|
1.9750 |
% |
|
1/1/2010 |
|
|
5/1/2012 |
|
|
(2,002 |
) |
|
(1,068 |
) |
|
50,000 |
|
|
0.5025 |
% |
|
1/3/2011 |
|
|
1/3/2012 |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
0.5025 |
% |
|
1/3/2011 |
|
|
1/3/2012 |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
0.4400 |
% |
|
1/4/2011 |
|
|
1/3/2012 |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
40,000 |
(1) |
|
3.8300 |
% |
|
11/2/2010 |
|
|
11/2/2015 |
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3,582 |
) |
$ |
(1,737 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- The
notional amount of this instrument is scheduled to amortize to $36.2 million.
Each
of these interest rate swaps were designated as cash flow hedges of interest rate risk. The table below sets forth the fair value of our interest rate derivatives as well as their
classification on our consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
Fair Value |
|
Balance Sheet Location |
|
Fair Value |
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
$ |
644 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
$ |
|
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
(4,226 |
) |
Other liabilities |
|
|
(1,737 |
) |
F-34
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
11. Interest Rate Derivatives (Continued)
The
table below presents the effect of our interest rate derivatives on our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income for 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years
Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Amount of loss recognized in AOCL (effective portion) |
|
$ |
(5,473 |
) |
$ |
(3,253 |
) |
Amount of loss reclassified from AOCL into interest expense (effective portion) |
|
|
(3,689 |
) |
|
(6,680 |
) |
Amount of loss recognized in interest expense (ineffective portion and amount excluded from effectiveness testing) |
|
|
|
|
|
(261 |
) |
Over
the next 12 months, we estimate that approximately $4.0 million will be reclassified from AOCL as an increase to interest expense.
We
have agreements with each of our interest rate derivative counterparties that contain provisions under which if we default or are capable of being declared in default on any of our
indebtedness, we could also be declared in default on our derivative obligations. These agreements also incorporate the loan covenant provisions of our indebtedness with a lender affiliate of the
derivative counterparties. Failure to comply with the loan covenant provisions could result in our being declared in default on any derivative instrument obligations covered by the agreements. As of
December 31, 2010, the fair value of interest rate derivatives in a liability position related to these agreements was $4.2 million, excluding the effects of accrued interest. As of
December 31, 2010, we had not posted any collateral related to these agreements. We are not in default with any of these provisions. If we breached any of these provisions, we could be required
to settle our obligations under the agreements at their termination value of $4.6 million.
12. Shareholders' Equity
Preferred Shares
At December 31, 2010, we had 15.0 million preferred shares of beneficial interest ("preferred shares") authorized at
$0.01 par value. The table below sets forth additional information pertaining to our preferred shares (dollars in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series
|
|
# of Shares
Issued |
|
Aggregate
Liquidation
Preference |
|
Month of
Issuance |
|
Annual
Dividend
Yield |
|
Annual
Dividend
Per Share |
|
Earliest
Redemption
Date |
Series G |
|
|
2,200,000 |
|
$ |
55,000 |
|
August 2003 |
|
|
8.000 |
% |
$ |
2.00000 |
|
8/11/2008 |
Series H |
|
|
2,000,000 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
December 2003 |
|
|
7.500 |
% |
$ |
1.87500 |
|
12/18/2008 |
Series J |
|
|
3,390,000 |
|
|
84,750 |
|
July 2006 |
|
|
7.625 |
% |
$ |
1.90625 |
|
7/20/2011 |
Series K |
|
|
531,667 |
|
|
26,583 |
|
January 2007 |
|
|
5.600 |
% |
$ |
2.80000 |
|
1/9/2017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,121,667 |
|
$ |
216,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each
series of preferred shares is nonvoting and redeemable for cash in the amount of its liquidation preference at our option on or after the earliest redemption date. The
Series K Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares are also convertible, subject to certain conditions, into common shares
F-35
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
12. Shareholders' Equity (Continued)
on
the basis of 0.8163 common shares for each preferred share, in accordance with the terms of the Articles Supplementary describing the Series K Preferred Shares. Holders of all preferred
shares are entitled to cumulative dividends, payable quarterly (as and if declared by our Board of Trustees). In the case of each series of preferred shares, there is a series of preferred units in
the Operating Partnership owned by us that carries substantially the same terms.
Common Shares
During 2009 and 2010, we completed the following public offerings of common shares:
-
- 2,990,000 common shares in April 2009 that was made in conjunction with our inclusion in the S&P MidCap 400 Index
effective April 1, 2009. The shares were issued at a public offering price of $24.35 per share for net proceeds of $72.1 million after underwriting discounts but before offering
expenses; and
-
- 7,475,000 common shares in November 2010 at a public offering price of $34.25 per share for net proceeds of
$245.8 million after underwriting discounts but before offering expenses.
Holders
of common units in our Operating Partnership converted their units into common shares on the basis of one common share for each common unit in the amount of 663,498 in 2010,
2,841,394 in 2009 and 258,917 in 2008.
We
declared dividends per common share of $1.61 in 2010, $1.53 in 2009 and $1.425 in 2008.
See
Note 14 for disclosure of common share activity pertaining to our share-based compensation plans.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
The table below sets forth activity in the accumulated other comprehensive loss component of shareholders' equity (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
(1,907 |
) |
$ |
(4,749 |
) |
$ |
(2,372 |
) |
Amount of loss recognized in AOCL (effective portion) |
|
|
(5,473 |
) |
|
(3,253 |
) |
|
(2,769 |
) |
Amount of loss reclassified from AOCL to income (effective portion) |
|
|
3,689 |
|
|
6,680 |
|
|
62 |
|
Adjustment to AOCL attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(472 |
) |
|
(585 |
) |
|
330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
(4,163 |
) |
$ |
(1,907 |
) |
$ |
(4,749 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-36
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
12. Shareholders' Equity (Continued)
The table below sets forth total comprehensive income and total comprehensive income attributable to COPT (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
45,504 |
|
$ |
61,299 |
|
$ |
61,316 |
|
Amount of loss recognized in AOCL |
|
|
(5,473 |
) |
|
(3,253 |
) |
|
(2,769 |
) |
Amount of loss reclassified from AOCL to income |
|
|
3,689 |
|
|
6,680 |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
|
43,720 |
|
|
64,726 |
|
|
58,609 |
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(2,744 |
) |
|
(4,970 |
) |
|
(7,351 |
) |
Other comprehensive loss (income) attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
153 |
|
|
(349 |
) |
|
403 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income attributable to COPT |
|
$ |
41,129 |
|
$ |
59,407 |
|
$ |
51,661 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13. Noncontrolling Interests
As discussed previously, we consolidate the accounts of our Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries into our financial statements. However, we do not own 100% of the Operating
Partnership. We also do not own 100% of certain consolidated real estate joint ventures. The amounts reported for noncontrolling interests on our consolidated balance sheets represent the portion of
these consolidated entities' equity that we do not own. The amounts reported for noncontrolling interests on our consolidated statements of operations represent the portion of these entities' net
income not allocated to us.
Common
units of the Operating Partnership are substantially similar economically to our common shares. Common units not owned by us are also exchangeable into our common shares, subject
to certain conditions.
The
Operating Partnership has 352,000 Series I Preferred Units issued to an unrelated party that have an aggregate liquidation preference of $8.8 million ($25.00 per unit),
plus any accrued and unpaid distributions of return thereon (as described below), and may be redeemed for cash by the Operating Partnership at our option any time after September 22, 2019. The
owner of these units is entitled to a priority annual cumulative return equal to 7.5% of their liquidation preference through September 22, 2019; the annual cumulative preferred return
increases for each subsequent five-year period, subject to certain maximum limits. These units are convertible into common units on the basis of 0.5 common units for each Series I
Preferred Unit; the resulting common units would then be exchangeable for common shares in accordance with the terms of the Operating Partnership's agreement of limited partnership.
14. Share-Based Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans
Share-Based Compensation Plans
On May 13, 2010, we adopted the Amended and Restated 2008 Omnibus Equity and Incentive Plan, which replaced the 2008 Omnibus
Equity and Incentive Plan adopted in May 2008. We may issue equity-based awards under this plan to officers, employees, non-employee trustees and any other key
F-37
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
14. Share-Based Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans (Continued)
persons
of us and our subsidiaries, as defined in the plan. The plan provides for a maximum of 5,900,000 common shares of beneficial interest, of which 3,000,000 were added pursuant to the amendment
and restatement, to be issued in the form of options, share appreciation rights, deferred share awards, restricted share awards, unrestricted share awards, performance shares, dividend equivalent
rights and other equity-based awards and for the granting of cash-based awards. The plan expires on May 13, 2020.
In
March 1998, we adopted a long-term incentive plan for our Trustees and employees. This plan, which expired in March 2008, provided for the award of options, restricted
shares and dividend equivalents.
Grants
of restricted shares and options under these plans to nonemployee Trustees generally vest on the first anniversary of the grant date provided that the Trustee remains in his
position. Restricted shares and options granted to employees vest based on increments and over periods of time set forth under the terms of the respective awards provided that the employees remain
employed by us. Options
expire ten years after the date of grant. Shares for each of our share-based compensation plans are issued under registration statements on Form S-8 that became effective upon
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The
following table summarizes restricted share transactions under our share-based compensation plans for 2008, 2009 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value |
|
Unvested at December 31, 2007 |
|
|
415,905 |
|
$ |
38.50 |
|
Granted |
|
|
308,569 |
|
|
31.76 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(19,851 |
) |
|
36.07 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(142,195 |
) |
|
35.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2008 |
|
|
562,428 |
|
|
35.69 |
|
Granted |
|
|
340,660 |
|
|
25.30 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(5,081 |
) |
|
29.83 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(229,017 |
) |
|
35.74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
668,990 |
|
|
30.43 |
|
Granted |
|
|
290,956 |
|
|
37.74 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(13,986 |
) |
|
34.38 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(276,102 |
) |
$ |
32.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
669,858 |
|
$ |
32.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted shares expected to vest |
|
|
648,063 |
|
$ |
32.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
aggregate intrinsic value of restricted shares that vested was $10.3 million in 2010, $5.9 million in 2009 and $4.4 million in 2008.
On
March 4, 2010, our Board of Trustees granted 100,645 PSUs to executives all of which were outstanding at December 31, 2010. The PSUs have a performance period beginning
on the grant date and concluding the earlier of three years from the grant date or the date of: (1) termination by the
F-38
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
14. Share-Based Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans (Continued)
Company
without cause, death or disability of the executive or constructive discharge of the executive (collectively, "qualified termination"); or (2) a sale event. The number of PSUs earned
("earned PSUs") at the end of the performance period will be determined based on the percentile rank of the Company's total shareholder return relative to a peer group of companies, as set forth in
the following schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
Percentile Rank
|
|
Earned PSUs Payout % |
|
75th or greater |
|
|
200% of PSUs granted |
|
50th or greater |
|
|
100% of PSUs granted |
|
25th |
|
|
50% of PSUs granted |
|
Below 25th |
|
|
0% of PSUs granted |
|
If
the percentile rank exceeds the 25th percentile and is between two of the percentile ranks set forth in the table above, then the percentage of the earned PSUs will be
interpolated between the ranges set forth in the table above to reflect any performance between the listed percentiles. At the end of the performance period, we, in settlement of the award, will issue
a number of fully-vested common shares equal to the sum of:
-
- the number of earned PSUs in settlement of the award plan; plus
-
- the aggregate dividends that would have been paid with respect to the common shares issued in settlement of the earned
PSUs through the date of settlement had such shares been issued on the grant date, divided by the share price on such settlement date, as defined under the terms of the agreement.
If
a performance period ends due to a sale event or qualified termination, the number of earned PSUs is prorated based on the portion of the three-year performance period
that has elapsed. If employment is terminated by the employee or by the Company for cause, all PSUs are forfeited. PSUs do not carry voting rights.
We
computed a grant date fair value of $53.31 per PSU using a Monte Carlo model, which included assumptions of, among other things, the following: baseline common share value of $37.84;
expected
volatility for our common shares of 62.2%; and risk-free interest rate of 1.38%. We are recognizing the grant date fair value in connection with these PSU awards over a
three-year period that commenced on March 4, 2010.
F-39
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
14. Share-Based Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans (Continued)
The
following table summarizes option transactions under our share-based compensation plans for 2008, 2009 and 2010 (dollars in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Range of
Exercise Price
per Share |
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price per
Share |
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(in Years) |
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 |
|
|
2,141,344 |
|
$7.38 - $57.00 |
|
$ |
25.29 |
|
|
6 |
|
$ |
22,639 |
|
Granted2008 |
|
|
40,000 |
|
$37.81 |
|
|
37.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited/Expired2008 |
|
|
(51,786 |
) |
$8.00 - $53.16 |
|
|
43.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised2008 |
|
|
(180,239 |
) |
$7.63 - $34.76 |
|
|
15.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 |
|
|
1,949,319 |
|
$7.38 - $57.00 |
|
|
25.96 |
|
|
5 |
|
$ |
18,744 |
|
Granted2009 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
$29.98 - $37.61 |
|
|
31.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited/Expired2009 |
|
|
(32,812 |
) |
$25.52 - $53.16 |
|
|
44.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised2009 |
|
|
(464,601 |
) |
$7.38 - $35.87 |
|
|
11.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
1,501,906 |
|
$8.63 - $57.00 |
|
|
30.29 |
|
|
5 |
|
$ |
14,579 |
|
Forfeited/Expired2010 |
|
|
(34,966 |
) |
$41.33 - $49.60 |
|
|
46.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised2010 |
|
|
(278,656 |
) |
$8.63 - $42.07 |
|
|
16.42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
1,188,284 |
|
$9.54 - $57.00 |
|
$ |
33.07 |
|
|
5 |
|
$ |
7,987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2008 |
|
|
1,657,956 |
|
|
(1) |
$ |
22.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
1,389,141 |
|
|
(2) |
$ |
29.42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
1,188,284 |
|
|
(3) |
$ |
33.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- 228,732
of these options had an exercise price ranging from $7.38 to $7.99; 195,950 had an exercise price ranging from $8.00 to $10.99; 395,217 had an
exercise price ranging from $11.00 to $16.99; 226,805 had an exercise price ranging from $17.00 to $25.99; 210,373 had an exercise price ranging from $26.00 to $34.99; 242,082 had an exercise price
ranging from $35.00 to $43.99; and 158,797 had an exercise price ranging from $44.00 to $57.00.
