UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010
Commission file number 1-12993
ALEXANDRIA REAL ESTATE EQUITIES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Maryland (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
|
95-4502084 (IRS Employer I.D. Number) |
385 East Colorado Boulevard
Suite 299
Pasadena, California 91101
(Address of principal executive offices including zip code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (626) 578-0777
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
Title of Each Class |
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered |
|
Common Stock, $.01 par value per share |
|
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. Yes [X] No [ ]
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes [ ] No [X]
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. Yes [X] 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). Yes [X] 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. [X]
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Large accelerated filer [X] Accelerated filer [ ]
|
Non-accelerated filer [ ] (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Smaller reporting company [ ] |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes [ ] No [X]
The aggregate market value of the shares of Common Stock held by non-affiliates of registrant was approximately $3.1 billion based on the closing price for such shares on the New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2010.
As of February 23, 2011, the registrant had outstanding 55,414,810 shares of Common Stock.
Documents Incorporated By Reference
Part III of this annual report on Form 10-K incorporates certain information by reference from the registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be filed within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year covered by this annual report on Form 10-K in connection with the registrant’s annual meeting of stockholders to be held on or about May 25, 2011.
ALEXANDRIA REAL ESTATE EQUITIES, INC.
Certain information and statements included in this annual report on Form 10-K, including, without limitation, statements containing the words “believes,” “expects,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seeks,” “approximately,” “intends,” “plans,” “estimates,” or “anticipates,” or the negative of these words or similar words, constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties regarding events, conditions, and financial trends that may affect our future plans of operation, business strategy, results of operations, and financial position. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those included within or contemplated by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, the following:
· negative worldwide economic, financial, and banking conditions;
· worldwide economic recession, lack of confidence, and/or high structural unemployment;
· financial, banking, and credit market conditions;
· the seizure or illiquidity of credit markets;
· our inability to obtain capital (debt, construction financing, and/or equity) or refinance debt maturities;
· our inability to comply with financial covenants in our debt agreements;
· inflation or deflation;
· prolonged period of stagnant growth;
· increased interest rates and operating costs;
· adverse economic or real estate developments in our markets;
· our failure to successfully complete and lease our existing space held for redevelopment and new properties acquired for that purpose and any properties undergoing development;
· significant decreases in our active development, active redevelopment, or preconstruction activities resulting in significant increases in our interest, operating, and payroll expenses;
· our failure to successfully operate or lease acquired properties;
· the financial condition of our insurance carriers;
· general and local economic conditions;
· adverse developments concerning the life science industry and/or our life science client tenants;
· the nature and extent of future competition;
· decreased rental rates, increased vacancy rates, or failure to renew or replace expiring leases;
· defaults on or non-renewal of leases by tenants;
· availability of and our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel;
· our failure to comply with laws or changes in law;
· compliance with environmental laws;
· our failure to maintain our status as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”);
· changes in laws, regulations, and financial accounting standards;
· certain ownership interests outside the United States may subject us to different or greater risks than those associated with our domestic operations; and
· fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.
This list of risks and uncertainties, however, is only a summary and is not intended to be exhaustive. Additional information regarding risk factors that may affect us is included under the headings “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this annual report on Form 10-K. Readers of our annual report on Form 10-K should also read our Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and other publicly filed documents for further discussion regarding such factors.
As used in this annual report on Form 10-K, references to the “Company,” “we,” “our,” and “us” refer to Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
General
We are a Maryland corporation formed in October 1994 that has elected to be taxed as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. We are the largest owner and preeminent REIT focused principally on cluster development through the ownership, operation, management, selective acquisition, development, and redevelopment of properties containing life science laboratory space. We are the leading provider of high-quality environmentally sustainable real estate, technical infrastructure, and services to the broad and diverse life science industry. Client tenants include institutional (universities and independent not-for-profit institutions), pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, product, service, and government agencies. Our primary business objective is to maximize stockholder value by providing our stockholders with the greatest possible total return based on a multi-faceted platform of internal and external growth. Our operating platform is based on the principle of “clustering,” with assets and operations located adjacent to life science entities driving growth and technological advances within each cluster. As of December 31, 2010, we had 167 properties (163 properties located in 10 states in the United States and four properties located in Canada) containing approximately 13.7 million rentable square feet (including spaces undergoing active redevelopment and properties undergoing ground-up development of approximately 475,818 rentable square feet).
2010 highlights
Acquisitions and dispositions
In March 2010, we sold one property located in the Seattle, Washington market aggregating approximately 71,000 rentable square feet for approximately $11.8 million. This property was located outside of our primary submarket location in Seattle.
In August 2010, we entered into definitive agreements to acquire three life science properties and other selected assets and interests of privately-held Veralliance Properties, Inc. (“Veralliance”), including continuing services from Veralliance Founder and President, Daniel Ryan and other key management and operational personnel. Veralliance was a San Diego-based corporate real estate solutions company focused on the acquisition, development, and management of office and life science assets in Southern California. The three life science properties, located in San Diego, California, contain an aggregate of 161,000 rentable square feet and were acquired for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $50.0 million consisting of approximately $35.2 million in cash and our assumption of two secured loans aggregating approximately $14.8 million. We completed the acquisition of one of these properties in the third quarter of 2010 and completed the acquisitions of the other two properties in the fourth quarter of 2010.
In September 2010, we purchased a life science property with approximately 48,500 rentable square feet in the Suburban Washington, D.C. market. The total purchase price was approximately $12.5 million and consisted of approximately $6.2 million in cash and our assumption of a secured loan of approximately $6.3 million. This property is fully leased to a credit life science entity.
In October 2010, we acquired a life science campus in the San Diego market aggregating approximately 347,000 rentable square feet for approximately $128 million. The purchase of this life science campus included land supporting the future development of additional life science buildings aggregating approximately 420,000 rentable square feet. At the time of this acquisition, the campus was subject to a 15-month lease with Biogen Idec Inc. In December 2010, we executed a new lease for the entire 347,000 rentable square foot campus pursuant to a 20-year lease with Illumina, Inc. (“Illumina”) and, pursuant to the lease, also commenced the ground-up development of a building aggregating approximately 123,000 rentable square feet on the campus. Illumina has the right to further expand the premises and lease one to three additional buildings that may be built on this campus.
In November 2010, we completed sales of land parcels in Mission Bay, San Francisco for an aggregate sales price of approximately $278 million at a gain of approximately $59 million. The sales of the land parcels resulted in a reduction of our preconstruction developable square footage by approximately 2.0 million square feet in the Mission Bay, San Francisco submarket. The cash proceeds from these sales were used to repay outstanding borrowings under our unsecured line of credit.
In December 2010, we acquired one property in the San Diego market aggregating approximately 373,000 rentable square feet for approximately $114 million. The acquisition of this property included land supporting the future development of additional life science buildings aggregating approximately 244,000 rentable square feet. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 201,000 rentable square feet of the property’s 373,000 total rentable square footage was undergoing active redevelopment. The remaining operating square footage aggregating 172,000 rentable square feet was 100% occupied.
Additionally in December 2010, we acquired one property in the Suburban Washington, D.C. market aggregating approximately 50,000 rentable square feet for approximately $14 million.
Redevelopment and development projects
During the year ended December 31, 2010, we completed the redevelopment of multiple spaces at nine properties aggregating approximately 303,000 rentable square feet. Also during the year ended December 31, 2010, we completed the ground-up development of three properties aggregating 553,000 rentable square feet, including approximately 308,000 rentable square feet at the Alexandria Center™ for Life Science – New York City, a state-of-the-art urban science park. Additionally, we commenced the ground-up development of two fully leased properties aggregating 220,000 rentable square feet pursuant to long term leases during the year ended December 31, 2010.
Unsecured credit facility
In January 2011, we entered into a third amendment (the “Third Amendment”) to our second amended and restated credit agreement dated October 31, 2006, as further amended on December 1, 2006 and May 2, 2007 (the “Existing Credit Agreement,” and as amended by the Third Amendment, the “Amended Credit Agreement”), with Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, and certain lenders.
The Third Amendment amended the Existing Credit Agreement to, among other things, increase the maximum permitted borrowings under the credit facilities from $1.9 billion to $2.25 billion, consisting of a $1.5 billion unsecured line of credit (increased from $1.15 billion) and a $750 million unsecured term loan (together the “Unsecured Credit Facility”) and provide an accordion option to increase commitments under the Unsecured Credit Facility by up to an additional $300 million. Borrowings under the Unsecured Credit Facility bear interest at LIBOR or the specified base rate, plus in either case a margin specified in the Amended Credit Agreement (the “Applicable Margin”). The Applicable Margin for LIBOR borrowings under the revolving credit facility was initially set at 2.4%. The Applicable Margin for the LIBOR borrowings under the unsecured term loan was not amended in the Third Amendment and was 1.0% as of December 31, 2010.
Under the Third Amendment, the maturity date for the unsecured revolving credit facility will be January 2015, assuming we exercise our sole right under the amendment to extend this maturity date twice by an additional six months after each exercise. The maturity date for the $750 million unsecured term loan remained unchanged at October 2012, assuming we exercise our sole right to extend the maturity date by one year. The Third Amendment modified certain financial covenants with respect to the Unsecured Credit Facility, including the fixed charge coverage ratio, secured debt ratio, leverage ratio, and minimum book value, and added covenants relating to an unsecured leverage ratio and unsecured debt yield.
Other financing activities
In June 2010, we completed an exchange (the “Exchange Offer”) of approximately $232.7 million of our 8.00% unsecured senior convertible notes (“8.00% Unsecured Convertible Notes”) for consideration of 24.1546 shares of our common stock, a cash premium of $180 per $1,000 principal amount of the notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest. In July 2010, we repurchased, in a privately negotiated transaction, approximately $7.1 million of our 8.00% Unsecured Convertible Notes for an aggregate cash price of approximately $12.8 million. Thus, in the Exchange Offer and this privately negotiated transaction, we retired $239.8 million of our 8.00% Unsecured Convertible Notes (representing substantially all $240 million outstanding principal amount of our 8.00% Unsecured Convertible Notes). In connection with the retirement of our 8% Unsecured Convertible Notes, we recognized losses on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $42.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2010
In September 2010, we sold 5,175,000 shares of our common stock in a follow-on offering (including 675,000 shares issued upon full exercise of the underwriters’ over-allotment option). The shares were issued at a price of $69.25 per share, resulting in aggregate proceeds of approximately $342 million (after deducting underwriters’ discounts and other offering costs).
In December 2010, we repurchased, in privately negotiated transactions, approximately $82.8 million of our 3.70% unsecured convertible notes (“3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes”) at an aggregate cash price of approximately $84.6 million. As a result of the repurchases, we recognized a loss on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $2.4 million during the fourth quarter of 2010.
During the year ended December 31, 2010, we repaid eight secured loans aggregating approximately $118.5 million and, in connection with three 2010 acquisitions, assumed three secured loans aggregating approximately $21.1 million.
Leasing
For the year ended December 31, 2010, we executed a total of 142 leases for approximately 2,744,000 rentable square feet at 71 different properties (excluding month-to-month leases). Of this total, approximately 1,778,000 rentable square feet related to new or renewal leases of previously leased space and approximately 966,000 rentable square feet related to developed, redeveloped, or previously vacant space. Of the 966,000 rentable square feet, approximately 712,000 rentable square feet were related to our development or redevelopment programs, with the remaining 254,000 rentable square feet related to previously vacant space. Rental rates (on a basis calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”)) for these new or renewal leases were on average approximately 4.9% higher than rental rates for the respective expiring leases.
Business objectives and strategies
We focus our property operations and investment activities principally in the following life science markets:
· California – San Diego;
· California – San Francisco Bay;
· Greater Boston;
· New York City/New Jersey/Suburban Philadelphia;
· Southeast;
· Suburban Washington, D.C.;
· Washington – Seattle; and
· International.
Our client tenant base is broad and diverse within the life science industry and reflects our focus on regional, national, and international tenants with substantial financial and operational resources. For a more detailed description of our properties and tenants, see “Item 2. Properties.” We have an experienced board of directors and are led by a senior management team with extensive experience in both the real estate and life science industries.