- (2)
- 83,441
of these options had an exercise price ranging from $8.63 to $10.99; 345,792 had an exercise price ranging from $11.00 to $16.99; 172,914 had an
exercise price ranging from $17.00 to $25.99; 190,287 had an exercise price ranging from $26.00 to $34.99; 343,040 had an exercise price ranging from $35.00 to $43.99; and 253,667 had an exercise
price ranging from $44.00 to $57.00.
- (3)
- 231,946
of these options had an exercise price ranging from $9.54 to $16.73; 246,103 had an exercise price ranging from $16.74 to $30.04; 205,012 had an
exercise price ranging from $30.05 to $41.28; 253,607 had an exercise price ranging from $41.29 to $45.24; 251,616 had an exercise price ranging from $45.25 to $57.
The
aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised was $5.9 million in 2010, $10.4 million in 2009 and $3.7 million in 2008.
F-40
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
14. Share-Based Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans (Continued)
We
computed share-based compensation expense for options under the fair value method using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model; the weight average assumptions we used in that model
for options granted in 2008 and 2009 are set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008(4) |
|
Weighted average fair value of grants on grant date |
|
$ |
10.15 |
|
$ |
8.00 |
|
Risk-free interest rate(1) |
|
|
2.20 |
% |
|
3.62 |
% |
Expected life-years |
|
|
5.32 |
|
|
6.52 |
|
Expected volatility(2) |
|
|
47.71 |
% |
|
24.22 |
% |
Expected dividend yield(3) |
|
|
3.77 |
% |
|
3.07 |
% |
- (1)
- Ranged
from 2.08% to 2.70% in 2009.
- (2)
- Ranged
from 47.60% to 48.17% in 2009.
- (3)
- Ranged
from 3.73% to 3.93% in 2009.
- (4)
- Since
one group of grants sharing the same terms took place in 2008, the assumptions used for such grants were uniform.
We
own a taxable REIT subsidiary that is subject to Federal and state income taxes. We realized a windfall tax shortfall of $152,000 in 2009 and benefit of $1.1 million in 2008 on
options exercised and vesting restricted shares in connection with employees of our subsidiaries that are subject to income tax.
The
table below sets forth information relating to expenses from share-based compensation included in our consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Increase in general and administrative expenses |
|
$ |
9,787 |
|
$ |
8,173 |
|
$ |
6,324 |
|
Increase in construction contract and other service operations expenses |
|
|
2,058 |
|
|
2,429 |
|
|
2,712 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share-based compensation expense |
|
$ |
11,845 |
|
$ |
10,602 |
|
$ |
9,036 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We
capitalized share-based compensation costs of approximately $794,000 in 2010, $620,000 in 2009 and $769,000 in 2008.
The
amounts included in our consolidated statements of operations for share-based compensation reflected an estimate of pre-vesting forfeitures of 0% for options and PSUs and
0% to 4% for restricted shares for 2010, 0% for options and 2% to 5% for restricted shares for 2009 and 7% for options and 2% to 5% for restricted shares for 2008.
As
of December 31, 2010, all of our options are vested and fully expensed. As of December 31, 2010, there was $12.8 million of unrecognized compensation cost related
to unvested restricted shares that is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately two years. As of
F-41
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
14. Share-Based Compensation and Employee Benefit Plans (Continued)
December 31,
2010, there was $3.9 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to PSUs that is expected to be recognized over the remaining performance period of approximately two
years.
401(k) Plan
We have a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all of our employees that permits participants to defer up to a
maximum of 15% of their compensation on an after tax basis. Participants who are 50 years of age or older by the end of a particular plan year and have contributed the maximum 401(k) deferral
amount allowed under the plan for that year are eligible to contribute an additional portion of their annual compensation on a before-tax basis as catch-up contributions, up to
the annual limit under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. For contributions to the plan occurring subsequent to December 31, 2008, we match 100% of the first 1% of
pre-tax and/or after-tax contributions that participants contribute to the plan and 50% of the next 5% in participant contributions to the plan (representing an aggregate match
by us of 3.5% on the first 6% of participant pre-tax and/or after-tax contributions to the plan). For contributions to the plan occurring through December 31, 2008, we
matched 50% of the first 6% of pre-tax and/or after-tax contributions that participants contributed to the Plan. Participants' contributions are fully vested. For matching
contributions made subsequent to December 31, 2008, a participant is 50% vested in Company matching contributions after one year of credited service and 100% vested after two years of credited
service. For matching contributions made through December 31, 2008, a participant is 30% vested in Company matching contributions after one year of credited service, 60% vested after two years
of credited service and 100% vested after three years of credited service. We fund all contributions with cash. Our matching contributions under the plan totaled approximately $1.0 million in
2010, $969,000 in 2009 and $641,000 in 2008. The 401(k) plan is fully funded at December 31, 2010.
Deferred Compensation Plan
We have a non-qualified elective deferred compensation plan for certain members of our management team that permits
participants to defer up to 100% of their compensation on a pre-tax basis and receive a tax-deferred return on such deferrals. We match the participant's contribution in an
amount equal to 50% of the participant's elective deferral for the plan year up to a maximum of 6% of a participant's annual
compensation after deducting contributions, if any, made under our 401(k) plan. Deferred compensation related to an employee contribution is charged to expense and is fully vested. Deferred
compensation related to the Company's matching contribution is charged to expense and vests in annual one-third increments. Once an employee has been with us for three years, all matching
contributions are fully vested. The balance of the plan, which was fully funded, totaled $8.2 million at December 31, 2010 and $6.7 million at December 31, 2009, and is
included in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
F-42
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
15. Operating Leases
We lease our properties to tenants under operating leases with various expiration dates extending to the year 2025. Gross minimum future rentals on noncancelable leases in our
consolidated properties at December 31, 2010 were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
$ |
359,021 |
|
2012 |
|
|
320,637 |
|
2013 |
|
|
274,035 |
|
2014 |
|
|
237,258 |
|
2015 |
|
|
189,186 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
520,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,900,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
16. Information by Business Segment
As of December 31, 2010, we had nine primary office property segments (comprised of: the Baltimore/Washington Corridor; Greater Baltimore; Northern Virginia; Colorado Springs;
Suburban Maryland; San Antonio; Washington, DC-Capitol Riverfront; Greater Philadelphia; and St. Mary's & King George Counties) and a wholesale data center segment.
F-43
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
16. Information by Business Segment (Continued)
The table below reports segment financial information for our real estate operations (in thousands). Our segment entitled "Other" includes assets and operations
not specifically associated with the other defined segments, including certain properties as well as corporate assets and investments in unconsolidated entities. We measure the performance of our
segments through a measure we define as net operating income from real estate operations ("NOI from real estate operations"), which is derived by subtracting property operating expenses from revenues
from real estate operations. We believe that NOI from real estate operations is an important supplemental measure of operating performance for a REIT's operating real estate because it provides a
measure of the core operations that is unaffected by depreciation,
amortization, financing and general and administrative expenses; this measure is particularly useful in our opinion in evaluating the performance of geographic segments, same-office
property groupings and individual properties (in thousands).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baltimore/
Washington
Corridor |
|
Greater
Baltimore |
|
Northern
Virginia |
|
Colorado
Springs |
|
Suburban
Maryland |
|
San
Antonio |
|
Washington, DC
Capitol
Riverfront |
|
Greater
Philadelphia |
|
St. Mary's &
King George
Counties |
|
Wholesale
Data
Center |
|
Other |
|
Total |
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from real estate operations |
|
$ |
207,456 |
|
$ |
71,850 |
|
$ |
75,063 |
|
$ |
24,897 |
|
$ |
21,759 |
|
$ |
21,673 |
|
$ |
4,678 |
|
$ |
6,299 |
|
$ |
13,967 |
|
$ |
1,062 |
|
$ |
13,024 |
|
$ |
461,728 |
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
77,340 |
|
|
31,491 |
|
|
28,115 |
|
|
9,137 |
|
|
9,657 |
|
|
10,447 |
|
|
1,708 |
|
|
2,274 |
|
|
4,340 |
|
|
1,202 |
|
|
4,052 |
|
|
179,763 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from real estate operations |
|
$ |
130,116 |
|
$ |
40,359 |
|
$ |
46,948 |
|
$ |
15,760 |
|
$ |
12,102 |
|
$ |
11,226 |
|
$ |
2,970 |
|
$ |
4,025 |
|
$ |
9,627 |
|
$ |
(140 |
) |
$ |
8,972 |
|
$ |
281,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, net |
|
$ |
90,054 |
|
$ |
38,586 |
|
$ |
108,438 |
|
$ |
3,499 |
|
$ |
4,434 |
|
$ |
19,064 |
|
$ |
92,811 |
|
$ |
20,714 |
|
$ |
7,090 |
|
$ |
125,636 |
|
$ |
15,084 |
|
$ |
525,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment assets at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
1,392,524 |
|
$ |
585,001 |
|
$ |
545,560 |
|
$ |
265,119 |
|
$ |
176,776 |
|
$ |
154,787 |
|
$ |
120,492 |
|
$ |
122,734 |
|
$ |
99,412 |
|
$ |
129,815 |
|
$ |
252,297 |
|
$ |
3,844,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from real estate operations |
|
$ |
197,610 |
|
$ |
58,275 |
|
$ |
79,132 |
|
$ |
23,125 |
|
$ |
19,620 |
|
$ |
13,566 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
7,983 |
|
$ |
13,960 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
13,584 |
|
$ |
426,855 |
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
72,902 |
|
|
25,560 |
|
|
30,111 |
|
|
7,391 |
|
|
8,393 |
|
|
4,479 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,271 |
|
|
3,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,808 |
|
|
157,406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from real estate operations |
|
$ |
124,708 |
|
$ |
32,715 |
|
$ |
49,021 |
|
$ |
15,734 |
|
$ |
11,227 |
|
$ |
9,087 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
6,712 |
|
$ |
10,469 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
9,776 |
|
$ |
269,449 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, net |
|
$ |
98,437 |
|
$ |
124,637 |
|
$ |
7,673 |
|
$ |
22,593 |
|
$ |
24,022 |
|
$ |
38,353 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
9,126 |
|
$ |
2,200 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
3,960 |
|
$ |
331,001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment assets at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
1,332,579 |
|
$ |
569,590 |
|
$ |
451,965 |
|
$ |
270,358 |
|
$ |
179,453 |
|
$ |
134,986 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
105,372 |
|
$ |
94,732 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
240,987 |
|
$ |
3,380,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from real estate operations |
|
$ |
184,250 |
|
$ |
54,626 |
|
$ |
75,974 |
|
$ |
20,343 |
|
$ |
19,294 |
|
$ |
9,311 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
10,025 |
|
$ |
12,894 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
13,274 |
|
$ |
399,991 |
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
65,474 |
|
|
23,978 |
|
|
29,520 |
|
|
7,284 |
|
|
7,102 |
|
|
2,425 |
|
|
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
3,245 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,119 |
|
|
141,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from real estate operations |
|
$ |
118,776 |
|
$ |
30,648 |
|
$ |
46,454 |
|
$ |
13,059 |
|
$ |
12,192 |
|
$ |
6,886 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
9,823 |
|
$ |
9,649 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
11,155 |
|
$ |
258,642 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties, net |
|
$ |
84,299 |
|
$ |
17,132 |
|
$ |
4,294 |
|
$ |
73,683 |
|
$ |
38,302 |
|
$ |
34,973 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
1,575 |
|
$ |
2,801 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
18,908 |
|
$ |
275,967 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment assets at December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
1,263,939 |
|
$ |
439,114 |
|
$ |
464,198 |
|
$ |
252,559 |
|
$ |
152,918 |
|
$ |
96,643 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
95,783 |
|
$ |
95,288 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
253,797 |
|
$ |
3,114,239 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-44
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
16. Information by Business Segment (Continued)
The following table reconciles our segment revenues from real estate operations to total revenues as reported on our consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Segment revenues from real estate operations |
|
$ |
461,728 |
|
$ |
426,855 |
|
$ |
399,991 |
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
|
104,675 |
|
|
343,087 |
|
|
188,385 |
|
Less: Revenues from discontinued operations (Note 18) |
|
|
(1,928 |
) |
|
(2,871 |
) |
|
(3,231 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
$ |
564,475 |
|
$ |
767,071 |
|
$ |
585,145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
following table reconciles our segment property operating expenses to property operating expenses as reported on our consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Segment property operating expenses |
|
$ |
179,763 |
|
$ |
157,406 |
|
$ |
141,349 |
|
Less: Property operating expenses from discontinued operations (Note 18) |
|
|
(344 |
) |
|
(252 |
) |
|
(454 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property operating expenses |
|
$ |
179,419 |
|
$ |
157,154 |
|
$ |
140,895 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
previously discussed, we provide real estate services such as property management, construction and development and heating and air conditioning services primarily for our properties
but also for third parties. The primary manner in which we evaluate the operating performance of our service activities is through a measure we define as net operating income from service operations
("NOI from service operations"), which is based on the net of the revenues and expenses from these activities. Construction contract and other service revenues and expenses consist primarily of
subcontracted costs that are reimbursed to us by the customer along with a management fee. The operating margins from these activities are small relative to the revenue. We believe NOI from service
operations is a useful measure in assessing both our level of activity and our profitability in conducting such operations. The table below sets forth the computation of our NOI from service
operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Construction contract and other service revenues |
|
$ |
104,675 |
|
$ |
343,087 |
|
$ |
188,385 |
|
Construction contract and other service expenses |
|
|
(102,302 |
) |
|
(336,519 |
) |
|
(184,142 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI from service operations |
|
$ |
2,373 |
|
$ |
6,568 |
|
$ |
4,243 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-45
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
16. Information by Business Segment (Continued)
The
following table reconciles our NOI from real estate operations for reportable segments and NOI from service operations to income from continuing operations as reported on our
consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
NOI from real estate operations |
|
$ |
281,965 |
|
$ |
269,449 |
|
$ |
258,642 |
|
NOI from service operations |
|
|
2,373 |
|
|
6,568 |
|
|
4,243 |
|
Interest and other income |
|
|
9,568 |
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
2,070 |
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,101 |
|
Equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities |
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
(941 |
) |
|
(147 |
) |
Income tax expense |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
(196 |
) |
|
(201 |
) |
Other adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization associated with real estate operations |
|
|
(123,236 |
) |
|
(108,529 |
) |
|
(101,854 |
) |
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
(24,008 |
) |
|
(23,240 |
) |
|
(24,096 |
) |
|
Business development expenses |
|
|
(4,197 |
) |
|
(3,699 |
) |
|
(1,233 |
) |
|
Interest expense on continuing operations |
|
|
(101,865 |
) |
|
(82,187 |
) |
|
(86,368 |
) |
|
NOI from discontinued operations |
|
|
(1,584 |
) |
|
(2,619 |
) |
|
(2,777 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
40,284 |
|
$ |
59,770 |
|
$ |
56,380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
accounting policies of the segments are the same as those used to prepare our consolidated financial statement, except that discontinued operations are not presented separately for
segment purposes. We did not allocate interest expense and depreciation and amortization to our real estate segments since they are not included in the measure of segment profit reviewed by
management. We also did not allocate general and administrative expenses, business development expenses, interest and other income, equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated entities, income taxes,
gain on early extinguishment of debt and noncontrolling interests because these items represent general corporate items not attributable to segments.