Growth and operating strategies
We continue to demonstrate the strength and durability of our core operations providing life science laboratory space to the broad and diverse life science industry. Our core operating results were steady for the year ended December 31, 2010. We intend to selectively acquire properties that we believe provide long-term value to our stockholders. Our strategy for acquisitions will focus on the quality of the submarket locations, improvements, tenancy, and overall return. We believe the life science industry will remain keenly focused on adjacency locations to key innovation drivers in each major life science submarket. As such, we will also focus on adjacency locations which will deliver high cash flows, stability, and returns as we work to deliver the highest value to our stockholders. We also intend to continue to focus on the completion of our existing active redevelopment projects aggregating approximately 755,463 rentable square feet and our existing active development projects aggregating approximately an additional 475,818 rentable square feet. Additionally, we intend to continue with preconstruction activities for certain land parcels for future ground-up development in order to preserve and create value for these projects. These important preconstruction activities add significant value to our land for future ground-up development and are required for the ultimate vertical construction of the buildings. We also continue to be very careful and prudent with any future decisions to add new projects to our active ground-up developments. Future ground-up development projects will likely require significant preleasing from high-quality and/or creditworthy entities. We intend to continue to reduce debt as a percentage of our overall capital structure over a multi-year period. During this period, we may also extend and/or refinance certain debt maturities. We expect sources of funds for construction activities and repayment of outstanding debt to be provided over several years by opportunistic sales of real estate, joint ventures, cash flows from operations, new secured or unsecured debt, and the issuance of additional equity securities, as appropriate.
We seek to maximize funds from operations (“FFO”), balance sheet liquidity and flexibility, and cash available for distribution to our stockholders through the ownership, operation, management, and selective redevelopment, development, and acquisition of life science properties, as well as management of our balance sheet. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Funds From Operations” for a discussion of how we compute and view FFO, as well as a discussion of other measures of cash flow. In particular, we seek to maximize FFO, balance sheet liquidity and flexibility, and cash available for distribution by:
· maintaining a strong, liquid, and flexible balance sheet;
· maintaining strong and stable operating cash flows;
· re-tenanting and re-leasing space at higher rental rates to the extent possible, while minimizing tenant improvement costs;
· maintaining solid occupancy while also maintaining high lease rental rates;
· realizing contractual rental rate escalations, which are currently provided for in approximately 91% of our leases (on a rentable square footage basis);
· implementing effective cost control measures, including negotiating pass-through provisions in tenant leases for operating expenses and certain capital expenditures;
· improving investment returns through leasing of vacant space and replacement of existing tenants with new tenants at higher rental rates;
· achieving higher rental rates from existing tenants as existing leases expire;
· selectively selling properties, including land parcels, to reduce outstanding debt;
· selectively acquiring high-quality life science properties in our target life science cluster markets at prices that enable us to realize attractive returns;
· selectively redeveloping existing office, warehouse, shell space, or newly acquired properties into generic laboratory space that can be leased at higher rental rates in our target life science cluster markets; and
· selectively developing properties in our target life science cluster markets.
Acquisitions
We seek to identify and acquire high-quality life science properties in our target life science cluster markets. Critical evaluation of prospective property acquisitions is an essential component of our acquisition strategy. When evaluating acquisition opportunities, we assess a full range of matters relating to the prospective property or properties, including:
· adjacency to centers of innovation and technological advances;
· location of the property and our strategy in the relevant market;
· quality of existing and prospective tenants;
· condition and capacity of the building infrastructure;
· quality and generic characteristics of the laboratory facilities;
· physical condition of the structure and common area improvements;
· opportunities available for leasing vacant space and for re-tenanting occupied space;
· availability of land for future ground-up development of new life science laboratory space; and
· opportunities to redevelop existing space into higher rent generic life science laboratory space.
Redevelopment
A key component of our long term business model is the redevelopment of existing office, warehouse, or shell space as generic life science laboratory space that can be leased at higher rates. As of December 31, 2010, we had 12 projects aggregating 755,463 rentable square feet undergoing redevelopment. In addition to properties undergoing redevelopment, as of December 31, 2010, our asset base contained embedded opportunities for a future permanent change of use to life science laboratory space through redevelopment aggregating approximately 1.5 million rentable square feet.
Development
Another key component of our long term business model is ground-up development projects. Our development strategy is primarily to pursue selective projects where we expect to achieve appropriate investment returns. Our ground-up development projects focus on investment in generic and reusable infrastructure, rather than tenant specific improvements. As of December 31, 2010, we had five parcels of land undergoing ground-up development approximating 475,818 rentable square feet of life science laboratory space. We also have an embedded pipeline for future ground-up development approximating 12.7 million developable square feet.
Tenants
As of December 31, 2010, we had 453 leases with a total of 373 tenants, and 73 of our 167 properties were single-tenant properties. Our three largest tenants accounted for approximately 14.1% of our aggregate annualized base rent, or approximately 6.6%, 3.8%, and 3.7%, respectively. None of our tenants represented more than 10% of total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Competition
In general, other life science properties are located in close proximity to our properties. The amount of rentable space available in any market could have a material effect on our ability to rent space and on the rents that we can earn. In addition, we compete for investment opportunities with insurance companies, pension and investment funds, private equity entities, partnerships, developers, investment companies, other REITs, and owner/occupants. Many of these entities have substantially greater financial resources than we do and may be able to pay more than us or accept more risk than we are willing to accept. These entities may be less sensitive to risks with respect to the creditworthiness of a tenant or the geographic concentration of their investments. Competition may also reduce the number of suitable investment opportunities available to us or may increase the bargaining power of property owners seeking to sell. Competition in acquiring existing properties and land, both from institutional capital sources and from other REITs, has been very strong over the past several years. We believe we have differentiated ourselves from our competitors, as we are the innovator as well as the largest owner, manager, and developer of life science properties, in key life science markets and have the most important relationships in the life science industry.
Financial information about our operating segment
See Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements for information about our operating segment.
Regulation
General
Properties in our markets are subject to various laws, ordinances, and regulations, including regulations relating to common areas. We believe we have the necessary permits and approvals to operate each of our properties.
Americans With Disabilities Act
Our properties must comply with Title III of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (the “ADA”), to the extent that such properties are “public accommodations” as defined by the ADA. The ADA may require removal of structural barriers to access by persons with disabilities in certain public areas of our properties where such removal is readily achievable. We believe that our properties are in substantial compliance with the ADA and that we will not be required to make substantial capital expenditures to address the requirements of the ADA. However, noncompliance with the ADA could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants. The obligation to make readily achievable accommodations is an ongoing one, and we will continue to assess our properties and make alterations as appropriate in this respect. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors—We may incur significant costs complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act and similar laws.”
Environmental matters
Under various environmental protection laws, a current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be liable for contamination resulting from the presence or discharge of hazardous or toxic substances at that property, and may be required to investigate and clean up contamination located on or emanating from that property. Such laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the contaminants, and the liability may be joint and several. Previous owners used some of our properties for industrial and other purposes, so those properties may contain some level of environmental contamination. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination at our properties may expose us to third-party liability or materially adversely affect our ability to sell, lease, or develop the real estate or to borrow using the real estate as collateral.
Some of our properties may contain asbestos-containing building materials. Environmental laws require that asbestos-containing building materials be properly managed and maintained, and may impose fines and penalties on building owners or operators for failure to comply with these requirements. These laws may also allow third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos-containing building materials.
In addition, some of our tenants, routinely handle hazardous substances and wastes as part of their operations at our properties. Environmental laws and regulations subject our tenants, and potentially us, to liability resulting from these activities or from previous uses of those properties. Environmental liabilities could also affect a tenant’s ability to make rental payments to us. We require our tenants to comply with these environmental laws and regulations. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors—We could be held liable for damages resulting from our tenants’ use of hazardous materials.”
Independent environmental consultants have conducted Phase I or similar environmental site assessments on the properties in our portfolio. Site assessments are intended to discover and evaluate information regarding the environmental condition of the surveyed property and surrounding properties, and do not generally include soil samplings, subsurface investigations, or an asbestos survey. These assessments have not to date revealed any environmental liability that we believe would have a material adverse effect on our business, assets, or results of operations. Nevertheless, it is possible that the assessments on our properties have not revealed all environmental conditions, liabilities, or compliance concerns. Material environmental conditions, liabilities, or compliance concerns may have arisen after the review was completed or may arise in the future; and future laws, ordinances, or regulations may impose material additional environmental liability. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors — We could incur significant costs complying with environmental laws.”
Insurance
We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage, and rental loss insurance with respect to our properties. We select policy specifications and insured limits which we believe to be appropriate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage, and industry practice. In the opinion of management, the properties in our portfolio are currently adequately insured. In addition, we have obtained earthquake insurance for certain properties located in the vicinity of active earthquake faults. We also carry environmental remediation insurance and title insurance on our properties. We obtain our title insurance policies when we acquire the property, with each policy covering an amount equal to the initial purchase price of each property. Accordingly, any of our title insurance policies may be in an amount less than the current value of the related property. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Our insurance may not adequately cover all potential losses.”
Available information
Copies of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K, including any amendments to the foregoing reports, are available, free of charge, through our corporate website at http://www.labspace.com as soon as is reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. The current charters of our Board of Director’s Audit, Compensation, and Nominating & Governance Committees, along with the Company’s corporate governance guidelines and Business Integrity Policy and Procedures for Reporting Non-compliance (the “Business Integrity Policy”) are available on our corporate website. Additionally, any amendments to, and waivers of, our Business Integrity Policy that apply to our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer will be available free of charge on our corporate website in accordance with applicable SEC and New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) requirements. Written requests should be sent to Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc., 385 East Colorado Boulevard, Suite 299, Pasadena, California 91101, Attention: Investor Relations. Further, a copy of this annual report on Form 10-K is located at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room can be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The public may also download these materials from the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had 151 full-time employees. We believe that we have good relations with our employees. We have adopted a Business Integrity Policy that applies to all of our employees. Its receipt and review by each employee is documented and verified annually.
The global financial crisis, high structural unemployment, and other events or circumstances beyond the control of the Company, may adversely affect our industry, business, results of operations, contractual commitments, and access to capital.
What began initially in 2007 and 2008 as a “subprime” mortgage crisis turned into an extraordinary United States and worldwide structural economic and financial crisis coupled with the rapid decline of the consumer economy. In 2008 and 2009 significant concerns over energy costs, geopolitical issues, the availability and cost of credit, the United States mortgage market, and a declining real estate market in the United States have contributed to increased volatility, diminished expectations for the economy and the markets, and high levels of structural unemployment by historical standards. In 2010, the economy has shown signs of improvement, but recovery has been slow and volatile. These factors, combined with volatile oil prices, fluctuating business and consumer confidence, precipitated a steep economic decline. Further, severe financial and structural strains on the banking and financial systems have led to significant lack of trust and confidence in the global credit and financial system. Consumers and money managers have liquidated and may liquidate equity investments and consumers and banks have held and may hold cash and other lower risk investments, resulting in significant and, in some cases, catastrophic declines in the equity capitalization of companies and unusual failures of financial institutions. While bank earnings and liquidity are on the rebound, the potential of significant future credit losses clouds the lending outlook. Additionally, job growth remains sluggish, and sustained high unemployment can further hinder economic growth.
Changes in laws, regulations, and financial accounting standards may adversely affect our reported results of operations.
As a response in large part to perceived abuses and deficiencies in current regulation believed to have caused or exacerbated the recent global financial crisis, legislative, regulatory, and accounting standard-setting bodies around the world are engaged in an intensive, wide-ranging examination and re-writing of the laws, regulations, and accounting standards that have constituted the basic playing field of global and domestic business for several decades. In many jurisdictions, including the United States, the legislative and regulatory response has included the extensive reorganization of existing regulatory and rulemaking agencies and organizations, and the establishment of new agencies with broad, interest powers. This reorganization has disturbed long-standing regulatory and industry relationships and established procedures.