17. Income Taxes
We elected to be treated as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code. To qualify as a REIT, we must meet a number of organizational and operational
requirements, including a requirement that we distribute at least 90% of our adjusted taxable income to our shareholders. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to Federal income tax on taxable
income that we distribute to our shareholders. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any tax year, we will be subject to Federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates and may not be
able to qualify as a REIT for four subsequent tax years.
F-46
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
17. Income Taxes (Continued)
The
differences between taxable income reported on our income tax return (estimated 2010 and actual 2009 and 2008) and net income as reported on our consolidated statements of operations
are set forth below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
45,504 |
|
$ |
61,299 |
|
$ |
61,316 |
|
Adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental revenue recognition |
|
|
(8,413 |
) |
|
(1,646 |
) |
|
(12,681 |
) |
|
Compensation expense recognition |
|
|
(4,820 |
) |
|
(5,240 |
) |
|
1,600 |
|
|
Operating expense recognition |
|
|
280 |
|
|
1,061 |
|
|
965 |
|
|
Gain on sales of properties |
|
|
1,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
(4,358 |
) |
|
Losses from service operations |
|
|
(1,628 |
) |
|
303 |
|
|
(1,867 |
) |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
119 |
|
|
196 |
|
|
779 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
42,839 |
|
|
36,031 |
|
|
36,181 |
|
|
Discounts/premiums included in interest expense |
|
|
5,713 |
|
|
3,390 |
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
Income from unconsolidated entities |
|
|
(118 |
) |
|
(12 |
) |
|
82 |
|
|
Noncontrolling interests, gross |
|
|
(2,091 |
) |
|
(5,813 |
) |
|
(1,568 |
) |
|
Other |
|
|
1,408 |
|
|
(2,954 |
) |
|
1,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable income |
|
$ |
79,951 |
|
$ |
86,615 |
|
$ |
81,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
Federal income tax purposes, dividends to shareholders may be characterized as ordinary income, capital gains or return of capital. The characterization of dividends declared on our
common and preferred shares during each of the last three years was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Shares |
|
Preferred Shares |
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Ordinary income |
|
|
59.7 |
% |
|
87.5 |
% |
|
94.0 |
% |
|
88.3 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
98.4 |
% |
Long term capital gain |
|
|
8.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
1.5 |
% |
|
11.7 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
1.6 |
% |
Return of capital |
|
|
32.3 |
% |
|
12.5 |
% |
|
4.5 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
We
distributed all of our REIT taxable income in 2010, 2009 and 2008 and, as a result, did not incur Federal income tax in those years on such income.
The
net basis of our assets and liabilities for tax reporting purposes is approximately $310.0 million lower than the amount reported on our consolidated balance sheet at
December 31, 2010, which is primarily related to differences in basis for net properties, intangible assets on real estate acquisitions and deferred rent receivable.
F-47
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
17. Income Taxes (Continued)
We
own a taxable REIT subsidiary ("TRS") that is subject to Federal and state income taxes. Our TRS had income before income taxes under GAAP of $345,000 in 2010, $506,000 in 2009 and
$2.0 million in 2008. Our TRS' provision for income tax consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
$ |
(64 |
) |
$ |
115 |
|
$ |
352 |
|
|
State |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
25 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
140 |
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
|
161 |
|
|
46 |
|
|
328 |
|
|
State |
|
|
36 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
56 |
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax expense |
|
$ |
119 |
|
$ |
196 |
|
$ |
779 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported on line entitled income tax expense |
|
$ |
108 |
|
$ |
196 |
|
$ |
201 |
|
Reported on line entitled gain on sales of real estate, net |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
578 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax expense |
|
$ |
119 |
|
$ |
196 |
|
$ |
779 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
reconciliation of our TRS' Federal statutory rate to the effective tax rate for income tax reported on our statements of operations is set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Income taxes at U.S. statutory rate |
|
|
34.0 |
% |
|
34.0 |
% |
|
34.0 |
% |
State and local, net of U.S. Federal tax benefit |
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
4.6 |
% |
|
4.6 |
% |
Other |
|
|
(3.5 |
)% |
|
0.1 |
% |
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
34.7 |
% |
|
38.7 |
% |
|
38.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Items
in our TRS contributing to temporary differences that lead to deferred taxes include depreciation and amortization, share-based compensation, certain accrued compensation,
compensation paid in the form of contributions to a deferred nonqualified compensation plan and net operating losses that are not deductible until future periods.
We
are subject to certain state and local income and franchise taxes. The expense associated with these state and local taxes is included in general and administrative expense on our
consolidated statements of operations. We did not separately state these amounts on our consolidated statements of operations because they are insignificant.
F-48
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
18. Discontinued Operations
Income from discontinued operations primarily includes revenues and expenses associated with the following:
-
- 429 Ridge Road property in Central New Jersey (included in the Other region) that was sold on January 31, 2008;
-
- 47 Commerce Drive property in Central New Jersey (included in the Other region) that was sold on April 1, 2008;
-
- 7253 Ambassador Road property in the Greater Baltimore region that was sold on June 2, 2008;
-
- 11101 McCormick Road property in the Greater Baltimore region that was sold on February 1, 2010; and
-
- 431 and 437 Ridge Road properties in Central New Jersey (included in the Other region) that were sold on
September 8, 2010.
Certain
reclassifications have been made in prior periods to reflect discontinued operations consistent with the current period presentation. The table below sets forth the components of
discontinued operations reported on our consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Revenue from real estate operations |
|
$ |
1,928 |
|
$ |
2,871 |
|
$ |
3,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses from real estate operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property operating expenses |
|
|
344 |
|
|
252 |
|
|
454 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
7 |
|
|
857 |
|
|
918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses from real estate operations |
|
|
351 |
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
1,372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income from real estate operations |
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
1,762 |
|
|
1,859 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
(233 |
) |
|
(553 |
) |
Gain on sales of real estate |
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
2,391 |
|
$ |
1,529 |
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19. Earnings Per Share ("EPS")
We present both basic and diluted EPS. We compute basic EPS by dividing net income available to common shareholders allocable to unrestricted common shares under the
two-class method by the weighted average number of unrestricted common shares outstanding during the year. Our computation of diluted EPS is similar except that:
-
- the denominator is increased to include: (1) the weighted average number of potential additional common shares that
would have been outstanding if securities that are convertible into our common shares were converted; and (2) the effect of dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the year
attributable to share-based compensation using the treasury stock or if-converted methods; and
F-49
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
19. Earnings Per Share ("EPS") (Continued)
-
- the numerator is adjusted to add back any changes in income or loss that would result from the assumed conversion into
common shares that we added to the denominator.
Summaries
of the numerator and denominator for purposes of basic and diluted EPS calculations are set forth below (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
40,284 |
|
$ |
59,770 |
|
$ |
56,380 |
|
Add: Gain on sales of real estate, net |
|
|
2,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,104 |
|
Less: Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
|
(16,102 |
) |
Less: Income from continuing operations attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(2,562 |
) |
|
(4,822 |
) |
|
(6,773 |
) |
Less: Income from continuing operations attributable to restricted shares |
|
|
(1,071 |
) |
|
(1,010 |
) |
|
(728 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for basic and diluted EPS from continuing operations attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
|
23,378 |
|
|
37,836 |
|
|
33,881 |
|
Add: Discontinued operations, net |
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
1,529 |
|
|
3,832 |
|
Less: Discontinued operations, net attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(182 |
) |
|
(148 |
) |
|
(578 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for basic and diluted EPS on net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
25,587 |
|
$ |
39,217 |
|
$ |
37,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator (all weighted averages): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for basic EPS (common shares) |
|
|
59,611 |
|
|
55,930 |
|
|
48,132 |
|
Dilutive effect of share-based compensation awards |
|
|
333 |
|
|
477 |
|
|
688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for diluted EPS |
|
|
59,944 |
|
|
56,407 |
|
|
48,820 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic EPS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
|
Discontinued operations attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
0.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
Discontinued operations attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
0.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-50
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
19. Earnings Per Share ("EPS") (Continued)
Our
diluted EPS computations do not include the effects of the following securities since the conversions of such securities would increase diluted EPS for the respective years (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Shares
Excluded from
Denominator for the
Years Ended
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Conversion of common units |
|
|
4,608 |
|
|
5,717 |
|
|
8,107 |
|
Conversion of convertible preferred units |
|
|
176 |
|
|
176 |
|
|
176 |
|
Conversion of convertible preferred shares |
|
|
434 |
|
|
434 |
|
|
434 |
|
As
discussed in Note 10, we have outstanding senior notes that have an exchange settlement feature but did not affect our diluted EPS reported above since the weighted average
closing price of our common shares during each of the years was less than the exchange prices per common share applicable for such years.
The
following share-based compensation securities were excluded from the computation of diluted EPS because their effect was antidilutive:
-
- weighted average restricted shares of 666,000 for 2010, 662,000 for 2009 and 527,000 for 2008; and
-
- weighted average options of 653,000 for 2010, 814,000 for 2009 and 757,000 for 2008.
F-51
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
20. Quarterly Data (Unaudited)
The tables below set forth selected quarterly information for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands, except per share data). Certain of the amounts below have
been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation of our consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
149,593 |
|
$ |
135,322 |
|
$ |
128,158 |
|
$ |
151,402 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
31,408 |
|
$ |
33,976 |
|
$ |
30,841 |
|
$ |
35,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
9,826 |
|
$ |
8,330 |
|
$ |
5,320 |
|
$ |
16,808 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
832 |
|
$ |
486 |
|
$ |
1,129 |
|
$ |
(56 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
10,675 |
|
$ |
9,151 |
|
$ |
8,926 |
|
$ |
16,752 |
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(737 |
) |
|
(685 |
) |
|
(94 |
) |
|
(1,228 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT |
|
|
9,938 |
|
|
8,466 |
|
|
8,832 |
|
|
15,524 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(4,025 |
) |
|
(4,026 |
) |
|
(4,025 |
) |
|
(4,026 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
5,913 |
|
$ |
4,440 |
|
$ |
4,807 |
|
$ |
11,498 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
$ |
0.06 |
|
$ |
0.06 |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
$ |
0.06 |
|
$ |
0.06 |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-52
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
20. Quarterly Data (Unaudited) (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
180,997 |
|
$ |
208,331 |
|
$ |
199,453 |
|
$ |
178,290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
36,244 |
|
$ |
35,297 |
|
$ |
34,271 |
|
$ |
32,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
17,774 |
|
$ |
17,675 |
|
$ |
15,154 |
|
$ |
9,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
392 |
|
$ |
376 |
|
$ |
382 |
|
$ |
379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
18,166 |
|
$ |
18,051 |
|
$ |
15,536 |
|
$ |
9,546 |
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
(2,019 |
) |
|
(1,412 |
) |
|
(1,081 |
) |
|
(458 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT |
|
|
16,147 |
|
|
16,639 |
|
|
14,455 |
|
|
9,088 |
|
Preferred share dividends |
|
|
(4,025 |
) |
|
(4,026 |
) |
|
(4,025 |
) |
|
(4,026 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
12,122 |
|
$ |
12,613 |
|
$ |
10,430 |
|
$ |
5,062 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to COPT common shareholders |
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21. Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation
In the normal course of business, we are involved in legal actions arising from our ownership and administration of properties. We
establish reserves for specific legal proceedings when we determine that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Management does not
anticipate that any liabilities that may result from such proceedings will have a materially adverse effect on our financial position, operations or liquidity. Our assessment of the potential outcomes
of these matters involves significant judgment and is subject to change based on future developments.