The rulemaking and administrative efforts have focused principally on the areas perceived as contributing to the financial crisis, including banking, investment banking, securities regulation, and real estate finance with spillover impacts into many other areas. These initiatives have created a degree of uncertainty regarding the basic rules governing the real estate industry and many other businesses that is unprecedented in the United States at least since the wave of lawmaking, regulatory reform, and governmental reorganization that followed in the wake of the Great Depression.
The global financial crisis and the aggressive governmental and accounting profession reaction thereto occurs against a backdrop of increasing globalization and internationalization of financial and securities regulation that began prior to the financial crisis. As a result of this ongoing trend, financial and investment activities previously regulated almost exclusively at a local or national level are increasingly regulated, or at least coordinated, on an international basis, with national rulemaking and standard setting groups relinquishing varying degrees of local and national control to achieve more uniform regulation and reduce the ability of market participants to engage in regulatory arbitrage between jurisdictions. This globalization and internationalization trend has continued, arguably with an increased sense of urgency and importance, since the financial crisis.
This high degree of regulatory uncertainty, coupled with considerable additional uncertainty regarding the underlying condition and prospects of global, domestic, and local economies, has created a business environment characterized by an unusually pronounced lack of visibility that makes business planning and projections even more uncertain than is ordinarily the case for businesses in the financial and real estate sectors.
In the commercial real estate sector in which we operate, the uncertainties posed by various initiatives of accounting standard-setting authorities to rewrite in fundamental respects major bodies of accounting literature constitute a significant source of uncertainty as to the basic rules of business engagement. Changes in accounting standards and requirements, including the potential requirement that United States public companies prepare financial statements in accordance with international standards, potential changes in lease accounting, and the adoption of accounting standards likely to require the increased use of “fair value” measures, may have a significant effect on our financial results and on the results of our tenants, which would have a secondary impact upon us. New accounting pronouncements and interpretations of existing pronouncements are likely to continue to occur at an accelerated pace as a result of recent Congressional and regulatory actions and continuing efforts by the accounting profession itself to reform and modernize its principles and procedures.
Although we have not been as directly affected by the wave of new legislation and regulation as banks and investment banks, we may also be adversely affected by new or amended laws or regulations, changes in federal, state, or foreign tax laws and regulations, and by changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and regulations. In the United States, the financial crisis and continuing economic slowdown has already prompted a list of legislative, regulatory, and accounting profession responses, including the adoption in 2009 by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), of accounting literature which changed in fundamental respects the accounting rules governing sales of financial assets and consolidation of certain entities that have severely curtailed the ability of entities to recognize gain on the sale or securitization of financial assets.
The federal legislative response has culminated most recently in the enactment on July 21, 2010 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”). The Dodd-Frank Act contains far-reaching provisions that substantially revise, or provide for the revision of, long-standing, fundamental rules governing the banking and investment banking industries, and provide for the broad restructuring of the regulatory authorities in these areas. The Dodd-Frank Act is expected to result in profound changes in the ground rules for financial business activities in the United States.
To a large degree, the impacts of the legislative, regulatory, and accounting reforms to date are still not clear. Many of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act have extended implementation periods and delayed effective dates and will require extensive rulemaking by regulatory authorities. While we do not currently expect the Dodd-Frank Act to have a significant direct effect on us, the Dodd-Frank Act’s impact on us may not be known for an extended period of time. The Dodd-Frank Act, including future rules implementing its provisions and the interpretation of those rules, along with other legislative and regulatory proposals directed at the financial or real estate industries or affecting taxation that are proposed or pending in the United States Congress, may limit our revenues, impose fees or taxes on us, and/or intensify the regulatory framework in which we operate in ways that are not currently identifiable. The Dodd-Frank Act is also expected to result in substantial changes and dislocations in the banking industry and the financial services sector in ways, for example, that could have significant consequences on the availability and pricing of unsecured credit, commercial mortgage credit, and derivatives, such as interest rate swaps, that are important aspects of our business. Accordingly, new laws, regulations, and accounting standards, as well as changes to, or new interpretations of, currently accepted accounting practices in the real estate industry, may adversely affect our results of operations.
The enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act will subject us to substantial additional federal regulation, and we cannot predict the effect of such regulation on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation-related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that require the SEC to adopt additional rules and regulations in these areas. For example, the Dodd-Frank Act requires publicly traded companies to give stockholders a non-binding vote on executive compensation and so-called “golden parachute” payments, and authorizes the SEC to promulgate rules that would allow stockholders to nominate their own candidates using a company’s proxy materials. Our efforts to comply with these requirements have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, an increase in expenses and a diversion of management’s time from other business activities. In addition, provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that directly affect other participants in the real estate and capital markets, such as banks, investment funds, and interest rate swap providers, could have indirect, but material, impacts on our business that cannot now be predicted. Given the uncertainty associated with the manner in which the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will be implemented by various regulatory agencies and through regulations, the full extent of the impact such requirements will have on our operations is unclear. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of business activities, require changes to certain business practices, or otherwise adversely affect our business.
Changes in the system for establishing United States accounting standards may result in adverse fluctuations in our asset and liability values and earnings, and materially and adversely affect our reported results of operations.
Accounting for public companies in the United States has historically been conducted in accordance with GAAP. GAAP is established by the FASB, an independent body whose standards are recognized by the SEC as authoritative for publicly held companies. The International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) is a London-based independent board established in 2001 and charged with the development of International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). IFRS generally reflects accounting practices that prevail in Europe and in developed nations around the world.
IFRS differs in material respects from GAAP. Among other things, IFRS has historically relied more on “fair value” models of accounting for assets and liabilities than GAAP. “Fair value” models are based on periodic revaluation of assets and liabilities, often resulting in fluctuations in such values as compared to GAAP, which relies more frequently on historical cost as the basis for asset and liability valuation.
The SEC has proposed the mandatory adoption of IFRS by United States public companies starting in 2015, with early adoption permitted before that date. It is unclear at this time how the SEC will propose that GAAP and IFRS be harmonized if the proposed change is adopted. In addition, switching to a new method of accounting and adopting IFRS will be a complex undertaking. We may need to develop new systems and controls based on the principles of IFRS. Since these are new endeavors, and the precise requirements of the pronouncements ultimately adopted are not now known, the magnitude of costs associated with this conversion are uncertain.
We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of IFRS on our financial position and results of operations. Such evaluation cannot be completed, however, without more clarity regarding the specific IFRS standards that will be adopted. Until there is more certainty with respect to the IFRS standards to be adopted, prospective investors should consider that our conversion to IFRS could have a material adverse impact on our reported results of operations.
Changes in financial accounting standards governing leases and investment properties may cause adverse unexpected fluctuations in our income and asset valuations, which could impact our compliance with debt covenants and adversely affect our reported results of operations.
In August 2010, a joint committee of the FASB and the IASB issued an exposure draft on a new standard for lease accounting by both lessors and lessees. With respect to accounting by lessors, the exposure draft reflects the FASB’s and the IASB’s tentative conclusion to adopt one of two accounting models with respect to operating leases, which comprise substantially our entire lease portfolio. A lessor that retains exposure to significant risks or benefits associated with the underlying asset would apply a “performance obligation” approach; otherwise, the lessor would apply the “derecognition” approach. For substantially our entire lease portfolio, we anticipate applying the “performance obligation” approach.
Under this approach, the underlying leased real estate asset remains on the balance sheet of the lessor and a separate liability for the performance obligation of the lessor—that is, the obligation to make the property available to the lessee and related obligations—would be recorded. In addition, the lessor would recognize an additional asset representing its right to receive rental payments, which would be subsequently measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method which would replace the current straight-line recognition of lease revenue. If the guidance is issued in its current form, we would expect our assets and liabilities to increase substantially relative to the current presentation. Additionally, income on leases previously accounted for as operating leases would be front-end loaded as compared to the existing accounting requirements. Accordingly, the new guidance, if adopted as proposed, may impact key financial metrics, including those which serve or may serve as covenants for our outstanding debt.
The FASB, under a separate but related project, is considering requiring investment properties to be reported at fair value at the end of each quarterly reporting period. Under this proposed guidance, lessors with investment properties would not be subject to the proposed FASB/IASB lease accounting guidance described above with respect to their investment properties. If we are required to fair value our investment properties quarterly, we may experience significant fluctuations in our results of operations from one reporting period to the next.
The new lease and investment property guidance is expected to be finalized in the second quarter of 2011, with an effective date no earlier than 2013. We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of the proposed lease accounting standard and the anticipated investment property standard on our financial position and results of operations. Such evaluation cannot be completed, however, without more clarity regarding the specific standard that will be adopted. Until there is more certainty with respect to the standards to be adopted, prospective investors should consider that the proposed and anticipated standard could have a material adverse impact on our reported results of operations.
Changes in laws, regulations, and financial accounting standards applicable to our tenants may materially affect the terms of our leases and demand for our properties, and thereby cause adverse unexpected fluctuations in income and adversely affect our reported results of operations.
The lease accounting exposure draft issued by the FASB and the IASB would generally require our tenants to establish an asset on their balance sheet representing the right to occupy and use the leased property and an offsetting liability representing the tenant’s lease payment obligation. For many life science companies whose intellectual property and other assets do not carry high balance sheet values, the cost of the tenant’s premises constitutes one of the tenant’s most significant financial attributes, and the new requirement to record an asset and a liability reflecting the right to use and the payment obligation with respect to a leased property as balance sheet entries could have a significant impact on the structuring of new and renewal leases in the future.
For example, all other things being equal, lessees may negotiate for shorter-term leases or other features that would result in relatively lower recognition of balance sheet asset and liability related to leases. Moreover, some lessees who decided to lease rather than purchase their premises to avoid recording the value of the property as an asset and the amount of an associated mortgage as a liability may in the future purchase rather than lease their premises if the standard is adopted as proposed.
Non-accounting legal developments affecting a significant portion of our tenant base could also have unforeseen, and potentially materially adverse, impacts on our business and results of operations. For example, changes in tax rules regarding the treatment of research and development costs, and governmental incentives to life science companies to locate in particular geographic markets in the United States or in foreign jurisdictions, could systematically impact our tenants’ siting decisions in favor of markets in the United States or in foreign jurisdictions in which we do not have a significant presence.
We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of the proposed lease accounting standard on our tenants’ financial position and results of operations, as well as the likely impact of the standard on the lease preferences of our tenants. Such evaluation cannot be completed, however, without more clarity regarding the specific standard that will be adopted. Until there is more certainty with respect to the standard to be adopted and the impact thereof on our tenants, prospective investors should consider that the imposition of the lease accounting standard on our tenants could ultimately have a material adverse impact on our reported results of operations.
Current levels of market volatility are unprecedented.
The capital and credit markets have experienced volatility and disruption for several years. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit capacity for certain issuers without regard to those issuers’ underlying financial and/or operating strength. If current levels of market disruption and volatility continue or worsen, there can be no assurance that we will not experience an adverse effect, which may be material, on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Disruptions, uncertainty, or volatility in the capital markets may also limit our access to capital from financial institutions on favorable terms, or at all, and our ability to raise capital through the issuance of equity securities could be adversely affected by causes beyond the control of the Company through ongoing extraordinary disruptions in the global economy and financial systems or other events.
We may not be able to obtain additional capital to further our business objectives.
Our ability to acquire, develop, or redevelop properties depends upon our ability to obtain capital. The real estate industry has recently experienced volatile debt and equity capital markets with periods of extreme illiquidity. A prolonged period in which we cannot effectively access the public equity or debt markets may result in heavier reliance on alternative financing sources to undertake new investments. An inability to obtain equity or debt capital on acceptable terms could delay or prevent us from acquiring, financing, and completing desirable investments, and which could otherwise adversely affect our business. Also, the issuance of additional shares of capital stock or interests in subsidiaries to fund future operations could dilute the ownership of our then-existing stockholders. Even as liquidity returns to the market, debt and equity capital may be more expensive than in prior years.
Possible future sales of shares of our common stock could adversely affect its market price.