In
2005, a suit was initiated in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against The Secretary of the United States Army, PenMar Development Corporation ("PMDC")
and us, as defendants, in connection with our then pending acquisition of the former army base known as Fort Ritchie located in Cascade, Maryland. The case was dismissed by the United States District
Court in 2006 due to the plaintiffs' lack of standing but upon the filing of an appeal, the findings of the District Court were reversed and the case remanded to the District Court for further
proceedings. We subsequently acquired from PMDC fee simple title to 500 acres of the 591 acres comprising Fort Ritchie on October 5, 2006 and the remaining 91 acres on November 29, 2007.
On
November 10, 2009, the District Court issued an Order, together with a Memorandum Opinion, which precludes us from proceeding with the implementation of our development plan
until
F-53
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
21. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)
the
Army either re-issues an amended Record of Environmental Consideration ("REC") or a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ("SEIS") that complies with the District Court's
Memorandum Opinion. The Memorandum Opinion highlights various areas of the existing REC which could be revised to include greater detail on the Army's deliberative process whereby the Army determined
that a SEIS was not necessary. We are working with both the Army's counsel and the Army representative on re-submission of the amended REC to the Court in order to lift the restrictions
imposed by the Court.
On
January 8, 2010, the Army filed an appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and, on January 19, 2011, the appeal was dismissed.
On January 21, 2011, the District Court issued an order for the parties to meet and confer to provide a status report to the Court on or before February 4, 2011 and the Court has
approved an extended filing date of February 18, 2011. In the event that this matter is not favorably resolved, we may be unable to execute our development plans for the property, which could
render us unable to recover some or all of our investment made in the property. As of December 31, 2010, the carrying value of our investment in the property was $27.7 million.
Environmental
We are subject to various Federal, state and local environmental regulations related to our property ownership and operation. We have
performed environmental assessments of our properties, the results of which have not revealed any environmental liability that we believe would have a materially adverse effect on our financial
position, operations or liquidity.
Joint Ventures
In connection with our 2005 contribution of properties to an unconsolidated partnership in which we hold a limited partnership
interest, we entered into standard nonrecourse loan guarantees (environmental indemnifications and guarantees against fraud and misrepresentation, including springing guarantees of partnership debt in
the event of a voluntary bankruptcy of the partnership). The maximum amount we could be required to pay under the guarantees is approximately $66 million. We are entitled to recover 20% of any
amounts paid under the
guarantees from an affiliate of the general partner pursuant to an indemnity agreement so long as we continue to manage the properties. In the event that we no longer manage the properties, the
percentage that we are entitled to recover is increased to 80%. Management estimates that the aggregate fair value of the guarantees is not material and would not exceed the amounts included in
distributions received in excess of investment in unconsolidated real estate joint venture reported on the consolidated balance sheets.
We
are party to a contribution agreement that formed a joint venture relationship with a limited partnership to develop up to 1.8 million square feet of office space on 63 acres
of land located in Hanover, Maryland. As we and the joint venture partner agree to proceed with the construction of buildings in the future, our joint venture partner would contribute land into
newly-formed entities and we would make cash capital contributions into such entities to fund development and construction activities for which financing is not obtained. We owned a 50% interest in
one such joint venture as of December 31, 2010.
We
may be required to make our pro rata share of additional investments in our real estate joint ventures (generally based on our percentage ownership) in the event that additional funds
are needed.
F-54
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)
21. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)
In
the event that the other members of these joint ventures do not pay their share of investments when additional funds are needed, we may then deem it appropriate to make even larger investments in
these joint ventures.
Tax Incremental Financing Obligation
In August 2010, Anne Arundel County, Maryland issued $30 million in tax incremental financing bonds to third-party investors in
order to finance public improvements needed in connection with our project known as National Business Park North. The real estate taxes on increases in assessed value of a development district
encompassing National Business Park North are to be transferred to a special fund pledged to the repayment of the bonds. We recognized a $3.5 million liability through December 31, 2010
representing the estimated fair value of our obligation to fund through a special tax any future shortfalls between debt service on the bonds and real estate taxes available to repay the bonds.
Ground Leases
We are obligated as lessee under two ground leases that expire in 2099 and 2100. Future minimum rental payments due under the terms of
these leases as of December 31, 2010 follow (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
$ |
320 |
|
2012 |
|
|
320 |
|
2013 |
|
|
320 |
|
2014 |
|
|
320 |
|
2015 |
|
|
320 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
27,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
28,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental Indemnity Agreement
We agreed to provide certain environmental indemnifications in connection with a lease of three New Jersey properties that we no longer
own. The prior owner of the properties, a Fortune 100 company that is responsible for groundwater contamination at such properties, previously agreed to indemnify us for (1) direct losses
incurred in connection with the contamination and (2) its failure to perform remediation activities required by the State of New Jersey, up to the point that the state declares the remediation
to be complete. Under the lease agreement, we agreed to the following:
-
- to indemnify the tenant against losses covered under the prior owner's indemnity agreement if the prior owner fails to
indemnify the tenant for such losses. This indemnification is capped at $5.0 million in perpetuity after the State of New Jersey declares the remediation to be complete;
-
- to indemnify the tenant for consequential damages (e.g., business interruption) at one of the buildings in
perpetuity and another of the buildings for 15 years after the tenant's acquisition of the property from us. This indemnification is limited to $12.5 million; and
-
- to pay 50% of additional costs related to construction and environmental regulatory activities incurred by the tenant as a
result of the indemnified environmental condition of the properties. This indemnification is limited to $300,000 annually and $1.5 million in the aggregate.
F-55
Table of Contents
Corporate Office Properties Trust
Schedule IIIReal Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2010
(Dollars in Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
100 Sentry Gateway (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
6,752 |
|
|
1,178 |
|
|
9,191 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,178 |
|
|
9,191 |
|
|
10,369 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
7/16/2008 |
|
100 West Pennsylvania Avenue (O) |
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
950 |
|
|
769 |
|
|
698 |
|
|
1,719 |
|
|
2,417 |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
1952/1989 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
10001 Franklin Square Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
4,033 |
|
|
11,483 |
|
|
762 |
|
|
4,033 |
|
|
12,245 |
|
|
16,278 |
|
|
(1,634 |
) |
|
1997 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
10150 York Road (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,700 |
|
|
11,623 |
|
|
5,564 |
|
|
2,700 |
|
|
17,187 |
|
|
19,887 |
|
|
(5,733 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
4/15/2004 |
|
102 West Pennsylvania Avenue (O) |
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
3,182 |
|
|
845 |
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
4,027 |
|
|
5,117 |
|
|
(701 |
) |
|
1968/2001 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
10270 Old Columbia Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
1,121 |
|
|
751 |
|
|
1,402 |
|
|
190 |
|
|
751 |
|
|
1,592 |
|
|
2,343 |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
10280 Old Columbia Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
1,138 |
|
|
756 |
|
|
1,431 |
|
|
130 |
|
|
756 |
|
|
1,561 |
|
|
2,317 |
|
|
(253 |
) |
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
10290 Old Columbia Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
721 |
|
|
490 |
|
|
895 |
|
|
235 |
|
|
490 |
|
|
1,130 |
|
|
1,620 |
|
|
(228 |
) |
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
1055 North Newport Road (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
972 |
|
|
9,991 |
|
|
|
|
|
972 |
|
|
9,991 |
|
|
10,963 |
|
|
(706 |
) |
|
2007-2008 |
|
|
5/19/2006 |
|
10807 New Allegiance Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
25,251 |
|
|
60 |
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
25,311 |
|
|
27,151 |
|
|
(645 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
9/28/2005 |
|
109-111 Allegheny Avenue (O) |
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,688 |
|
|
5,620 |
|
|
147 |
|
|
1,688 |
|
|
5,767 |
|
|
7,455 |
|
|
(746 |
) |
|
1971 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
1099 Winterson Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
12,012 |
|
|
1,323 |
|
|
5,293 |
|
|
2,136 |
|
|
1,323 |
|
|
7,429 |
|
|
8,752 |
|
|
(2,686 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
110 Thomas Johnson Drive (O) |
|
Frederick, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,810 |
|
|
12,075 |
|
|
799 |
|
|
2,810 |
|
|
12,874 |
|
|
15,684 |
|
|
(1,706 |
) |
|
1987/1999 |
|
|
10/21/2005 |
|
11011 McCormick Road (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
3,474 |
|
|
1,635 |
|
|
875 |
|
|
5,109 |
|
|
5,984 |
|
|
(1,248 |
) |
|
1974 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
1120 Vapor Trail (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
1,291 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,291 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
5/19/2006 |
|
11311 McCormick Road (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,308 |
|
|
21,310 |
|
|
5,811 |
|
|
2,308 |
|
|
27,121 |
|
|
29,429 |
|
|
(4,781 |
) |
|
1984/1994 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
114 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
3,109 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
364 |
|
|
3,118 |
|
|
3,482 |
|
|
(723 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
6/30/2000 |
|
11751 Meadowville Lane (O) |
|
Richmond, VA |
|
|
42,885 |
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
52,098 |
|
|
112 |
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
52,210 |
|
|
53,515 |
|
|
(4,668 |
) |
|
2007 |
|
|
9/15/2006 |
|
11800 Tech Road (O) |
|
Silver Spring, MD |
|
|
16,016 |
|
|
4,574 |
|
|
19,703 |
|
|
2,349 |
|
|
4,574 |
|
|
22,052 |
|
|
26,626 |
|
|
(6,209 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
8/1/2002 |
|
1190 Winterson Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
11,291 |
|
|
1,335 |
|
|
5,340 |
|
|
3,919 |
|
|
1,335 |
|
|
9,259 |
|
|
10,594 |
|
|
(4,522 |
) |
|
1987 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
1199 Winterson Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
18,578 |
|
|
1,599 |
|
|
6,395 |
|
|
2,832 |
|
|
1,599 |
|
|
9,227 |
|
|
10,826 |
|
|
(3,823 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
1201 M Street (O) |
|
Washington, DC |
|
|
38,261 |
|
|
|
|
|
49,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,785 |
|
|
49,785 |
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
9/1/2010 |
|
1201 Winterson Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
460 |
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
5,614 |
|
|
6,902 |
|
|
(1,747 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
1220 12th Street, SE (O) |
|
Washington, DC |
|
|
31,471 |
|
|
|
|
|
42,682 |
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
|
|
43,026 |
|
|
43,026 |
|
|
(422 |
) |
|
2003 |
|
|
9/1/2010 |
|
1243 Winterson Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
12/19/2001 |
|
12515 Academy Ridge View (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
2,612 |
|
|
7,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,612 |
|
|
7,260 |
|
|
9,872 |
|
|
(380 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
6/26/2009 |
|
1302 Concourse Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,078 |
|
|
8,313 |
|
|
2,325 |
|
|
2,078 |
|
|
10,638 |
|
|
12,716 |
|
|
(3,883 |
) |
|
1996 |
|
|
11/18/1999 |
|
1304 Concourse Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
9,621 |
|
|
1,999 |
|
|
12,934 |
|
|
362 |
|
|
1,999 |
|
|
13,296 |
|
|
15,295 |
|
|
(3,693 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
11/18/1999 |
|
F-56
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
1306 Concourse Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,796 |
|
|
11,186 |
|
|
1,887 |
|
|
2,796 |
|
|
13,073 |
|
|
15,869 |
|
|
(4,089 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
11/18/1999 |
|
131 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
7,168 |
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
7,623 |
|
|
1,802 |
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
9,425 |
|
|
11,331 |
|
|
(3,260 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
9/28/1998 |
|
132 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
28,264 |
|
|
2,917 |
|
|
12,259 |
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
2,917 |
|
|
14,534 |
|
|
17,451 |
|
|
(5,230 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
5/28/1999 |
|
13200 Woodland Park Road (O) |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
63,659 |
|
|
10,428 |
|
|
41,711 |
|
|
13,760 |
|
|
10,428 |
|
|
55,471 |
|
|
65,899 |
|
|
(14,779 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
6/2/2003 |
|
133 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
9,591 |
|
|
2,517 |
|
|
10,068 |
|
|
4,183 |
|
|
2,517 |
|
|
14,251 |
|
|
16,768 |
|
|
(4,844 |
) |
|
1997 |
|
|
9/28/1998 |
|
1331 Ashton Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
2,347 |
|
|
311 |
|
|
587 |
|
|
2,658 |
|
|
3,245 |
|
|
(762 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
1334 Ashton Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
2,946 |
|
|
2,173 |
|
|
736 |
|
|
5,119 |
|
|
5,855 |
|
|
(1,438 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
134 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
19,200 |
|
|
3,684 |
|
|
7,517 |
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
3,684 |
|
|
9,138 |
|
|
12,822 |
|
|
(3,069 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
11/13/1998 |
|
1340 Ashton Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
905 |
|
|
3,620 |
|
|
894 |
|
|
905 |
|
|
4,514 |
|
|
5,419 |
|
|
(1,638 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
1341 Ashton Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
1,223 |
|
|
421 |
|
|
306 |
|
|
1,644 |
|
|
1,950 |
|
|
(581 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
1343 Ashton Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
774 |
|
|
405 |
|
|
193 |
|
|
1,179 |
|
|
1,372 |
|
|
(274 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
1344 Ashton Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
355 |
|
|
1,421 |
|
|
384 |
|
|
355 |
|
|
1,805 |
|
|
2,160 |
|
|
(681 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
13450 Sunrise Valley (O) |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
1,386 |
|
|
5,576 |
|
|
1,818 |
|
|
1,386 |
|
|
7,394 |
|
|
8,780 |
|
|
(2,203 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
7/25/2003 |
|
13454 Sunrise Valley (O) |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
2,899 |
|
|
11,986 |
|
|
2,271 |
|
|
2,899 |
|
|
14,257 |
|
|
17,156 |
|
|
(3,364 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
7/25/2003 |
|
1348 Ashton Road (R) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
50 |
|
|
40 |
|
|
90 |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
135 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
10,272 |
|
|
2,484 |
|
|
9,750 |
|
|
1,522 |
|
|
2,484 |
|
|
11,272 |
|
|
13,756 |
|
|
(4,326 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
12/30/1998 |
|
1350 Dorsey Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
1,573 |
|
|
549 |
|
|
393 |
|
|
2,122 |
|
|
2,515 |
|
|
(712 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
1362 Mellon Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,706 |
|
|
6,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,706 |
|
|
6,797 |
|
|
8,503 |
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2/10/2006 |
|
140 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
3,407 |
|
|
24,167 |
|
|
631 |
|
|
3,407 |
|
|
24,798 |
|
|
28,205 |
|
|
(4,380 |
) |
|
2003 |
|
|
12/31/2003 |
|
141 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
10,066 |
|
|
2,398 |
|
|
9,590 |
|
|
1,632 |
|
|
2,398 |
|
|
11,222 |
|
|
13,620 |
|
|
(3,590 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
9/28/1998 |
|
14280 Park Meadow Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
3,731 |
|
|
15,953 |
|
|
819 |
|
|
3,731 |
|
|
16,772 |
|
|
20,503 |
|
|
(3,440 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
9/29/2004 |
|
1460 Dorsey Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,141 |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,141 |
|
|
45 |
|
|
2,186 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
2/28/2006 |
|
14840 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
1,572 |
|
|
8,175 |
|
|
31 |
|
|
1,572 |
|
|
8,206 |
|
|
9,778 |
|
|
(3,062 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
7/25/2003 |
|
14850 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
1,615 |
|
|
8,358 |
|
|
22 |
|
|
1,615 |
|
|
8,380 |
|
|
9,995 |
|
|
(3,100 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
7/25/2003 |
|
14900 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
3,436 |
|
|
14,402 |
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
3,436 |
|
|
17,025 |
|
|
20,461 |
|
|
(4,351 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
7/25/2003 |
|
15 Governor's Court (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
383 |
|
|
1,168 |
|
|
|
|
|
383 |
|
|
1,168 |
|
|
1,551 |
|
|
(238 |
) |
|
1981 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
15 West Gude Drive (O) |
|
Rockville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
3,120 |
|
|
13,626 |
|
|
2,921 |
|
|
3,120 |
|
|
16,547 |
|
|
19,667 |
|
|
(2,996 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
4/7/2005 |
|
15000 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
54,000 |
|
|
5,193 |
|
|
47,180 |
|
|
12,031 |
|
|
5,193 |
|
|
59,211 |
|
|
64,404 |
|
|
(16,963 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
11/30/2001 |
|
1501 South Clinton Street (O) |
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
35,264 |
|
|
49,609 |
|
|
276 |
|
|
35,264 |
|
|
49,885 |
|
|
85,149 |
|
|
(2,433 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
10/27/2009 |
|
15010 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
96,000 |
|
|
3,500 |
|
|
41,921 |
|
|
147 |
|
|
3,500 |
|
|
42,068 |
|
|
45,568 |
|
|
(4,392 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
11/30/2001 |
|
15049 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
4,415 |
|
|
20,365 |
|
|
704 |
|
|
4,415 |
|
|
21,069 |
|
|
25,484 |
|
|
(5,747 |
) |
|
1997 |
|
|
8/14/2002 |
|
F-57
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
15059 Conference Center Drive (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
23,648 |
|
|
5,753 |
|
|
13,615 |
|
|
999 |
|
|
5,753 |
|
|
14,614 |
|
|
20,367 |
|
|
(4,011 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
8/14/2002 |
|
1550 West Nursery Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
15,513 |
|
|
16,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
15,513 |
|
|
16,930 |
|
|
32,443 |
|
|
(686 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
10/28/2009 |
|
1550 Westbranch Dr (O) |
|
McLean, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
5,595 |
|
|
26,212 |
|
|
97 |
|
|
5,595 |
|
|
26,309 |
|
|
31,904 |
|
|
(490 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
6/28/2010 |
|
1560A Cable Ranch Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
1,097 |
|
|
3,770 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
1,097 |
|
|
3,776 |
|
|
4,873 |
|
|
(384 |
) |
|
1985/2007 |
|
|
6/19/2008 |
|
1560B Cable Ranch Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
2,299 |
|
|
6,545 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
2,299 |
|
|
6,556 |
|
|
8,855 |
|
|
(650 |
) |
|
1985/2006 |
|
|
6/19/2008 |
|
16442 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
2,396 |
|
|
613 |
|
|
2,582 |
|
|
198 |
|
|
613 |
|
|
2,780 |
|
|
3,393 |
|
|
(499 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
12/21/2004 |
|
16444 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
671 |
|
|
988 |
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
12/21/2004 |
|
16480 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
1,856 |
|
|
7,425 |
|
|
164 |
|
|
1,856 |
|
|
7,589 |
|
|
9,445 |
|
|
(1,217 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
12/28/2004 |
|
16501 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
1,959 |
|
|
522 |
|
|
2,090 |
|
|
176 |
|
|
522 |
|
|
2,266 |
|
|
2,788 |
|
|
(440 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
12/21/2004 |
|
16539 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
688 |
|
|
2,860 |
|
|
1,370 |
|
|
688 |
|
|
4,230 |
|
|
4,918 |
|
|
(766 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
12/21/2004 |
|
16541 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
773 |
|
|
3,094 |
|
|
858 |
|
|
773 |
|
|
3,952 |
|
|
4,725 |
|
|
(744 |
) |
|
1996 |
|
|
12/21/2004 |
|
16543 Commerce Drive (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
1,633 |
|
|
436 |
|
|
1,742 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
436 |
|
|
1,743 |
|
|
2,179 |
|
|
(262 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
12/21/2004 |
|
1670 North Newport Road (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
4,572 |
|
|
853 |
|
|
7,007 |
|
|
236 |
|
|
853 |
|
|
7,243 |
|
|
8,096 |
|
|
(1,196 |
) |
|
1986/1987 |
|
|
9/30/2005 |
|
17 Governor's Court (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
530 |
|
|
293 |
|
|
170 |
|
|
823 |
|
|
993 |
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
1981 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
1751 Pinnacle Drive (O) |
|
McLean, VA |
|
|
31,796 |
|
|
10,486 |
|
|
42,339 |
|
|
11,171 |
|
|
10,486 |
|
|
53,510 |
|
|
63,996 |
|
|
(11,716 |
) |
|
1989/1995 |
|
|
9/23/2004 |
|
1753 Pinnacle Drive (O) |
|
McLean, VA |
|
|
25,659 |
|
|
8,275 |
|
|
34,353 |
|
|
8,339 |
|
|
8,275 |
|
|
42,692 |
|
|
50,967 |
|
|
(7,753 |
) |
|
1976/2004 |
|
|
9/23/2004 |
|
1915 Aerotech Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
3,394 |
|
|
556 |
|
|
3,094 |
|
|
471 |
|
|
556 |
|
|
3,565 |
|
|
4,121 |
|
|
(796 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
6/8/2006 |
|
1925 Aerotech Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
3,717 |
|
|
556 |
|
|
3,067 |
|
|
358 |
|
|
556 |
|
|
3,425 |
|
|
3,981 |
|
|
(487 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
6/8/2006 |
|
200 International Circle (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,016 |
|
|
10,851 |
|
|
3,368 |
|
|
2,016 |
|
|
14,219 |
|
|
16,235 |
|
|
(2,582 |
) |
|
1987 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
200 Sentry Gateway (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
7/16/2008 |
|
201 International Circle (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
6,071 |
|
|
2,072 |
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
8,143 |
|
|
9,695 |
|
|
(1,669 |
) |
|
1982 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
201 Technology Drive (O) |
|
Lebanon, VA |
|
|
21,431 |
|
|
726 |
|
|
31,091 |
|
|
60 |
|
|
726 |
|
|
31,151 |
|
|
31,877 |
|
|
(2,464 |
) |
|
2007 |
|
|
10/5/2007 |
|
202 Research Boulevard (O) |
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,862 |
|
|
2,289 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,862 |
|
|
2,289 |
|
|
4,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
9/14/2007 |
|
206 Research Boulevard (O) |
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,862 |
|
|
8,338 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,862 |
|
|
8,338 |
|
|
10,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
9/14/2007 |
|
209 Research Boulevard (O) |
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
12,973 |
|
|
1,045 |
|
|
15,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,045 |
|
|
15,059 |
|
|
16,104 |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
2010 |
|
|
9/14/2007 |
|
21 Governor's Court (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
771 |
|
|
3,341 |
|
|
804 |
|
|
771 |
|
|
4,145 |
|
|
4,916 |
|
|
(707 |
) |
|
1981/1995 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
210 Research Boulevard (O) |
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
9,639 |
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
11,963 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
11,963 |
|
|
13,028 |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
2010 |
|
|
9/14/2007 |
|
216 Schilling Center (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
825 |
|
|
3,684 |
|
|
102 |
|
|
825 |
|
|
3,786 |
|
|
4,611 |
|
|
(447 |
) |
|
1988/2001 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
222 Schilling Circle (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
754 |
|
|
2,465 |
|
|
423 |
|
|
754 |
|
|
2,888 |
|
|
3,642 |
|
|
(364 |
) |
|
1978/1997 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
22289 Exploration Drive (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,422 |
|
|
5,719 |
|
|
681 |
|
|
1,422 |
|
|
6,400 |
|
|
7,822 |
|
|
(1,364 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
22299 Exploration Drive (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,362 |
|
|
5,791 |
|
|
490 |
|
|
1,362 |
|
|
6,281 |
|
|
7,643 |
|
|
(1,507 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
22300 Exploration Drive (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
5,038 |
|
|
160 |
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
5,198 |
|
|
6,292 |
|
|
(1,169 |
) |
|
1997 |
|
|
11/9/2004 |
|
22309 Exploration Drive (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,243 |
|
|
10,419 |
|
|
192 |
|
|
2,243 |
|
|
10,611 |
|
|
12,854 |
|
|
(2,660 |
) |
|
1984/1997 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
224 Schilling Circle (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
2,423 |
|
|
809 |
|
|
734 |
|
|
3,232 |
|
|
3,966 |
|
|
(482 |
) |
|
1978/1997 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
226 Schilling Circle (O) |
|
Hunt Valley, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,877 |
|
|
9,891 |
|
|
232 |
|
|
1,877 |
|
|
10,123 |
|
|
12,000 |
|
|
(1,876 |
) |
|
1980 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
23535 Cottonwood Parkway (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
763 |
|
|
3,051 |
|
|
192 |
|
|
763 |
|
|
3,243 |
|
|
4,006 |
|
|
(533 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
2500 Riva Road (O) |
|
Annapolis, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,791 |
|
|
12,145 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
2,791 |
|
|
12,146 |
|
|
14,937 |
|
|
(2,696 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
3/4/2003 |
|
2691 Technology Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
24,000 |
|
|
2,098 |
|
|
17,334 |
|
|
1,303 |
|
|
2,098 |
|
|
18,637 |
|
|
20,735 |
|
|
(2,344 |
) |
|
2005 |
|
|
5/26/2000 |
|
2701 Technology Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
14,277 |
|
|
1,737 |
|
|
15,266 |
|
|
45 |
|
|
1,737 |
|
|
15,311 |
|
|
17,048 |
|
|
(4,562 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
5/26/2000 |
|
2711 Technology Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
20,036 |
|
|
2,251 |
|
|
21,611 |
|
|
433 |
|
|
2,251 |
|
|
22,044 |
|
|
24,295 |
|
|
(6,319 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
11/13/2000 |
|
2720 Technology Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
24,923 |
|
|
3,863 |
|
|
29,272 |
|
|
36 |
|
|
3,863 |
|
|
29,308 |
|
|
33,171 |
|
|
(4,636 |
) |
|
2004 |
|
|
1/31/2002 |
|
2721 Technology Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
28,264 |
|
|
4,611 |
|
|
14,597 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
4,611 |
|
|
14,630 |
|
|
19,241 |
|
|
(4,063 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
10/21/1999 |
|
2730 Hercules Road (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
33,880 |
|
|
8,737 |
|
|
31,612 |
|
|
1,749 |
|
|
8,737 |
|
|
33,361 |
|
|
42,098 |
|
|
(9,834 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
9/28/1998 |
|
F-58
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
2900 Towerview Road (O) |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
3,207 |
|
|
16,337 |
|
|
1,524 |
|
|
3,207 |
|
|
17,861 |
|
|
21,068 |
|
|
(2,513 |
) |
|
1982/2008 |
|
|
12/20/2005 |
|
300 Sentinel Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
30,440 |
|
|
1,517 |
|
|
53,782 |
|
|
119 |
|
|
1,517 |
|
|
53,901 |
|
|
55,418 |
|
|
(1,286 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
302 Sentinel Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
23,500 |
|
|
2,648 |
|
|
29,405 |
|
|
257 |
|
|
2,648 |
|
|
29,662 |
|
|
32,310 |
|
|
(2,136 |
) |
|
2007 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
304 Sentinel Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
37,280 |
|
|
3,411 |
|
|
24,917 |
|
|
105 |
|
|
3,411 |
|
|
25,022 |
|
|
28,433 |
|
|
(3,071 |
) |
|
2005 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
306 Sentinel Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
21,707 |
|
|
3,260 |
|
|
22,592 |
|
|
60 |
|
|
3,260 |
|
|
22,652 |
|
|
25,912 |
|
|
(2,402 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
308 Sentinel Drive (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
15,628 |