We cannot predict the effect, if any, of future sales of shares of our common stock on the market price of our common stock from time to time. Sales of substantial amounts of capital stock (including common stock issued upon the exercise of stock options, the conversion of convertible debt securities, or the conversion or redemption of preferred stock), or the perception that such sales may occur, could adversely affect prevailing market prices for our common stock.
We have reserved a number of shares of common stock for issuance to our directors, officers, and employees pursuant to our Amended and Restated 1997 Stock Award and Incentive Plan (sometimes referred to herein as our equity incentive plan). As of December 31, 2010, a total of 3,019,340 shares of our common stock were reserved for issuance under our Amended and Restated 1997 Stock Award and Incentive Plan.
As of December 31, 2010, options to purchase 51,850 shares of our common stock were outstanding, all of which were exercisable. We have filed a registration statement with respect to the issuance of shares of our common stock pursuant to grants under our equity incentive plan. In addition, any shares issued under our equity incentive plan will be available for sale in the public market from time to time without restriction by persons who are not our “affiliates” (as defined in Rule 144 adopted under the Securities Act). Affiliates will be able to sell shares of our common stock subject to restrictions under Rule 144.
The price per share of our stock may fluctuate significantly.
The market price per share of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to many factors, including, but not limited to:
· the availability and cost of debt and/or equity capital;
· the condition of our balance sheet;
· the condition of the financial and banking industries;
· actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly operating results or dividends;
· the amount and timing of debt maturities and other contractual obligations;
· changes in our FFO or earnings estimates;
· the publication of research reports about us, the real estate industry, or the life science industry;
· the general reputation of REITs and the attractiveness of their equity securities in comparison to other debt or equity securities (including securities issued by other real estate-based companies);
· general stock and bond market conditions, including changes in interest rates on fixed income securities, that may lead prospective purchasers of our stock to demand a higher annual yield from future dividends;
· changes in our analyst ratings;
· changes in market valuations of similar companies;
· adverse market reaction to any additional debt we incur in the future;
· additions or departures of key management personnel;
· actions by institutional stockholders;
· speculation in the press or investment community;
· terrorist activity adversely affecting the markets in which our securities trade, possibly increasing market volatility and causing the further erosion of business and consumer confidence and spending;
· government regulatory action and changes in tax laws;
· the realization of any of the other risk factors included in this annual report on Form 10-K; and
· general market and economic conditions.
Many of the factors listed above are beyond our control. These factors may cause the market price of shares of our common stock to decline, regardless of our financial condition, results of operations, business, or our prospects.
Our debt service obligations may have adverse consequences on our business operations.
We use debt to finance our operations, including the acquisition, development, and redevelopment of properties. Our use of debt may have adverse consequences, including the following:
· our cash flow from operations may not be sufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest;
· we may be forced to dispose of one or more of our properties, possibly on disadvantageous terms, to make payments on our debt;
· we may default on our debt obligations, and the lenders or mortgagees may foreclose on our properties that secure those loans;
· a foreclosure on one of our properties could create taxable income without any accompanying cash proceeds to pay the tax;
· a default under a mortgage loan that has cross default provisions may cause us to automatically default on another loan;
· we may not be able to refinance or extend our existing debt;
· the terms of any refinancing or extension may not be as favorable as the terms of our existing debt;
· we may be subject to a significant increase in the variable interest rates on our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan and certain other borrowings, which could adversely impact our operations; and
· the terms of our debt obligations may require a reduction in our distributions to stockholders.
As of December 31, 2010, we had outstanding mortgage indebtedness of approximately $790.9 million (net of $1.1 million discount), secured by 49 properties, and outstanding debt under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan of approximately $1.5 billion. In addition, as of December 31, 2010, we had approximately $295.1 million (net of $6.9 million discount) and $230,000 (net of $20,000 discount) of 3.70% and 8.00% unsecured convertible notes outstanding, respectively.
We may not be able to refinance our debt and/or our debt may not be assumable.
Due to the high volume of real estate debt financing in recent years, the real estate industry may require more funds to refinance debt maturities than the potential funds available from lenders. This potential shortage of available funds from lenders and stricter credit underwriting guidelines may limit our ability to refinance our debt as it matures, our cash flows, our ability to make distributions to our stockholders, or adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, and the market price of our common stock.
As of December 31, 2010, we have approximately $2.6 billion in outstanding debt. This debt may be unassumable by a potential purchaser of the Corporation and may be subject to significant prepayment penalties.
We may not be able to borrow additional amounts under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan.
Aggregate unsecured borrowings under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan is limited to an amount based primarily on the net operating income derived from a pool of unencumbered properties and our cost basis of certain land and construction projects and compliance with certain financial and non-financial covenants. Borrowings under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan are funded by a group of approximately 50 banks. Our ability to borrow additional amounts under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan may be negatively impacted by a decrease in cash flows from our properties, a default or cross default under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan, non-compliance with one or more loan covenants, and non-performance or failure of one or more lenders under our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan. In addition, we may not be able to refinance or repay outstanding borrowings on our unsecured line of credit or unsecured term loan. Our inability to borrow additional amounts could delay or prevent us from acquiring, financing, and completing desirable investments, which could adversely affect our business; and our inability to refinance or repay amounts under our unsecured line of credit or unsecured term loan may adversely affect our cash flows, ability to make distributions to our stockholders, financial condition, and results of operations.
Our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan restrict our ability to engage in some business activities.
Our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan contain customary negative covenants and other financial and operating covenants that, among other things:
· restrict our ability to incur additional indebtedness;
· restrict our ability to make certain investments;
· restrict our ability to merge with another company;
· restrict our ability to make distributions to stockholders;
· require us to maintain financial coverage ratios; and
· require us to maintain a pool of unencumbered assets approved by the lenders.
These restrictions could cause us to default on our unsecured line of credit and unsecured term loan or negatively affect our operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
We could become highly leveraged and our debt service obligations could increase.
Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of debt that we may incur. Therefore, we could become highly leveraged. This would result in an increase in our debt service obligations that could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Higher leverage could also increase the risk of default on our debt obligations.
If interest rates rise, our debt service costs will increase and the value of our properties may decrease.
Our unsecured line of credit, unsecured term loan, and certain other borrowings bear interest at variable rates, and we may incur additional debt in the future. Increases in market interest rates would increase our interest expense under these debt instruments and would increase the costs of refinancing existing indebtedness or obtaining new debt. Additionally, increases in market interest rates may result in a decrease in the value of our real estate and decrease the market price of our common stock. Accordingly, these increases could adversely affect our financial position and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may adversely affect our results of operations.
The interest rate hedge agreements we use to manage some of our exposure to interest rate volatility involve risks, such as the risk that counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under these arrangements. In addition, these arrangements may not be effective in reducing our exposure to changes in interest rates. These risk factors may lead to failure to hedge effectively against changes in interest rates and therefore may adversely affect our results of operations.
The adoption of derivatives legislation by Congress could have an adverse impact on our ability to hedge risks associated with our business.
The Dodd-Frank Act regulates derivative transactions, which include certain instruments used in our risk management activities. The Dodd-Frank Act contemplates that most swaps will be required to be cleared through a registered clearing facility and traded on a designated exchange or swap execution facility. There are some exceptions to these requirements for entities that use swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk. While we may ultimately be eligible for such exceptions, the scope of these exceptions is currently uncertain, pending further definition through rulemaking proceedings. Among the other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that may affect derivative transactions are those relating to establishment of capital and margin requirements for certain derivative participants; establishment of business conduct standards, recordkeeping and reporting requirements; and imposition of position limits. Although the Dodd-Frank Act includes significant new provisions regarding the regulation of derivatives, the impact of those requirements will not be known definitively until regulations have been adopted by the SEC and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission. The new legislation and any new regulations could increase the operational and transactional cost of derivatives contracts and affect the number and/or creditworthiness of available hedge counterparties to us.
The conversion rights of our 3.70% unsecured convertible notes may be detrimental to holders of our common stock.
As of December 31, 2010, we had approximately $295.1 million, net of $6.9 million discount, outstanding on our 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes. Prior to January 15, 2012, we will not have the right to redeem the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes, except to preserve our qualification as a REIT. On and after that date, we have the right to redeem the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes, in whole or in part, at any time and from time to time, for cash equal to 100% of the principal amount of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes to be redeemed, plus any accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the redemption date. Holders of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes may require us to repurchase their notes, in whole or in part, on January 15, 2012, 2017, and 2022 for cash equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes to be purchased plus any accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the repurchase date. Holders of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their notes upon the occurrence of specified corporate transactions, including a change in control, certain merger or consolidation transactions, or the liquidation of the Company (each, a “Fundamental Change”), at a repurchase price in cash equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased, plus any accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the fundamental change repurchase date. At issuance, the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes had an initial conversion rate of approximately 8.4774 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes, representing a conversion price of approximately $117.96 per share of our common stock. This initial conversion price represented a premium of 20% based on the last reported sale price of $98.30 per share of our common stock on January 10, 2007. The conversion rate of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes is subject to adjustments for certain events, including, but not limited to, certain dividends on our common stock in excess of $0.74 per share per quarter and dividends on our common stock payable in shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2010, the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes had a conversion rate of approximately 8.5207 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $117.36 per share of our common stock. Holders of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes may convert their notes into cash and, if applicable, shares of our common stock prior to the stated maturity of January 15, 2027 only under the following circumstances: (1) during any calendar quarter after the calendar quarter ending March 31, 2007, if the closing sale price of our common stock for each of 20 or more trading days in a period of 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the immediately preceding calendar quarter exceeds 120% of the conversion price in effect on the last trading day of the immediately preceding calendar quarter; (2) during the five consecutive business days immediately after any five consecutive trading day period (the “3.70% Unsecured Convertible Note Measurement Period”) in which the average trading price per $1,000 principal amount of 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes was equal to or less than 98% of the average conversion value of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes during the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Note Measurement Period; (3) upon the occurrence of a Fundamental Change; (4) if we call the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes for redemption; and (5) at any time from, and including, December 15, 2026 until the close of business on the business day immediately preceding January 15, 2027 or earlier redemption or repurchase.
The conversion of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes into our common stock would dilute stockholder ownership in the Company, and could adversely affect the market price of our common stock or impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. Any adjustments that increase the conversion rate of the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes would increase their dilutive effect. Further, the 3.70% Unsecured Convertible Notes may be converted into cash at a time when we need to conserve our cash reserves, in which event, such conversion may adversely affect us and our stockholders.
The conversion rights of our convertible preferred stock may be detrimental to holders of common stock.
As of December 31, 2010, we had approximately $250 million outstanding of 7.00% series D cumulative convertible preferred stock (“Series D Convertible Preferred Stock”). The Series D Convertible Preferred Stock may be converted into shares of our common stock subject to certain conditions. At December 31, 2010, the conversion rate for the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock was 0.2480 shares of our common stock per $25.00 liquidation preference, which was equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $100.81 per share of common stock. The conversion rate for the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock is subject to adjustments for certain events, including, but not limited to certain dividends on our common stock in excess of $0.78 per share per quarter and dividends on our common stock payable in shares of our common stock. In addition, on or after April 20, 2013, we may, at our option, be able to cause some or all of our Series D Convertible Preferred Stock to be automatically converted if the closing sale price per share of our common stock equals or exceeds 150% of the then-applicable conversion price of the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock for at least 20 trading days in a period of 30 consecutive trading days ending on the trading day immediately prior to our issuance of a press release announcing the exercise of our conversion option. Holders of our Series D Convertible Preferred Stock, at their option, may, at any time and from time to time, convert some or all of their outstanding shares.
The conversion of the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock for our common stock would dilute stockholder ownership in our company, and could adversely affect the market price of our common stock or impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. Any adjustments that increase the conversion rate of the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock would increase their dilutive effect. Further, the conversion rights by the holders of the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock might be triggered in situations where we need to conserve our cash reserves, in which event, our election, under certain conditions, to repurchase such Series D Convertible Preferred Stock in lieu of converting them into common stock might adversely affect us and our stockholders.
We are subject to risks and liabilities in connection with properties owned through partnerships, limited liability companies, and joint ventures.
Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of funds that we may invest in non-wholly owned partnerships, limited liability companies, or joint ventures. Partnership, limited liability company, or joint venture investments involve certain risks, including:
· upon bankruptcy of non-wholly owned partnerships, limited liability companies, or joint venture entities, we may become liable for the partnership’s, limited liability company’s, or joint venture’s liabilities;
· we may share certain approval rights over major decisions with third parties;
· we may be required to contribute additional capital if our partners fail to fund their share of any required capital contributions;
· our partners, co-members, or joint ventures might have economic or other business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or goals and that could affect our ability to operate the property or our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT;
· our ability to sell the interest on advantageous terms when we desire may be limited or restricted under the terms of our agreements with our partners; and
· we may not continue to own or operate the interests or assets underlying such relationship or may need to purchase such interests or assets at an above market price to continue ownership.
We generally seek to maintain sufficient control of our partnerships, limited liability companies, and joint ventures to permit us to achieve our business objectives. However, we may not be able to do so, and the occurrence of one or more of the events described above could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, ability to make distributions to our stockholders, or the market price of our common stock.
We may not be able to sell our properties quickly to raise money.
Investments in real estate are relatively illiquid compared to other investments. Accordingly, we may not be able to sell our properties when we desire or at prices acceptable to us in response to changes in economic or other conditions. In addition, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”) limits our ability to sell properties held for fewer than two years. These limitations on our ability to sell our properties may adversely affect our cash flows, our ability to repay debt, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
If our revenues are less than our expenses, we may have to borrow additional funds and we may not be able to make distributions to our stockholders.
If our properties do not generate revenues sufficient to meet our operating expenses, including our debt service obligations and capital expenditures, we may have to borrow additional amounts to cover fixed costs and cash flow needs. This could adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Factors that could adversely affect the revenues we generate from, and the values of, our properties include:
· national, local, and worldwide economic conditions;
· competition from other life science properties;
· changes in the life science industry;
· real estate conditions in our target markets;
· our ability to collect rent payments;
· the availability of financing;
· changes to the financial and banking industries;
· changes in interest rate levels;
· vacancies at our properties and our ability to re-lease space;
· changes in tax or other regulatory laws;
· the costs of compliance with government regulation;
· the lack of liquidity of real estate investments; and
· increases in operating costs.
In addition, if a lease at a property is not a triple net lease, we will have greater expenses associated with that property and greater exposure to increases in such expenses. Significant expenditures, such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes and insurance, and maintenance costs are generally fixed and do not decrease when revenues at the related property decrease.
Our distributions to stockholders may decline at any time.
We may not continue our current level of distributions to our stockholders. Our board of directors will determine future distributions based on a number of factors, including:
· our amount of cash available for distribution;
· our financial condition;
· any decision by our board of directors to reinvest funds rather than to distribute such funds;
· our capital expenditures;
· the annual distribution requirements under the REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code;
· restrictions under Maryland law; and
· other factors our board of directors deems relevant.
A reduction in distributions to stockholders may negatively impact our stock price.
Distributions on our common stock may be made in the form of cash, stock, or a combination of both.
As a REIT, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our taxable income to our stockholders. Typically, we generate cash for distributions through our operations, the disposition of assets, or the incurrence of additional debt. Our board of directors may determine in the future, to pay dividends on our common stock in cash, shares of our common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of our common stock. The Internal Revenue Service issued Revenue Procedure 2010-12, which provides guidance regarding certain dividends payable in cash or stock at the election of stockholders and declared with respect to taxable years ending on or before December 31, 2011. Under Revenue Procedure 2010-12, a distribution of our stock pursuant to such an election will be considered a taxable distribution of property in an amount equal to the amount of cash that could have been received instead if, among other things, 10% or more of the distribution is payable in cash. Any such dividend would be distributed in a manner intended to count toward satisfaction of our annual distribution requirements and to qualify for the dividends paid deduction. A reduction in the cash yield on our common stock may negatively impact our stock price.
We may be unable to identify and complete acquisitions and successfully operate acquired properties.
We continually evaluate the market of available properties and may acquire properties when opportunities exist. Our ability to acquire properties on favorable terms and successfully operate them may be exposed to the following significant risks:
· we may be unable to acquire a desired property because of competition from other real estate investors with significant capital, including both publicly traded REITs and institutional investment funds;
· even if we are able to acquire a desired property, competition from other potential acquirers may significantly increase the purchase price or result in other less favorable terms;
· even if we enter into agreements for the acquisition of properties, these agreements are subject to customary conditions to closing, including completion of due diligence investigations to our satisfaction;
· we may be unable to finance acquisitions on favorable terms or at all;
· we may spend more than budgeted amounts to make necessary improvements or renovations to acquired properties;
· we may be unable to integrate new acquisitions quickly and efficiently, particularly acquisitions of operating properties or portfolios of properties, into our existing operations, and our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected;
· acquired properties may be subject to reassessment, which may result in higher than expected property tax payments;
· market conditions may result in higher than expected vacancy rates and lower than expected rental rates; and
· we may acquire properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, with respect to unknown liabilities such as liabilities for clean-up of undisclosed environmental contamination, claims by tenants, vendors or other persons dealing with the former owners of the properties and claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers, and others indemnified by the former owners of the properties.
If we cannot finance property acquisitions on favorable terms, or operate acquired properties to meet our financial expectations, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, ability to make distributions to our stockholders, trading price of our common stock, and ability to satisfy our debt service obligations could be materially adversely affected.
We may suffer economic harm as a result of making unsuccessful acquisitions in new markets.
We may pursue selective acquisitions of properties in markets 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 markets, such as the risk that we do not correctly anticipate conditions or trends in a new market and are therefore not able to generate profit from the acquired property. If this occurs, it could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows, our ability to make distributions to our stockholders, the trading price of our common stock, and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations.
The acquisition of new properties or the development of new properties may give rise to difficulties in predicting revenue potential.
We may continue to acquire additional properties and may seek to develop our existing land holdings strategically as warranted by market conditions. These acquisitions and developments could fail to perform in accordance with expectations. If we fail to accurately estimate occupancy levels, operating costs, or costs of improvements to bring an acquired property or a development property up to the standards established for our intended market position, the performance of the property may be below expectations. Acquired properties may have characteristics or deficiencies affecting their valuation or revenue potential that we have not yet discovered. We cannot assure our stockholders that the performance of properties acquired or developed by us will increase or be maintained under our management.
We may be unsuccessful with our real estate development and redevelopment activities.
A key component of our long term business model consists of the ground-up development and redevelopment of space for lease. Our success with our development and redevelopment projects depends on many risks that may adversely affect our business, including those associated with:
· negative worldwide economic, financial, and banking conditions;
· worldwide economic recession, lack of confidence, and/or high structural unemployment;
· financial, banking, and credit market conditions;
· the seizure or illiquidity of credit markets;
· national, local, and worldwide economic conditions;
· delays in construction;
· budget overruns;
· lack of availability and/or increasing costs of materials;
· commodity pricing of building materials and supplies;
· financing availability;
· changes in the life sciences, financial, and banking industries;
· volatility in interest rates;
· labor availability and/or strikes;
· uncertainty of leasing;
· timing of the commencement of rental payments;
· changes in local submarket conditions;
· delays or denials of entitlements or permits; and
· other property development uncertainties.
In addition, development and redevelopment activities, regardless of whether they are ultimately successful, typically require a substantial portion of management’s time and attention. This may distract management from focusing on other operational activities. If we are unable to complete development and/or redevelopment projects successfully, our business may be adversely affected.
We have spaces available for redevelopment that may be difficult to redevelop or successfully lease to tenants.
A key component of our long term business model is redevelopment of existing office, warehouse, or shell space as generic life science laboratory space that can be leased at higher rates. There can be no assurance that we will be able to complete spaces undergoing redevelopment or initiate additional redevelopment projects. Redevelopment activities subject us to many risks, including delays in permitting, financing availability, engaging contractors, the availability and pricing of materials and labor, and other redevelopment uncertainties. In addition, there can be no assurance that, upon completion, we will be able to successfully lease the space or lease the space at rental rates at or above the returns on our investment anticipated by our stockholders.
Improvements to life science properties are significantly more costly than traditional office space.
Our properties contain infrastructure improvements that are significantly more costly than other property types. Although we have historically been able to recover the additional investment in infrastructure improvements through higher rental rates, there is the risk that we will not be able to continue to do so in the future. Typical improvements include:
· reinforced concrete floors;
· upgraded roof loading capacity;
· increased floor to ceiling heights;
· heavy-duty heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (“HVAC”) systems;
· enhanced environmental control technology;
· significantly upgraded electrical, gas, and plumbing infrastructure; and
· laboratory benches.
We could default on leases for land on which some of our properties are located or held for future development.
As of December 31, 2010, we held ground lease obligations including leases for 21 of our properties and land development parcels. These lease obligations have remaining lease terms from 22 to 96 years, excluding extension options. If we default under the terms of any particular lease, we may lose the ownership rights to the property subject to the lease. Upon expiration of a lease and all of its options, we may not be able to renegotiate a new lease on favorable terms, if at all. The loss of the ownership rights to these properties or an increase of rental expense could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, stock price, and ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and pay distributions to our stockholders.
We may not be able to operate properties successfully.
Our success depends in large part upon our ability to operate our properties successfully. If we are unable to do so, our business could be adversely affected. The ownership and operation of real estate is subject to many risks that may adversely affect our business and our ability to make payments to our stockholders, including the risks that:
· our properties may not perform as we expect;
· we may lease space at rates below our expectations;
· we may not be able to obtain financing on acceptable terms; and
· we may underestimate the cost of improvements required to maintain or improve space up to standards established for the market position intended for that property.
If we encounter any of these risks, our business and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be adversely affected.
We may experience increased operating costs, which may reduce profitability.
Our properties are subject to increases in operating expenses including insurance, property taxes, utilities, administrative costs, and other costs associated with security, landscaping, and repairs and maintenance of our properties. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 96% of our leases (on a rentable square footage basis) were triple net leases, requiring tenants to pay substantially all real estate taxes and insurance, common area, and other operating expenses (including increases thereto) in addition to base rent. However, we cannot be certain that our tenants will be able to bear the full burden of these higher costs, or that such increased costs will not lead them, or other prospective tenants, to seek space elsewhere. If operating expenses increase, the availability of other comparable space in the markets we operate in may hinder or limit our ability to increase our rents; if operating expenses increase without a corresponding increase in revenues, our profitability could diminish and limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
In order to maintain the quality of our properties and successfully compete against other properties, we must periodically spend money to maintain, repair, and renovate our properties, which reduces our cash flows.
If our properties are not as attractive to customers in terms of rent, services, condition, or location as properties owned by our competitors, we could lose tenants or suffer lower rental rates. As a result, we may from time to time be required to make significant capital expenditures to maintain the competitiveness of our properties. There can be no assurances that any such expenditures would result in higher occupancy, higher rental rates, or deter existing tenants from relocating to properties owned by our competitors.
We face substantial competition in our target markets.
The significant competition for business in our target markets could have an adverse effect on our operations. We compete for investment opportunities with:
· insurance companies;
· pension and investment funds;
· private equity entities;
· partnerships;
· developers;
· investment companies;
· other REITs; and
· owners/occupants.
Many of these entities have substantially greater financial resources than we do and may be able to pay more than we can or accept more risk than we are willing to accept. These entities may be less sensitive to risks with respect to the creditworthiness of a tenant or the geographic concentration of their investments. Competition may also reduce the number of suitable investment opportunities available to us or may increase the bargaining power of property owners seeking to sell.
Poor economic conditions in our markets could adversely affect our business.
Our properties are located in the following markets:
· California – San Diego;
· California – San Francisco Bay;
· Greater Boston;
· New York City/New Jersey/Suburban Philadelphia;
· Southeast;
· Suburban Washington, D.C.;
· Washington – Seattle; and
· International.
As a result of our geographic concentration, we depend upon the local economic and real estate conditions in these markets. We are, therefore, subject to increased exposure (positive or negative) to economic, tax, currency fluctuations, and other competitive factors specific to markets in confined geographic areas. Our operations may also be affected if too many competing properties are built in any of these markets. An economic downturn in any of these markets could adversely affect our operations and our ability to make distributions to stockholders. We cannot assure our stockholders that these markets will continue to grow or remain favorable to the life science industry.
We are largely dependent on the life science industry, and changes within the industry may adversely impact our revenues from lease payments and results of operations.
In general, our business and strategy is to invest primarily in properties used by tenants in the life science industry. Our business could be adversely affected if the life science industry is impacted by the current economic, financial, and banking crisis or if the life science industry migrates from the United States to other countries. Because of our industry focus, events within the life science industry may have a more pronounced effect on our ability to make distributions to our stockholders than if we had more diversified investments. Also, some of our properties may be better suited for a particular life science industry tenant and could require modification before we are able to re-lease vacant space to another life science industry tenant. Generally, our properties may not be suitable for lease to traditional office tenants without significant expenditures on renovations.
Our ability to negotiate contractual rent escalations on future leases and to achieve increases in rental rates will depend upon market conditions and the demand for life science properties at the time the leases are negotiated and the increases are proposed.
Many life science entities have completed mergers or consolidations. Mergers or consolidations of life science entities in the future could reduce the amount of rentable square footage requirements of our client tenants and prospective tenants which may adversely impact our revenues from lease payments and results of operations.
Our inability to renew leases or re-lease space on favorable terms as leases expire may significantly affect our business.
Our revenues are derived primarily from rental payments and reimbursement of operating expenses under our leases. If a tenant experiences a downturn in its business or other types of financial distress, it may be unable to make timely payments under its lease. Also, when our tenants decide not to renew their leases or terminate early, we may not be able to re-lease the space. Even if tenants decide to renew or lease space, the terms of renewals or new leases, including the cost of any tenant improvements, concessions, and lease commissions, may be less favorable to us than current lease terms. Consequently, we could generate less cash flow from the affected properties than expected, which could negatively impact our business. We may have to divert cash flow generated by other properties to meet our debt service payments, if any, or to pay other expenses related to owning the affected properties. As of December 31, 2010, leases at our properties representing approximately 13.3% and 10.6% of the aggregate total rentable square footage of our properties, excluding month-to-month leases, were scheduled to expire in 2011 and 2012, respectively.
High levels of regulation, expense, and uncertainty may adversely affect the life science industry as well as our tenants’ business, results of operations, and financial condition which may adversely affect their ability to make rental payments to us and consequently, may materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
Our life science industry tenants are subject to a number of risks unique to the life science industry, including the following, any one or more of which may adversely affect their ability to make rental payments to us and consequently, may materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition:
· Our client tenants sell products and services in an industry that is characterized by rapid and significant technological changes, frequent new product and service introductions and enhancements, evolving industry standards, and uncertainty over the implementation of new heathcare reform legislation, which may cause them to lose competitive positions and adversely affect their operations.
· Some of our tenants developing potential drugs may find that their drugs are not effective, or may even be harmful, when tested in humans.
· Some of our tenants depend on reimbursements from various government entities or private insurance plans and reimbursements may decrease in the future or may not be obtained.
· Some of our tenants may not be able to manufacture their drugs economically, even if such drugs are proven through human clinical trials to be safe and effective in humans.
· Drugs that are developed and manufactured by some of our tenants require regulatory approval, including the approval of the United States Food and Drug Administration, prior to being made, marketed, sold, and used. The regulatory approval process to manufacture and market drugs is costly, typically takes several years, requires the expenditure of substantial resources, and is often unpredictable. A tenant may fail or experience significant delays in obtaining these approvals.
· Some of our tenants and their licensors require patent, copyright or trade secret protection to develop, make, market, and sell their products and technologies. A tenant may be unable to commercialize its products or technologies if patents covering such products or technologies do not issue, or are successfully challenged, narrowed, invalidated, or circumvented by third parties, or if the tenant fails to obtain licenses to the discoveries of third parties necessary to commercialize its products or technologies.
· A drug made by a tenant may not be well accepted by doctors and patients, may be less effective or accepted than a competitor’s drug, or may be subsequently recalled from the market, even if it is successfully developed, proven safe and effective in human clinical trials, manufactured, and the requisite regulatory approvals are obtained.
· Some of our tenants require significant funding to develop and commercialize their products and technologies, which funding must be obtained from venture capital firms, private investors, the public markets, companies in the life science industry, or federal, state, and local governments. Such funding may become unavailable or difficult to obtain. The ability of each tenant to raise capital will depend on their financial and operating condition and the overall condition of the financial, banking, and economic environment.
· Even with sufficient funding, some of our tenants may not be able to discover or identify potential drug targets in humans, or potential drugs for use in humans, or to create tools or technologies which are commercially useful in the discovery or identification of potential drug targets or drugs.
We cannot assure our stockholders that our tenants will be able to develop, make, market, or sell their products and technologies due to the risks inherent in the life science industry. Any tenant that is unable to avoid, or sufficiently mitigate, the risks described above, may have difficulty making rental payments to us.
Our results of operations depend on our tenants’ research and development efforts and their ability to obtain funding for these efforts.
Our client tenant base includes entities in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, life science, and related industries, academic institutions, government institutions, and private foundations. Our tenants determine their research and development budgets based on several factors, including the need to develop new products, the availability of governmental and other funding, competition, and the general availability of resources.
Research and development budgets fluctuate due to changes in available resources, research priorities, general economic conditions, institutional and governmental budgetary limitations, and mergers and consolidations of entities in the life science industry. Our business could be adversely impacted by a significant decrease in life science research and development expenditures by either our tenants or the life science industry.
Additionally, our client tenants include research institutions whose funding is largely dependent on grants from government agencies such as the United States National Institutes of Health (“NIH”), the National Science Foundation, and similar agencies or organizations. Government funding of research and development is subject to the political process, which is often unpredictable. Other programs, such as Homeland Security or defense could be viewed by the government as a higher priority. Additionally, proposals to reduce or eliminate budgetary deficits have sometimes included reduced allocations to the NIH and other government agencies that fund research and development activities. Any shift away from funding of life science research and development or delays surrounding the approval of governmental budget proposals may adversely impact our tenants’ operations, which in turn may impact their ability to make lease payments to us and adversely impact our results of operations.
The inability of a tenant to pay us rent could adversely affect our business.
Our revenues are derived primarily from rental payments and reimbursement of operating expenses under our leases. If our tenants, especially significant tenants, fail to make rental payments under their leases, our financial condition, cash flow, and ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be adversely affected.
As of December 31, 2010, we had 453 leases with a total of 373 tenants, and 73 of our 167 properties were single-tenant properties. Our three largest tenants accounted for approximately 14.1% of our aggregate annualized base rent, or approximately 6.6%, 3.8%, and 3.7%, respectively. “Annualized base rent” means the annualized fixed base rental amount in effect as of December 31, 2010, using rental revenues calculated on a straight-line basis in accordance with GAAP. Annualized base rent does not include reimbursements for real estate taxes, insurance, utilities, common area, and other operating expenses, substantially all of which are borne by the tenants in the case of triple net leases.
The bankruptcy or insolvency of a major tenant may also adversely affect the income produced by a property. If any of our tenants becomes a debtor in a case under the United States Bankruptcy Code, as amended, we cannot evict that tenant solely because of its bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court may authorize the tenant to reject and terminate its lease with us. Our claim against such a tenant for unpaid future rent would be subject to a statutory limitation that might be substantially less than the remaining rent actually owed to us under the tenant’s lease. Any shortfall in rent payments could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Our United States government tenants may not receive annual budget appropriations, which could adversely affect their ability to pay us.
United States government tenants may be subject to annual budget appropriations. If one of our United States government tenants fails to receive its annual budget appropriation, it might not be able to make its lease payments to us. In addition, defaults under leases with federal government tenants are governed by federal statute and not by state eviction or rent deficiency laws. All of our leases with United States government tenants provide that the government tenant may terminate the lease under certain circumstances. As of December 31, 2010, leases with United States government tenants at our properties accounted for approximately 2.8% of our aggregate annualized base rent.
We could be held liable for damages resulting from our tenants’ use of hazardous materials.
Many of our life science industry tenants engage in research and development activities that involve controlled use of hazardous materials, chemicals, and biological and radioactive compounds. In the event of contamination or injury from the use of these hazardous materials, we could be held liable for damages that result. This liability could exceed our resources and any recovery available through any applicable environmental remediation insurance coverage, which could adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Together with our tenants, we must comply with federal, state, and local laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste products. Failure to comply with, or changes in, these laws and regulations could adversely affect our business or our tenants’ businesses and their ability to make rental payments to us.
Our properties may have defects that are unknown to us.
Although we review the physical condition of our properties before they are acquired, and on a periodic basis after acquisition, any of our properties may have characteristics or deficiencies unknown to us that could adversely affect the property’s value or revenue potential.
We may incur significant costs complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act and similar laws.
Under the ADA, places of public accommodation and/or commercial facilities are required to meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. We may be required to make substantial capital expenditures at our properties to comply with this law. In addition, non-compliance could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants.
A number of additional federal, state, and local laws and regulations exist regarding access by disabled persons. These regulations may require modifications to our properties or may affect future renovations. These expenditures may have an adverse impact on overall returns on our investments.
We may incur significant costs if we fail to comply with laws or if laws change.
Our properties are subject to many federal, state, and local regulatory requirements and to state and local fire, life-safety, and other requirements. If we do not comply with all of these requirements, we may have to pay fines to government authorities or damage awards to private litigants. We do not know whether these requirements will change or whether new requirements will be imposed. Changes in these regulatory requirements could require us to make significant unanticipated expenditures. These expenditures could have an adverse effect on us and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
We could incur significant costs complying with environmental laws.
Federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations may require us, as a current or prior owner or operator of real estate, to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products released at or from any of our properties. The cost of investigating and cleaning up contamination could be substantial and could exceed the amount of any environmental remediation insurance coverage available to us. In addition, the presence of contamination, or the failure to properly clean it up, may adversely affect our ability to lease or sell an affected property, or to borrow funds using that property as collateral.
Under environmental laws and regulations, we may have to pay government entities or third parties for property damage and for investigation and clean-up costs incurred by those parties relating to contaminated properties regardless of whether we knew of or caused the contamination. Even if more than one party may have been responsible for the contamination, we may be held responsible for all of the clean-up costs. In addition, third parties may sue us for damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination or jointly responsible parties may contest their responsibility or be financially unable to pay their share of such costs.
Environmental laws also govern the presence, maintenance, and removal of asbestos-containing materials. These laws may impose fines and penalties on us for the release of asbestos-containing materials and may allow third parties to seek recovery from us for personal injury from exposure to asbestos fibers. We have detected asbestos-containing materials at some of our properties, but we do not expect that they will result in material environmental costs or liabilities to us.
Environmental laws and regulations also require the removal or upgrading of certain underground storage tanks and regulate:
· the discharge of storm water, wastewater, and any water pollutants;
· the emission of air pollutants;
· the generation, management, and disposal of hazardous or toxic chemicals, substances, or wastes; and
· workplace health and safety.
Many of our tenants routinely handle hazardous substances and wastes as part of their operations at our properties. Environmental laws and regulations subject our tenants, and potentially us, to liability resulting from these activities. Environmental liabilities could also affect a tenant’s ability to make rental payments to us. We require our tenants to comply with these environmental laws and regulations and to indemnify us for any related liabilities.
Independent environmental consultants have conducted Phase I or similar environmental assessments at our properties. We intend to use consultants to conduct similar environmental assessments on our future acquisitions. This type of assessment generally includes a site inspection, interviews, and a public records review, but no subsurface sampling. These assessments and certain additional investigations of our properties have not to date revealed any environmental liability that we believe would have a material adverse effect on our business, assets, or results of operations.
The additional investigations have included, as appropriate:
· asbestos surveys;
· radon surveys;
· lead surveys;
· mold surveys;
· additional public records review;
· subsurface sampling; and
· other testing.