|
|
1,386 |
|
|
19,065 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,386 |
|
|
19,065 |
|
|
20,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
310 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,372 |
|
|
1,089 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,372 |
|
|
1,089 |
|
|
3,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
11/14/2003 |
|
312 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
3,138 |
|
|
3,089 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,138 |
|
|
3,089 |
|
|
6,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
11/14/2003 |
|
3120 Fairview Park Drive (O) |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
6,863 |
|
|
35,556 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,863 |
|
|
35,556 |
|
|
42,419 |
|
|
(76 |
) |
|
2008(5 |
) |
|
11/23/2010 |
|
314 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,254 |
|
|
1,331 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,254 |
|
|
1,331 |
|
|
2,585 |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
2008 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
316 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
15,551 |
|
|
2,748 |
|
|
23,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,748 |
|
|
23,905 |
|
|
26,653 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
11/14/2003 |
|
318 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
23,030 |
|
|
2,185 |
|
|
28,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,185 |
|
|
28,426 |
|
|
30,611 |
|
|
(3,427 |
) |
|
2005 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
320 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
19,209 |
|
|
2,067 |
|
|
21,625 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,067 |
|
|
21,625 |
|
|
23,692 |
|
|
(1,607 |
) |
|
2007 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
322 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
22,679 |
|
|
2,605 |
|
|
22,812 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,605 |
|
|
22,812 |
|
|
25,417 |
|
|
(2,290 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
11/14/2003 |
|
324 Sentinel Way (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
17,515 |
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
21,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
21,356 |
|
|
23,012 |
|
|
(262 |
) |
|
2010 |
|
|
6/29/2006 |
|
3535 Northrop Grumman Point (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
18,611 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,163 |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,259 |
|
|
22,259 |
|
|
(1,964 |
) |
|
2008 |
|
|
6/10/2008 |
|
37 Allegheny Avenue (O) |
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
375 West Padonia Road (O) |
|
Timonium, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,483 |
|
|
10,415 |
|
|
1,818 |
|
|
2,483 |
|
|
12,233 |
|
|
14,716 |
|
|
(3,751 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
12/21/1999 |
|
400 Professional Drive (O) |
|
Gaithersburg, MD |
|
|
15,137 |
|
|
3,673 |
|
|
16,826 |
|
|
1,003 |
|
|
3,673 |
|
|
17,829 |
|
|
21,502 |
|
|
(5,219 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
3/5/2004 |
|
410 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,760 |
|
|
1,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
6/29/2003 |
|
4230 Forbes Boulevard (O) |
|
Lanham, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
4,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
4,346 |
|
|
4,857 |
|
|
(1,553 |
) |
|
2003 |
|
|
12/24/2002 |
|
430 National Business Parkway (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
|
6,498 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
|
6,498 |
|
|
8,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
6/29/2006 |
|
44408 Pecan Court (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
817 |
|
|
3,269 |
|
|
103 |
|
|
817 |
|
|
3,372 |
|
|
4,189 |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
44414 Pecan Court (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
1,619 |
|
|
160 |
|
|
405 |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
2,184 |
|
|
(329 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
44417 Pecan Coirt (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
1,939 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
434 |
|
|
1,957 |
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
(501 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
44420 Pecan Court (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
126 |
|
|
344 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,844 |
|
|
(235 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
11/9/2004 |
|
44425 Pecan Court (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
5,234 |
|
|
690 |
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
5,924 |
|
|
7,233 |
|
|
(1,155 |
) |
|
1997 |
|
|
5/5/2004 |
|
45 West Gude Drive (O) |
|
Rockville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
3,102 |
|
|
15,267 |
|
|
388 |
|
|
3,102 |
|
|
15,655 |
|
|
18,757 |
|
|
(3,137 |
) |
|
1987 |
|
|
4/7/2005 |
|
45310 Abell House Lane (O) |
|
California, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,265 |
|
|
3,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,265 |
|
|
3,485 |
|
|
5,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
8/30/2010 |
|
46579 Expedition Drive (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,406 |
|
|
5,796 |
|
|
945 |
|
|
1,406 |
|
|
6,741 |
|
|
8,147 |
|
|
(1,575 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
46591 Expedition Drive (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
7,199 |
|
|
138 |
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
7,337 |
|
|
8,537 |
|
|
(712 |
) |
|
2005-2006 |
|
|
3/24/2004 |
|
4851 Stonecroft Boulevard (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
16,405 |
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
11,558 |
|
|
21 |
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
11,579 |
|
|
13,457 |
|
|
(1,800 |
) |
|
2004 |
|
|
8/14/2002 |
|
4940 Campbell Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,379 |
|
|
3,858 |
|
|
700 |
|
|
1,379 |
|
|
4,558 |
|
|
5,937 |
|
|
(593 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
4969 Mercantile Road (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,308 |
|
|
4,456 |
|
|
62 |
|
|
1,308 |
|
|
4,518 |
|
|
5,826 |
|
|
(449 |
) |
|
1983 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
4979 Mercantile Road (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,299 |
|
|
4,686 |
|
|
70 |
|
|
1,299 |
|
|
4,756 |
|
|
6,055 |
|
|
(485 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
502 Washington Avenue (O) |
|
Towson, MD |
|
|
4,808 |
|
|
826 |
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
826 |
|
|
8,680 |
|
|
9,506 |
|
|
(1,591 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
5020 Campbell Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,014 |
|
|
3,136 |
|
|
88 |
|
|
1,014 |
|
|
3,224 |
|
|
4,238 |
|
|
(458 |
) |
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
5022 Campbell Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
624 |
|
|
1,924 |
|
|
133 |
|
|
624 |
|
|
2,057 |
|
|
2,681 |
|
|
(310 |
) |
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
5024 Campbell Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
2,420 |
|
|
218 |
|
|
767 |
|
|
2,638 |
|
|
3,405 |
|
|
(500 |
) |
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
F-59
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
5026 Campbell Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
2,138 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
700 |
|
|
2,145 |
|
|
2,845 |
|
|
(293 |
) |
|
1986-1988 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
525 Babcock Road (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
355 |
|
|
974 |
|
|
|
|
|
355 |
|
|
974 |
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
1967 |
|
|
7/12/2007 |
|
5325 Nottingham Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
816 |
|
|
3,976 |
|
|
137 |
|
|
816 |
|
|
4,113 |
|
|
4,929 |
|
|
(468 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
5355 Nottingham Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
761 |
|
|
3,562 |
|
|
1,280 |
|
|
761 |
|
|
4,842 |
|
|
5,603 |
|
|
(387 |
) |
|
2005 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
5520 Research Park Drive (O) |
|
Catonsville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,348 |
|
|
18,348 |
|
|
(710 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
4/4/2006 |
|
5522 Research Park Drive (O) |
|
Catonsville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,550 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,550 |
|
|
4,550 |
|
|
(387 |
) |
|
2007 |
|
|
3/8/2006 |
|
565 Space Center Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
12,720 |
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
12,720 |
|
|
13,364 |
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
7/8/2005 |
|
5725 Mark Dabling Blvd. (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
12,882 |
|
|
900 |
|
|
11,397 |
|
|
2,363 |
|
|
900 |
|
|
13,760 |
|
|
14,660 |
|
|
(3,115 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
5/18/2006 |
|
5755 Mark Dabling Boulevard (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
10,208 |
|
|
799 |
|
|
10,324 |
|
|
2,227 |
|
|
799 |
|
|
12,551 |
|
|
13,350 |
|
|
(2,202 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
5/18/2006 |
|
5775 Mark Dabling Boulevard (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
12,477 |
|
|
1,035 |
|
|
12,440 |
|
|
609 |
|
|
1,035 |
|
|
13,049 |
|
|
14,084 |
|
|
(3,195 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
5/18/2006 |
|
5825 University Research Court (O) |
|
College Park, MD |
|
|
16,910 |
|
|
|
|
|
21,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,839 |
|
|
21,839 |
|
|
(1,049 |
) |
|
2008 |
|
|
1/29/2008 |
|
5850 University Research Court (O) |
|
College Park, MD |
|
|
23,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
30,024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,024 |
|
|
30,024 |
|
|
(731 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
1/29/2008 |
|
655 Space Center Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
14,944 |
|
|
745 |
|
|
17,668 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
745 |
|
|
17,681 |
|
|
18,426 |
|
|
(1,183 |
) |
|
2008 |
|
|
7/8/2005 |
|
6700 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
1,755 |
|
|
7,019 |
|
|
3,520 |
|
|
1,755 |
|
|
10,539 |
|
|
12,294 |
|
|
(3,836 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
5/14/2001 |
|
6708 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
6,320 |
|
|
897 |
|
|
3,588 |
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
897 |
|
|
5,168 |
|
|
6,065 |
|
|
(1,954 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
5/14/2001 |
|
6711 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
23,391 |
|
|
2,683 |
|
|
22,557 |
|
|
117 |
|
|
2,683 |
|
|
22,674 |
|
|
25,357 |
|
|
(2,299 |
) |
|
2006-2007 |
|
|
9/28/2000 |
|
6716 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
4,969 |
|
|
1,852 |
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
6,821 |
|
|
8,063 |
|
|
(2,861 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
12/31/1998 |
|
6721 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
30,276 |
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
34,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
34,090 |
|
|
35,843 |
|
|
(1,529 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
9/28/2000 |
|
6724 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
10,939 |
|
|
449 |
|
|
5,039 |
|
|
161 |
|
|
449 |
|
|
5,200 |
|
|
5,649 |
|
|
(1,434 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
5/14/2001 |
|
6731 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
20,143 |
|
|
2,807 |
|
|
18,975 |
|
|
1,121 |
|
|
2,807 |
|
|
20,096 |
|
|
22,903 |
|
|
(5,012 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
3/29/2000 |
|
6740 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,424 |
|
|
5,696 |
|
|
2,850 |
|
|
1,424 |
|
|
8,546 |
|
|
9,970 |
|
|
(3,264 |
) |
|
1992 |
|
|
12/31/1998 |
|
6741 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
675 |
|
|
1,718 |
|
|
114 |
|
|
675 |
|
|
1,832 |
|
|
2,507 |
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
2008 |
|
|
9/28/2000 |
|
6750 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,263 |
|
|
12,461 |
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
1,263 |
|
|
14,331 |
|
|
15,594 |
|
|
(4,860 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
12/31/1998 |
|
6760 Alexander Bell Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
3,561 |
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
890 |
|
|
5,238 |
|
|
6,128 |
|
|
(2,259 |
) |
|
1991 |
|
|
12/31/1998 |
|
6940 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
17,300 |
|
|
3,545 |
|
|
9,916 |
|
|
2,560 |
|
|
3,545 |
|
|
12,476 |
|
|
16,021 |
|
|
(4,256 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
11/13/1998 |
|
6950 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
14,039 |
|
|
3,596 |
|
|
14,269 |
|
|
936 |
|
|
3,596 |
|
|
15,205 |
|
|
18,801 |
|
|
(5,155 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
10/22/1998 |
|
F-60
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
7000 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
15,800 |
|
|
3,131 |
|
|
12,103 |
|
|
153 |
|
|
3,131 |
|
|
12,256 |
|
|
15,387 |
|
|
(2,571 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
5/31/2002 |
|
7015 Albert Einstein Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,987 |
|
|
2,058 |
|
|
6,093 |
|
|
826 |
|
|
2,058 |
|
|
6,919 |
|
|
8,977 |
|
|
(1,689 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
12/1/2005 |
|
7061 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,359 |
|
|
729 |
|
|
3,094 |
|
|
560 |
|
|
729 |
|
|
3,654 |
|
|
4,383 |
|
|
(1,137 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
8/30/2001 |
|
7063 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,830 |
|
|
902 |
|
|
3,684 |
|
|
1,035 |
|
|
902 |
|
|
4,719 |
|
|
5,621 |
|
|
(1,756 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
8/30/2001 |
|
7065 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,745 |
|
|
919 |
|
|
3,763 |
|
|
927 |
|
|
919 |
|
|
4,690 |
|
|
5,609 |
|
|
(1,527 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
8/30/2001 |
|
7067 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
8,003 |
|
|
1,829 |
|
|
11,823 |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
1,829 |
|
|
13,602 |
|
|
15,431 |
|
|
(3,207 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
8/30/2001 |
|
7102 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
277 |
|
|
203 |
|
|
209 |
|
|
277 |
|
|
412 |
|
|
689 |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7104 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
613 |
|
|
445 |
|
|
572 |
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
1,630 |
|
|
(367 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7106 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
306 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
229 |
|
|
313 |
|
|
542 |
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7108 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
252 |
|
|
117 |
|
|
171 |
|
|
369 |
|
|
540 |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7125 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
844 |
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
224 |
|
|
844 |
|
|
2,120 |
|
|
2,964 |
|
|
(538 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7125 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