Nevertheless, it is possible that the assessments on our properties have not revealed, nor that assessments on future acquisitions will reveal, all environmental liabilities. Consequently, there may be material environmental liabilities of which we are unaware that may result in substantial costs to us or our tenants and that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our properties may contain or develop harmful mold or suffer from other air quality issues, which could lead to liability for adverse health effects and costs to remedy the problem.
When excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold may grow, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants. Indoor air quality issues can also stem from inadequate ventilation, chemical contamination from indoor or outdoor sources, and other biological contaminants such as pollen, viruses, and bacteria. Indoor exposure to airborne toxins or irritants above certain levels can be alleged to cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. As a result, the presence of significant mold or other airborne contaminants at any of our properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the mold or other airborne contaminants from the affected property or increase indoor ventilation. In addition, the presence of significant mold or other airborne contaminants could expose us to liability from our tenants, employees of our tenants, and others if property damage or health concerns arise.
We could incur significant costs due to the financial condition of our insurance carriers.
We insure our properties with insurance companies that we believe have a good rating at the time our policies are put into effect. The financial condition of one or more of our insurance companies that we hold policies with may be negatively impacted resulting in their inability to pay on future insurance claims. Their inability to pay future claims may have a negative impact on our financial results. In addition, the failure of one or more insurance companies may increase the costs to renew our insurance policies or increase the cost of insuring additional properties and recently developed or redeveloped properties.
Our insurance may not adequately cover all potential losses.
If we experience a loss at any of our properties that is not covered by insurance or that exceeds our insurance policy limits, we could lose the capital invested in the affected property and, possibly, future revenues from that property. In addition, we could continue to be obligated on any mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the affected properties. We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage, and rental loss insurance with respect to our properties. We have obtained earthquake insurance for our properties that are located in the vicinity of active earthquake faults. We also carry environmental remediation insurance and have title insurance policies for our properties. We obtain our title insurance policies when we acquire the property, with each policy covering an amount equal to the initial purchase price of each property. Accordingly, any of our title insurance policies may be in an amount less than the current value of the related property.
Our tenants are also required to maintain comprehensive insurance, including liability and casualty insurance, that is customarily obtained for similar properties. There are, however, certain types of losses that we and our tenants do not generally insure against because they are uninsurable or because it is not economical to insure against them. The availability of coverage against certain types of losses, such as from terrorism or toxic mold, has become more limited and, when available, is at a significantly higher cost. We cannot predict whether insurance coverage against terrorism or toxic mold will remain available for our properties because insurance companies may no longer offer coverage against such losses or, if offered, such coverage may become prohibitively expensive. Many, but not all, of our properties are low-rise buildings. Toxic mold has not presented any material problems at any of our properties.
We face possible risks associated with the physical effects of climate change.
We cannot predict with certainty whether climate change is occurring and, if so, at what rate. However, the physical effects of climate change could have a material adverse effect on our properties, operations, and business. For example, most of our properties are located along the East and West coasts of the United States. To the extent climate change impacts changes in weather patterns, our markets could experience increases in storm intensity and rising sea-levels. Over time, these conditions could result in declining demand for life science laboratory space at our properties or our inability to operate the buildings at all. Climate change may also have indirect effects on our business by increasing the cost of, or availability of, property insurance on terms we find acceptable, increasing the cost of energy and increasing the cost of snow removal at our properties. There can be no assurance that climate change will not have a material adverse effect on our properties, operations, or business.
Terrorist attacks may have an adverse impact on our business and operating results and could decrease the value of our assets.
Terrorist attacks such as those that took place on September 11, 2001, could have a material adverse impact on our business and operating results. Future terrorist attacks may result in declining economic activity, which could reduce the demand for and the value of our properties. To the extent that future terrorist attacks impact our tenants, their businesses similarly could be adversely affected, including their ability to continue to honor their lease obligations.
The loss of services of any of our senior executive officers could adversely affect us.
We depend upon the services of relatively few executive officers. The loss of services of any one of them may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and prospects. We use the extensive personal and business relationships that members of our management have developed over time with owners of life science properties and with major life science industry tenants. We cannot assure our stockholders that our senior executive officers will remain employed with us.
Competition for skilled personnel could increase labor costs.
We compete with various other companies in attracting and retaining qualified and skilled personnel. We depend on our ability to attract and retain skilled management personnel who are responsible for the day-to-day operations of our company. Competitive pressures may require that we enhance our pay and benefits package to compete effectively for such personnel. We may not be able to offset such additional costs by increasing the rates we charge tenants. If there is an increase in these costs or if we fail to attract and retain qualified and skilled personnel, our business and operating results could be adversely affected.
If we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would be taxed at corporate rates and would not be able to take certain deductions when computing our taxable income.
If, in any taxable year, we fail to qualify as a REIT:
· we would be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates;
· we would not be allowed a deduction for distributions to our stockholders in computing taxable income;
· unless we were entitled to relief under the Internal Revenue Code, we would also be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which we lost qualification; and
· we would no longer be required by the Internal Revenue Code to make any distributions to our stockholders.
As a result of any additional tax liability, we might need to borrow funds or liquidate certain investments in order to pay the applicable tax. Accordingly, funds available for investment or distribution to our stockholders would be reduced for each of the years involved.
Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the Internal Revenue Code to our operations and financial results, and the determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control. There are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations of these provisions. Although we believe that we have operated in a manner so as to qualify as a REIT, we cannot assure our stockholders that we are or will remain so qualified.
In addition, although we are not aware of any pending tax legislation that would adversely affect our ability to operate as a REIT, new legislation, regulations, administrative interpretations, or court decisions could change the tax laws or interpretations of the tax laws regarding qualification as a REIT, or the federal income tax consequences of that qualification, in a manner that is adverse to our stockholders.
We may change our business policies without stockholder approval.
Our board of directors determines all of our material business policies, with management’s input, including those related to our:
· status as a REIT;
· incurrence of debt and debt management activities;
· selective development, redevelopment, and acquisition activities;
· stockholder distributions; and
· other policies, as appropriate.
Our board of directors may amend or revise these policies at any time without a vote of our stockholders. A change in these policies could adversely affect our business and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and stock price.
Pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are required to provide a report by management on internal control over financial reporting, including management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control. Changes to our business will necessitate ongoing changes to our internal control systems and processes. Internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatement because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls or fraud. Therefore, even effective internal controls can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements. If we fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls, including any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or if we experience difficulties in their implementation, our business, results of operations, and financial condition could be materially harmed, and we could fail to meet our reporting obligations and there could be a material adverse effect on our stock price.
Our business and operations would suffer in the event of system failures.
Despite system redundancy, the implementation of security measures and the existence of a disaster recovery plan for our internal information technology systems, our systems are vulnerable to damages from any number of sources, including computer viruses, unauthorized access, energy blackouts, natural disasters, terrorism, war, and telecommunication failures. Any system failure or accident that causes interruptions in our operations could result in a material disruption to our business. We may also incur additional significant costs to remedy damages caused by such disruptions.
There are limits on the ownership of our capital stock under which a stockholder may lose beneficial ownership of its shares and which may delay or prevent transactions that might otherwise be desired by our stockholders.
In order to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, not more than 50% of the value of our outstanding stock may be owned, directly or constructively, by five or fewer individuals or entities (as set forth in the Internal Revenue Code) during the last half of a taxable year. Furthermore, shares of our outstanding stock must be beneficially owned by 100 or more persons during at least 335 days of a taxable year of 12 months or during a proportionate part of a shorter taxable year.
In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT, among other reasons, our charter provides for an ownership limit, which prohibits, with certain exceptions, direct or constructive ownership of shares of stock representing more than 9.8% of the combined total value of our outstanding shares of stock by any person, as defined in our charter. Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, may waive the ownership limit for any person. However, our board of directors may not grant such waiver if, after giving effect to such waiver, five individuals could beneficially own, in the aggregate, more than 49.9% of the value of our outstanding stock. As a condition to waiving the ownership limit, our board of directors may require a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service or an opinion of counsel in order to determine our status as a REIT. Notwithstanding the receipt of any such ruling or opinion, our board of directors may impose such conditions or restrictions as it deems appropriate in connection with granting a waiver.
Our charter further prohibits transferring shares of our stock if such transfer would result in us being “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Internal Revenue Code or would result in shares of our stock being owned by fewer than 100 persons.
The constructive ownership rules are complex and may cause shares of our common stock owned directly or constructively by a group of related individuals or entities to be constructively owned by one individual or entity. A transfer of shares to a person who, as a result of the transfer, violates these limits, shall be void or shall be exchanged for shares of excess stock and transferred to a trust, for the benefit of one or more qualified charitable organizations designated by us. In that case, the intended transferee will have only a right to share, to the extent of the transferee’s original purchase price for such shares, in proceeds from the trust’s sale of those shares and will effectively forfeit its beneficial ownership of the shares. These ownership limits could delay, defer, or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for the holders of our common stock or might otherwise be desired by such holders.
In addition to the ownership limit, certain provisions of our charter and bylaws may delay or prevent transactions that may be deemed to be desirable to our stockholders.
As authorized by Maryland law, our charter allows our board of directors to cause us to issue additional authorized but unissued shares of our common stock or preferred stock and to classify or reclassify unissued shares of common or preferred stock without any stockholder approval. Our board of directors could establish a series of preferred stock that could delay, defer, or prevent a transaction that might involve a premium price for our common stock or for other reasons be desired by our common stockholders or that have a dividend preference which may adversely affect our ability to pay dividends on our common stock.
Our charter permits the removal of a director only upon a two-thirds vote of the votes entitled to be cast generally in the election of directors, and our bylaws require advance notice of a stockholder’s intention to nominate directors or to present business for consideration by stockholders at an annual meeting of our stockholders. Our charter and bylaws also contain other provisions that may delay, defer, or prevent a transaction or change in control that involves a premium price for our common stock or that for other reasons may be desired by our stockholders.
External factors may adversely impact the valuation of investments.
We hold equity investments in certain publicly traded companies and privately held entities primarily involved in the life science industry. The valuation of these investments is affected by many external factors beyond our control, including, but not limited to, market prices, market conditions, prospects for favorable or unfavorable clinical trial results, new product initiatives, and new collaborative agreements. Unfavorable developments with respect to any of these factors may have an adverse impact on the valuation of our investments.
We face risks associated with short-term liquid investments.
We have significant cash balances that we invest in a variety of short-term investments that are intended to preserve principal value and maintain a high degree of liquidity while providing current income. From time to time, these investments may include (either directly or indirectly) obligations (including certificates of deposit) of banks, money market funds, Treasury bank securities, and other highly rated short-term securities. Investments in these securities and funds are not insured against loss of principal. Under certain circumstances we may be required to redeem all or part of these securities or funds at less than par value. A decline in the value of our investments or delay or suspension of our right to redeem may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition and our ability to pay our obligations as they become due.
We have certain ownership interests outside the United States that may subject us to different or greater risks than those associated with our domestic operations.
We have four operating properties and one development parcel in Canada and construction projects in Asia for aggregate real estate investments in Canada and Asia of approximately $266.6 million and $98.3 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2010. International development, ownership, and operating activities involve risks that are different from those we face with respect to our domestic properties and operations. These risks include but are not limited to:
· adverse effects of changes in exchange rates for foreign currencies;
· any international currency gain recognized with respect to changes in exchange rates may not qualify under the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test that we must satisfy annually in order to qualify and maintain our status as a REIT;
· challenges with respect to the repatriation of foreign earnings;
· changes in foreign political, regulatory, and economic conditions, including regionally, nationally, and locally;
· challenges in managing international operations;
· challenges of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws and regulations, including those relating to real estate, corporate governance, operations, taxes, employment, and legal proceedings;
· differences in lending practices;
· differences in languages, cultures, and time zones; and
· changes in applicable laws and regulations in the United States that affect foreign operations.
Although our international activities currently represent a relatively small portion of our overall business, these risks could increase in significance which, in turn, could have an adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.
We are subject to risks from potential fluctuations in exchange rates between the United States dollar and foreign currencies.