35,258 |
|
|
20,487 |
|
|
47,054 |
|
|
2,887 |
|
|
20,487 |
|
|
49,941 |
|
|
70,428 |
|
|
(7,293 |
) |
|
1973/1999 |
|
|
6/29/2006 |
|
7127 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
455 |
|
|
221 |
|
|
142 |
|
|
676 |
|
|
818 |
|
|
(184 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7129 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
610 |
|
|
294 |
|
|
129 |
|
|
904 |
|
|
1,033 |
|
|
(370 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7130 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
6,519 |
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
4,359 |
|
|
1,764 |
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
6,123 |
|
|
7,473 |
|
|
(844 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
9/19/2005 |
|
7131 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
368 |
|
|
282 |
|
|
105 |
|
|
650 |
|
|
755 |
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7134 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,949 |
|
|
704 |
|
|
1,971 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
704 |
|
|
1,977 |
|
|
2,681 |
|
|
(396 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
9/19/2005 |
|
7138 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
5,406 |
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
3,518 |
|
|
1,961 |
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
5,479 |
|
|
6,583 |
|
|
(1,530 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
9/19/2005 |
|
7142 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
6,280 |
|
|
1,342 |
|
|
3,978 |
|
|
1,326 |
|
|
1,342 |
|
|
5,304 |
|
|
6,646 |
|
|
(888 |
) |
|
1994 |
|
|
9/19/2005 |
|
7150 Columbia Gateway Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
4,850 |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
3,429 |
|
|
207 |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
3,636 |
|
|
4,668 |
|
|
(680 |
) |
|
1991 |
|
|
9/19/2005 |
|
7150 Riverwood Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
4,879 |
|
|
1,821 |
|
|
4,388 |
|
|
165 |
|
|
1,821 |
|
|
4,553 |
|
|
6,374 |
|
|
(618 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
7152 Windsor Boulevard (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
879 |
|
|
6,764 |
|
|
187 |
|
|
879 |
|
|
6,951 |
|
|
7,830 |
|
|
(1,039 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7160 Riverwood Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
7,652 |
|
|
2,732 |
|
|
7,006 |
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
2,732 |
|
|
8,108 |
|
|
10,840 |
|
|
(1,899 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
7170 Riverwood Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
3,441 |
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
3,096 |
|
|
162 |
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
3,258 |
|
|
4,541 |
|
|
(435 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
7175 Riverwood Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,788 |
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,788 |
|
|
956 |
|
|
2,744 |
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
1996 |
|
|
7/27/2005 |
|
7200 Riverwood Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
4,089 |
|
|
16,356 |
|
|
2,348 |
|
|
4,089 |
|
|
18,704 |
|
|
22,793 |
|
|
(5,602 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
10/13/1998 |
|
7205 Riverwood Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,367 |
|
|
2,787 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,367 |
|
|
2,787 |
|
|
4,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
7/27/2005 |
|
7210 Ambassador Road (O) |
|
Woodlawn, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,481 |
|
|
6,257 |
|
|
241 |
|
|
1,481 |
|
|
6,498 |
|
|
7,979 |
|
|
(1,501 |
) |
|
1972 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
7240 Parkway Drive (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,496 |
|
|
5,985 |
|
|
2,678 |
|
|
1,496 |
|
|
8,663 |
|
|
10,159 |
|
|
(2,929 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
4/18/2000 |
|
7272 Park Circle Drive (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
5,509 |
|
|
1,479 |
|
|
6,300 |
|
|
1,262 |
|
|
1,479 |
|
|
7,562 |
|
|
9,041 |
|
|
(1,022 |
) |
|
1991/1996 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
7318 Parkway Drive (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
972 |
|
|
3,888 |
|
|
785 |
|
|
972 |
|
|
4,673 |
|
|
5,645 |
|
|
(1,316 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
4/16/1999 |
|
7320 Parkway Drive (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
905 |
|
|
3,570 |
|
|
1,140 |
|
|
905 |
|
|
4,710 |
|
|
5,615 |
|
|
(1,197 |
) |
|
1983 |
|
|
4/4/2002 |
|
745 Space Center Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
7,667 |
|
|
654 |
|
|
10,003 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
654 |
|
|
10,006 |
|
|
10,660 |
|
|
(1,088 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
7/8/2005 |
|
7467 Ridge Road (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,629 |
|
|
6,517 |
|
|
1,609 |
|
|
1,629 |
|
|
8,126 |
|
|
9,755 |
|
|
(2,783 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
4/28/1999 |
|
7468 Candlewood Drive (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
5,599 |
|
|
34,713 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
5,599 |
|
|
34,716 |
|
|
40,315 |
|
|
|
|
|
1979/1982(5 |
) |
|
12/20/2005 |
|
F-61
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
7700 Potranco Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
14,020 |
|
|
38,611 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
14,020 |
|
|
38,618 |
|
|
52,638 |
|
|
(3,765 |
) |
|
1982/1985 |
|
|
3/30/2005 |
|
7700-1 Potranco Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,066 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,066 |
|
|
1,066 |
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
2007 |
|
|
3/30/2005 |
|
7700-5 Potranco Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,884 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,884 |
|
|
1,884 |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
3/30/2005 |
|
7740 Milestone Parkway (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
16,753 |
|
|
3,825 |
|
|
25,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,825 |
|
|
25,148 |
|
|
28,973 |
|
|
(956 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
7/2/2007 |
|
7770 Backlick Road (O) |
|
Springfield, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
3/10/2010 |
|
7923 Honeygo Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
715 |
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
175 |
|
|
715 |
|
|
2,081 |
|
|
2,796 |
|
|
(341 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
7939 Honeygo Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
869 |
|
|
2,716 |
|
|
139 |
|
|
869 |
|
|
2,855 |
|
|
3,724 |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
7941-7949 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,087 |
|
|
3,782 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
2,087 |
|
|
3,794 |
|
|
5,881 |
|
|
(497 |
) |
|
1996 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
800 International Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
8,408 |
|
|
775 |
|
|
3,099 |
|
|
909 |
|
|
775 |
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
4,783 |
|
|
(1,399 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
8000 Potranco Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
16,702 |
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
19,147 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
19,147 |
|
|
21,111 |
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
2010 |
|
|
1/20/2006 |
|
8003 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
1,611 |
|
|
48 |
|
|
611 |
|
|
1,659 |
|
|
2,270 |
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8007 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,434 |
|
|
3,336 |
|
|
179 |
|
|
1,434 |
|
|
3,515 |
|
|
4,949 |
|
|
(540 |
) |
|
1995 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8010 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,349 |
|
|
3,262 |
|
|
1,588 |
|
|
1,349 |
|
|
4,850 |
|
|
6,199 |
|
|
(422 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8013 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
1,364 |
|
|
642 |
|
|
1,536 |
|
|
219 |
|
|
642 |
|
|
1,755 |
|
|
2,397 |
|
|
(273 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8015 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
980 |
|
|
446 |
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
111 |
|
|
446 |
|
|
1,227 |
|
|
1,673 |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8019 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
1,617 |
|
|
680 |
|
|
1,898 |
|
|
96 |
|
|
680 |
|
|
1,994 |
|
|
2,674 |
|
|
(385 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8020 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,184 |
|
|
3,767 |
|
|
2,053 |
|
|
2,184 |
|
|
5,820 |
|
|
8,004 |
|
|
(412 |
) |
|
1997 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8023 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
1,413 |
|
|
651 |
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
|
|
|
651 |
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
2,254 |
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
1990 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8029 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
5,637 |
|
|
962 |
|
|
2,719 |
|
|
|
|
|
962 |
|
|
2,719 |
|
|
3,681 |
|
|
(419 |
) |
|
1988/2004 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8030 Potranco Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
17,140 |
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
19,287 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
19,287 |
|
|
21,251 |
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
2010 |
|
|
1/20/2006 |
|
8031 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
5,637 |
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
6,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
6,975 |
|
|
9,523 |
|
|
(980 |
) |
|
1988/2004 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8094 Sandpiper Circle (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,960 |
|
|
3,716 |
|
|
206 |
|
|
1,960 |
|
|
3,922 |
|
|
5,882 |
|
|
(576 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8098 Sandpiper Circle (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
3,651 |
|
|
46 |
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
3,697 |
|
|
5,494 |
|
|
(368 |
) |
|
1998 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8100 Potranco Road (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
1,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
1,360 |
|
|
3,324 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
6/14/2005 |
|
8110 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
11,956 |
|
|
2,285 |
|
|
10,117 |
|
|
29 |
|
|
2,285 |
|
|
10,146 |
|
|
12,431 |
|
|
(1,464 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8114 Sandpiper Circle (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,634 |
|
|
4,277 |
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
1,634 |
|
|
5,494 |
|
|
7,128 |
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8120 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
|
541 |
|
|
2,558 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8130 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
|
2,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
|
2,256 |
|
|
4,273 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8133 Perry Hall Boulevard (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
850 |
|
|
2,429 |
|
|
325 |
|
|
850 |
|
|
2,754 |
|
|
3,604 |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
1/10/2007 |
|
8140 Corporate Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
11,181 |
|
|
2,158 |
|
|
8,457 |
|
|
1,724 |
|
|
2,158 |
|
|
10,181 |
|
|
12,339 |
|
|
(2,036 |
) |
|
2003 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
849 International Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
11,692 |
|
|
1,356 |
|
|
5,426 |
|
|
2,681 |
|
|
1,356 |
|
|
8,107 |
|
|
9,463 |
|
|
(3,437 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
2/23/1999 |
|
8615 Ridgely's Choice (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,078 |
|
|
3,613 |
|
|
621 |
|
|
1,078 |
|
|
4,234 |
|
|
5,312 |
|
|
(648 |
) |
|
2005 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
8621 Robert Fulton Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
11,000 |
|
|
2,317 |
|
|
12,642 |
|
|
199 |
|
|
2,317 |
|
|
12,841 |
|
|
15,158 |
|
|
(1,622 |
) |
|
2005-2006 |
|
|
6/10/2005 |
|
8661 Robert Fulton Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
1,510 |
|
|
3,764 |
|
|
1,026 |
|
|
1,510 |
|
|
4,790 |
|
|
6,300 |
|
|
(1,181 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
12/30/2003 |
|
8671 Robert Fulton Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
7,600 |
|
|
1,718 |
|
|
4,280 |
|
|
1,670 |
|
|
1,718 |
|
|
5,950 |
|
|
7,668 |
|
|
(1,514 |
) |
|
2002 |
|
|
12/30/2003 |
|
880 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
18,900 |
|
|
2,003 |
|
|
9,442 |
|
|
6,689 |
|
|
2,003 |
|
|
16,131 |
|
|
18,134 |
|
|
(6,243 |
) |
|
1981 |
|
|
8/3/2001 |
|
881 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
11,812 |
|
|
1,034 |
|
|
4,137 |
|
|
1,057 |
|
|
1,034 |
|
|
5,194 |
|
|
6,228 |
|
|
(1,638 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
891 Elkrdige Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,160 |
|
|
4,750 |
|
|
1,739 |
|
|
1,160 |
|
|
6,489 |
|
|
7,649 |
|
|
(2,083 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
7/2/2001 |
|
F-62
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
900 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,993 |
|
|
7,972 |
|
|
2,445 |
|
|
1,993 |
|
|
10,417 |
|
|
12,410 |
|
|
(3,798 |
) |
|
1982 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
900 International Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
8,008 |
|
|
981 |
|
|
3,922 |
|
|
834 |
|
|
981 |
|
|
4,756 |
|
|
5,737 |
|
|
(1,577 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
901 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,151 |
|
|
4,416 |
|
|
1,192 |
|
|
1,151 |
|
|
5,608 |
|
|
6,759 |
|
|
(1,730 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
7/2/2001 |
|
9020 Mendenhall Court (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,233 |
|
|
4,571 |
|
|
392 |
|
|
1,233 |
|
|
4,963 |
|
|
6,196 |
|
|
(810 |
) |
|
1982/2005 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
911 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,215 |
|
|
4,861 |
|
|
1,998 |
|
|
1,215 |
|
|
6,859 |
|
|
8,074 |
|
|
(2,340 |
) |
|
1985 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
9130 Guilford Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
798 |
|
|
230 |
|
|
939 |
|
|
101 |
|
|
230 |
|
|
1,040 |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
(299 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
4/4/2002 |
|
9140 Guilford Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,733 |
|
|
794 |
|
|
3,209 |
|
|
756 |
|
|
794 |
|
|
3,965 |
|
|
4,759 |
|
|
(1,150 |
) |
|
1983 |
|
|
4/4/2002 |
|
9150 Guilford Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
319 |
|
|
1,291 |
|
|
318 |
|
|
319 |
|
|
1,609 |
|
|
1,928 |
|
|
(506 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
4/4/2002 |
|
9160 Guilford Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,287 |
|
|
665 |
|
|
2,686 |
|
|
1,203 |
|
|
665 |
|
|
3,889 |
|
|
4,554 |
|
|
(1,645 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
4/4/2002 |
|
920 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
7,287 |
|
|
2,101 |
|
|
9,765 |
|
|
687 |
|
|
2,101 |
|
|
10,452 |
|
|
12,553 |
|
|
(3,564 |
) |
|
1982 |
|
|
7/2/2001 |
|
921 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
4,176 |
|
|
639 |
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
4,815 |
|
|
5,859 |
|
|
(1,739 |
) |
|
1983 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
930 International Drive (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
8,488 |
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
4,053 |
|
|
912 |
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
4,965 |
|
|
5,978 |
|
|
(1,722 |
) |
|
1986 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
938 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
4,045 |
|
|
1,204 |
|
|
4,727 |
|
|
346 |
|
|
1,204 |
|
|
5,073 |
|
|
6,277 |
|
|
(1,246 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
7/2/2001 |
|
939 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
939 |
|
|
3,756 |
|
|
1,408 |
|
|
939 |
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
6,103 |
|
|
(2,065 |
) |
|
1983 |
|
|
4/30/1998 |
|
940 Elkridge Landing Road (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
3,071 |
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
4,705 |
|
|
170 |
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
4,875 |
|
|
5,975 |
|
|
(1,081 |
) |
|
1984 |
|
|
7/2/2001 |
|
9651 Hornbaker Road (D) |
|
Manassas, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
6,050 |
|
|
119,586 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,050 |
|
|
119,586 |
|
|
125,636 |
|
|
(173 |
) |
|
2010 |
|
|
9/14/2010 |
|
9690 Deereco Road (O) |
|
Timonium, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
3,415 |
|
|
13,723 |
|
|
4,361 |
|
|
3,415 |
|
|
18,084 |
|
|
21,499 |
|
|
(6,665 |
) |
|
1988 |
|
|
12/21/1999 |
|
9700 Patuxent Woods Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,057 |
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
2,621 |
|
|
314 |
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
2,935 |
|
|
4,264 |
|
|
(490 |
) |
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9710 Patuxent Woods Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
993 |
|
|
648 |
|
|
1,260 |
|
|
215 |
|
|
648 |
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
2,123 |
|
|
(237 |
) |
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9720 Patuxent Woods Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,712 |
|
|
1,701 |
|
|
3,508 |
|
|
174 |
|
|
1,701 |
|
|
3,682 |
|
|
5,383 |
|
|
(677 |
) |
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9730 Patuxent Woods Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,095 |
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
2,707 |
|
|
143 |
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
2,850 |
|
|
4,168 |
|
|
(541 |
) |
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9740 Patuxent Woods Drive (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
2,515 |
|
|
1,628 |
|
|
3,201 |
|
|
755 |
|
|
1,628 |
|
|
3,956 |
|
|
5,584 |
|
|
(615 |
) |
|
1986/2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
980 Technology Court (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
2,046 |
|
|
341 |
|
|
526 |
|
|
2,387 |
|
|
2,913 |
|
|
(449 |
) |
|
1995 |
|
|
9/28/2005 |
|
985 Space Center Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
777 |
|
|
12,287 |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
777 |
|
|
13,319 |
|
|
14,096 |
|
|
(2,081 |
) |
|
1989 |
|
|
9/28/2005 |
|
9900 Franklin Square Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
979 |
|
|
3,466 |
|
|
44 |
|
|
979 |
|
|
3,510 |
|
|
4,489 |
|
|
(493 |
) |
|
1999 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9910 Franklin Square Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
5,352 |
|
|
1,219 |
|
|
6,590 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
1,219 |
|
|
6,615 |
|
|
7,834 |
|
|
(969 |
) |
|
2005 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9920 Franklin Square Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
5,293 |
|
|
1,043 |
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
6,336 |
|
|
7,394 |
|
|
(857 |
) |
|
2006 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9925 Federal Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
1,129 |
|
|
7,042 |
|
|
17 |
|
|
1,129 |
|
|
7,059 |
|
|
8,188 |
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
2008 |
|
|
9/28/2005 |
|
9930 Franklin Square Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,137 |
|
|
3,921 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
1,137 |
|
|
3,930 |
|
|
5,067 |
|
|
(571 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
F-63
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
9940 Franklin Square Drive (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
3,382 |
|
|
281 |
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
3,663 |
|
|
4,715 |
|
|
(447 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
1/9/2007 |
|
9945 Federal Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
1,854 |
|
|
6,864 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,854 |
|
|
6,864 |
|
|
8,718 |
|
|
(257 |
) |
|
2009 |
|
|
9/28/2005 |
|
9950 Federal Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
877 |
|
|
5,045 |
|
|
671 |
|
|
877 |
|
|
5,716 |
|
|
6,593 |
|
|
(1,464 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
9960 Federal Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
3,830 |
|
|
126 |
|
|
695 |
|
|
3,956 |
|
|
4,651 |
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
2001 |
|
|
12/22/2005 |
|
9965 Federal Drive (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
1,401 |
|
|
6,061 |
|
|
519 |
|
|
1,401 |
|
|
6,580 |
|
|
7,981 |
|
|
(602 |
) |
|
1983/2007 |
|
|
1/19/2006 |
|
9965 Federal Drive Land (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
12/22/2005 |
|
999 Corporate Boulevard (O) |
|
Linthicum, MD |
|
|
13,530 |
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
8,332 |
|
|
484 |
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
8,816 |
|
|
10,003 |
|
|
(2,619 |
) |
|
2000 |
|
|
8/1/1999 |
|
Arborcrest Business Park (O) |
|
Blue Bell, PA |
|
|
|
|
|
22,481 |
|
|
124,951 |
|
|
1,054 |
|
|
22,481 |
|
|
126,005 |
|
|
148,486 |
|
|
(29,620 |
) |
|
1991-1996(5 |
) |
|
10/14/1997 |
|
Arundel Preserve (O) |
|
Hanover, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,702 |
|
|
4,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
(7 |
) |
Canton Crossing Land Parcel (O) |
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
16,085 |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,085 |
|
|
76 |
|
|
16,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
10/27/2009 |
|
Columbia Gateway Parcel T-11 (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
6,387 |
|
|
2,910 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,387 |
|
|
2,910 |
|
|
9,297 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
9/20/2004 |
|
Commons at Nottingham Ridge (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
12,017 |
|
|
2,490 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,017 |
|
|
2,490 |
|
|
14,507 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
Dahlgren Land Parcel (O) |
|
Dahlgren, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
910 |
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
|
|
910 |
|
|
226 |
|
|
1,136 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
3/16/2005 |
|
Expedition VII (O) |
|
Lexington Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
705 |
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
|
|
705 |
|
|
733 |
|
|
1,438 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
3/24/2004 |
|
Fort Ritchie (M) |
|
Cascade, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
4,798 |
|
|
22,489 |
|
|
493 |
|
|
4,798 |
|
|
22,982 |
|
|
27,780 |
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
Various(5)(8) |
|
|
10/5/2006 |
|
Indian Head (O) |
|
Bryans Road, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
5,822 |
|
|
1,606 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,822 |
|
|
1,606 |
|
|
7,428 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
10/23/2006 |
|
InterQuest Land Parcel (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
19,043 |
|
|
9,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
19,043 |
|
|
9,616 |
|
|
28,659 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
9/28/2005 |
|
4985 Mercantile Road (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,177 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,177 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
1,188 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
M Square Research Park (O) |
|
College Park, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,405 |
|
|
2,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
1/29/2008 |
|
Cedar Knolls (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,151 |
|
|
1,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
11/14/2003 |
|
National Business Park North (O) |
|
Annapolis Junction, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
28,350 |
|
|
21,233 |
|
|
|
|
|
28,350 |
|
|
21,233 |
|
|
49,583 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
6/29/2006 |
|
North Gate Business Park (O) |
|
Aberdeen, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
4,575 |
|
|
6,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,575 |
|
|
6,888 |
|
|
11,463 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
9/14/2007 |
|
Nottingham Ridge (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
12,087 |
|
|
5,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,087 |
|
|
5,105 |
|
|
17,192 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
Old Annapolis Road (O) |
|
Columbia, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,637 |
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
2,103 |
|
|
1,637 |
|
|
7,603 |
|
|
9,240 |
|
|
(1,892 |
) |
|
1974/1985 |
|
|
12/14/2000 |
|
Patriot Park (O) |
|
Colorado Springs, CO |
|
|
|
|
|
8,768 |
|
|
9,147 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,768 |
|
|
9,147 |
|
|
17,915 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
7/12/2007 |
|
Patriot Ridge (O) |
|
Springfield, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
24,812 |
|
|
2,675 |
|
|
|
|
|
24,812 |
|
|
2,675 |
|
|
27,487 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
3/10/2010 |
|
Philadelphia Road & Route 43 (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,008 |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,008 |
|
|
343 |
|
|
1,351 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
Redstone Gateway (O) |
|
Huntsville, AL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,634 |
|
|
14,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
3/23/2010 |
|
Rockville Corporate Center (O) |
|
Rockville, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
6,244 |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,244 |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
9,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
4/7/2005 |
|
Sentry Gateway (O) |
|
San Antonio, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
16,890 |
|
|
4,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,890 |
|
|
4,540 |
|
|
21,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
3/30/2005 |
|
Thatcher Farm (O) |
|
Frederick, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
8,703 |
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,703 |
|
|
472 |
|
|
9,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
8/28/2008 |
|
Thomas Johnson Drive Land (O) |
|
Frederick, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,092 |
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,092 |
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
2,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
10/21/2005 |
|
Waterview III (O) |
|
Herndon, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
9,614 |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
9,614 |
|
|
81 |
|
|
9,695 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
4/29/2004 |
|
F-64
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Amounts Carried
At Close of Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property (Type)(1)
|
|
Location |
|
Encumbrances(2) |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Land |
|
Building
and Land
Improvements |
|
Total(3) |
|
Accumulated
Depreciation(4) |
|
Year Built or
Renovated |
|
Date
Acquired |
|
Westfields Corporate Center (O) |
|
Chantilly, VA |
|
|
|
|
|
10,750 |
|
|
3,971 |
|
|
|
|
|
10,750 |
|
|
3,971 |
|
|
14,721 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
Various |
|
White Marsh Commerce Center II (O) |
|
White Marsh, MD |
|
|
|
|
|
1,613 |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,613 |
|
|
66 |
|
|
1,679 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
Other Developments, including intercompany eliminations (V) |
|
Various |
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
(119 |
) |
|
257 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
138 |
|
|
145 |
|
|
159 |
|
|
Various |
|
|
Various |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,639,835 |
|
$ |
757,697 |
|
$ |
2,947,874 |
|
$ |
242,916 |
|
$ |
757,697 |
|
$ |
3,190,790 |
|
$ |
3,948,487 |
|
$ |
(503,032 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- (1)
- A
legend for the Property Type follows: (O) = Office Property; (D) = Data Center; (R) = Retail Property; (M) =
Mixed-Use Property; and (V) = Various.
- (2)
- Excludes
our unsecured Revolving Credit Facility of $295.0 million, senior exchangeable notes of $383.7 million, unsecured notes payable of
$1.9 million, and net premiums on the remaining loans of $3.2 million.
- (3)
- The
aggregate cost of these assets for Federal income tax purposes was approximately $3.6 billion at December 31, 2010.
- (4)
- The
estimated lives over which depreciation is recognized follow: Buildings improvements: 10-40 years; and tenant improvements: related
lease terms.
- (5)
- Under
construction, development or redevelopment at December 31, 2010.
- (6)
- Held
for future development at December 31, 2010.
- (7)
- Development
in progress in anticipation of acquisition.
- (8)
- Includes
residential housing units and commercial buildings, as well as commercial assets under development.
F-65
Table of Contents
The following table summarizes our changes in cost of properties for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
3,452,512 |
|
$ |
3,121,576 |
|
$ |
2,893,583 |
|
Acquisitions of operating properties |
|
|
187,052 |
|
|
119,249 |
|
|
36,069 |
|
Improvements and other additions |
|
|
338,358 |
|
|
211,752 |
|
|
239,898 |
|
Sales |
|
|
(29,430 |
) |
|
(65 |
) |
|
(32,071 |
) |
Retirements/disposals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,903 |
) |
Other |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
3,948,487 |
|
$ |
3,452,512 |
|
$ |
3,121,576 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
following table summarizes our changes in accumulated depreciation for the same time periods (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
422,612 |
|
$ |
343,110 |
|
$ |
288,747 |
|
Depreciation expense |
|
|
88,048 |
|
|
79,650 |
|
|
74,158 |
|
Sales |
|
|
(7,764 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(3,892 |
) |
Retirements/disposals |
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
(15,903 |
) |
Other |
|
|
136 |
|
|
(146 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
503,032 |
|
$ |
422,612 |
|
$ |
343,110 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-66