We have four operating properties and one development parcel in Canada and construction projects in China and India. Investments in countries where the United States dollar is not the local currency are subject to international currency risk from the potential fluctuations in exchange rates between the United States dollar and the local currency. A significant decrease in the value of the Canadian dollar, Chinese Renminbi, or other foreign currencies where we may have an investment could materially affect our results of operations. We may attempt to mitigate such effects by borrowing in the local foreign currency in which we invest. Any international currency gain recognized with respect to changes in exchange rates may not qualify under the 75% gross income test or the 95% gross income test that we must satisfy annually in order to qualify and maintain our status as a REIT.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
General
As of December 31, 2010, we had 167 properties containing approximately 13.7 million rentable square feet of life science laboratory space. Our operating properties were approximately 94.3% leased as of December 31, 2010. The exteriors of our properties typically resemble traditional office properties, but the interior infrastructures are designed to accommodate the needs of life science industry tenants. These improvements typically are generic to life science industry tenants rather than being specific to a particular tenant. As a result, we believe that the improvements have long term value and utility and are usable by a wide range of life science industry tenants. Generic infrastructure improvements to our life science properties typically include:
· reinforced concrete floors;
· upgraded roof loading capacity;
· increased floor to ceiling heights;
· heavy-duty HVAC systems;
· enhanced environmental control technology;
· significantly upgraded electrical, gas, and plumbing infrastructure; and
· laboratory benches.
As of December 31, 2010, we held a fee simple interest in each of our properties, except for 21 properties that accounted for approximately 18% of the total rentable square footage of our properties. Of the 21 properties, we held four properties in the San Francisco Bay market, 13 properties in the Greater Boston market, one property in the New York City submarket, one property in the Southeast market, and two properties in the Suburban Washington, D.C. market pursuant to ground leasehold interests. See further discussion in our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto in “Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.”
In addition, as of December 31, 2010, our asset base contained approximately 1.2 million developable square feet in Canada and New York City which we held pursuant to ground leasehold interests and two land parcels aggregating approximately 547,000 rentable square feet in China which we held pursuant to land usage rights.
As of December 31, 2010, we had 453 leases with a total of 373 tenants, and 73 of our 167 properties were single-tenant properties. Leases in our multi-tenant buildings typically have terms of three to seven years, while the single-tenant building leases typically have initial terms of ten to 20 years. As of December 31, 2010:
· approximately 96% of our leases (on a rentable square footage basis) were triple net leases, requiring tenants to pay substantially all real estate taxes, insurance, utilities, common area, and other operating expenses (including increases thereto) in addition to base rent;
· approximately 91% of our leases (on a rentable square footage basis) contained effective annual rent escalations that were either fixed (generally ranging from 3% to 3.5%) or indexed based on a consumer price index or other index; and
· approximately 93% of our leases (on a rentable square footage basis) provided for the recapture of certain capital expenditures (such as HVAC systems maintenance and/or replacement, roof replacement, and parking lot resurfacing), which we believe would typically be borne by the landlord in traditional office leases.
Our leases also typically give us the right to review and approve tenant alterations to the property. Generally, tenant-installed improvements to the properties are reusable generic life science laboratory improvements and remain our property after termination of the lease at our election. However, we are permitted under the terms of most of our leases to require that the tenant, at its expense, remove certain non-generic improvements and restore the premises to their original condition.
Location of properties
The locations of our properties are diversified among a number of life science cluster submarkets. The following table sets forth, as of December 31, 2010, the total rentable square footage, annualized base rent, and encumbrances of our properties in each of our existing markets (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
Rentable Square Feet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
|
Markets |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelop- |
|
Develop- |
|
Total |
|
% of |
|
# of |
|
Annualized |
|
% of |
|
Encum- |
| ||||
|
California – San Diego |
|
2,043,199 |
|
419,722 |
|
123,430 |
|
2,586,351 |
|
18.9 |
% |
|
36 |
|
$ |
63,569 |
|
16.0 |
% |
|
$ |
135,509 |
|
|
California – San Francisco Bay |
|
1,879,290 |
|
– |
|
255,388 |
|
2,134,678 |
|
15.6 |
|
|
22 |
|
67,098 |
|
16.9 |
|
|
168,010 |
| ||
|
Greater Boston |
|
3,250,589 |
|
210,660 |
|
– |
|
3,461,249 |
|
25.3 |
|
|
38 |
|
121,277 |
|
30.5 |
|
|
251,814 |
| ||
|
NYC/New Jersey/Suburban Philadelphia |
|
747,292 |
|
– |
|
– |
|
747,292 |
|
5.5 |
|
|
9 |
|
33,747 |
|
8.5 |
|
|
15,428 |
| ||
|
Southeast |
|
713,221 |
|
30,000 |
|
97,000 |
|
840,221 |
|
6.1 |
|
|
13 |
|
15,484 |
|
3.9 |
|
|
7,756 |
| ||
|
Suburban Washington, D.C. |
|
2,458,299 |
|
95,081 |
|
– |
|
2,553,380 |
|
18.6 |
|
|
32 |
|
53,327 |
|
13.4 |
|
|
167,647 |
| ||
|
Washington – Seattle |
|
997,205 |
|
– |
|
– |
|
997,205 |
|
7.3 |
|
|
12 |
|
34,461 |
|
8.6 |
|
|
44,705 |
| ||
|
International |
|
342,394 |
|
– |
|
– |
|
342,394 |
|
2.5 |
|
|
4 |
|
8,995 |
|
2.2 |
|
|
– |
| ||
|
Subtotal |
|
12,431,489 |
|
755,463 |
|
475,818 |
|
13,662,770 |
|
99.8 |
|
|
166 |
|
$ |
397,958 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
790,869 |
|
|
Discontinued Operations/ “Held for Sale” |
|
21,000 |
|
– |
|
– |
|
21,000 |
|
0.2 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
Total |
|
12,452,489 |
|
755,463 |
|
475,818 |
|
13,683,770 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
(1) Annualized base rent means the annualized fixed base rental amount in effect as of December 31, 2010 (using rental revenue computed on a straight-line basis in accordance with GAAP). Represents annualized base rent related to our operating rentable square feet.
(2) Certain properties are pledged as security under our secured notes payable as of December 31, 2010. See Schedule III — Consolidated Financial Statement Schedule of Rental Properties and Accumulated Depreciation of Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. in “Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules” for additional information on our properties, including encumbered properties.
Property listing
The following table provides certain information about our operating properties as of December 31, 2010 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square Feet |
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy Percentage |
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
Annualized |
|
|
|
Operating and |
| |||
|
Address |
|
Submarket |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelopment |
|
Development |
|
Total |
|
Properties |
|
Base Rent |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelopment |
| |||
|
California - San Diego |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
129/153/161 North Hill Avenue & 6 Thomas |
|
LA Metro |
|
61,003 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
61,003 |
|
2 |
|
$ |
851 |
|
62.2 |
% |
|
62.2 |
% |
|
|
13112 Evening Creek Drive |
|
I-15 Corridor |
|
109,780 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
109,780 |
|
1 |
|
2,495 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
5810-5820 Nancy Ridge Drive |
|
Sorrento Mesa |
|
87,298 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
87,298 |
|
1 |
|
1,645 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
5871 Oberlin Drive |
|
Sorrento Mesa |
|
35,510 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
35,510 |
|
1 |
|
771 |
|
64.3 |
% |
|
64.3 |
% |
| |
|
6138-6150 Nancy Ridge Drive |
|
Sorrento Mesa |
|
56,698 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
56,698 |
|
1 |
|
1,586 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
6146/6166 Nancy Ridge Drive |
|
Sorrento Mesa |
|
51,273 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
51,273 |
|
2 |
|
1,008 |
|
87.4 |
% |
|
87.4 |
% |
| |
|
6175/6225/6275 Nancy Ridge Drive |
|
Sorrento Mesa |
|
60,232 |
|
47,347 |
|
- |
|
107,579 |
|
3 |
|
417 |
|
45.6 |
% |
|
25.5 |
% |
| |
|
7330 Carroll Road |
|
Sorrento Mesa |
|
66,244 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
66,244 |
|
1 |
|
2,141 |
|
89.4 |
% |
|
89.4 |
% |
| |
|
10505 Roselle Street & 3770 Tansy Street |
|
Sorrento Valley |
|
33,013 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
33,013 |
|
2 |
|
1,001 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
11025/11035/11045 Roselle Street |
|
Sorrento Valley |
|
65,910 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
65,910 |
|
3 |
|
1,565 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
3985 Sorrento Valley Boulevard |
|
Sorrento Valley |
|
60,545 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
60,545 |
|
1 |
|
1,557 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
10931/10933 North Torrey Pines Road |
|
Torrey Pines |
|
96,641 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
96,641 |
|
1 |
|
3,056 |
|
96.9 |
% |
|
96.9 |
% |
| |
|
10975 North Torrey Pines Road |
|
Torrey Pines |
|
44,733 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
44,733 |
|
1 |
|
1,614 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
11119 North Torrey Pines Road |
|
Torrey Pines |
|
- |
|
81,816 |
|
- |
|
81,816 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
N/A |
|
0.0 |
% |
| ||
|
3010 Science Park Road |
|
Torrey Pines |
|
74,557 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
74,557 |
|
1 |
|
3,215 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
3115/3215 Merryfield Row |
|
Torrey Pines |
|
158,645 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
158,645 |
|
2 |
|
6,417 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
3530/3550 John Hopkins Court & 3535/3565 General Atomics Court |
|
Torrey Pines |
|
119,684 |
|
89,923 |
|
- |
|
209,607 |
|
4 |
|
3,197 |
|
73.6 |
% |
|
42.0 |
% |
| |
|
10300 Campus Point Drive |
|
University Town Center |
|
172,434 |
|
200,636 |
|
- |
|
373,070 |
|
1 |
|
7,623 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
46.2 |
% |
| |
|
4757/4767 Nexus Centre Drive |
|
University Town Center |
|
132,330 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
132,330 |
|
2 |
|
4,914 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
5200 Research Place |
|
University Town Center |
|
346,581 |
|
- |
|
123,430 |
|
470,011 |
|
1 |
|
12,321 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
9363/9373/9393 Towne Centre Drive |
|
University Town Center |
|
138,578 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
138,578 |
|
3 |
|
3,401 |
|
83.1 |
% |
|
83.1 |
% |
| |
|
9880 Campus Point Drive |
|
University Town Center |
|
71,510 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
71,510 |
|
1 |
|
2,774 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
California - San Diego |
|
|
|
2,043,199 |
|
419,722 |
|
123,430 |
|
2,586,351 |
|
36 |
|
$ |
63,569 |
|
93.1 |
% |
|
77.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square Feet |
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy Percentage |
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
Annualized |
|
|
|
Operating and |
| |||
|
Address |
|
Submarket |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelopment |
|
Development |
|
Total |
|
Properties |
|
Base Rent |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelopment |
| |||
|
California - San Francisco Bay |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
1500 Owens Street |
|
Mission Bay |
|
123,683 |
|
- |
|
34,584 |
|
158,267 |
|
1 |
|
$ |
5,607 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
1700 Owens Street |
|
Mission Bay |
|
157,340 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
157,340 |
|
1 |
|
6,768 |
|
97.1 |
% |
|
97.1 |
% |
| |
|
455 Mission Bay Boulevard |
|
Mission Bay |
|
151,196 |
|
- |
|
58,804 |
|
210,000 |
|
1 |
|
7,188 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
2425 Garcia Ave & 2400/2450 Bayshore Pky |
|
Peninsula |
|
98,964 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
98,964 |
|
1 |
|
2,542 |
|
78.8 |
% |
|
78.8 |
% |
| |
|
2625/2627/2631 Hanover Street |
|
Peninsula |
|
32,074 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
32,074 |
|
1 |
|
1,354 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
3165 Porter Drive |
|
Peninsula |
|
91,644 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
91,644 |
|
1 |
|
3,928 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
3350 W. Bayshore Road |
|
Peninsula |
|
60,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
60,000 |
|
1 |
|
1,230 |
|
82.6 |
% |
|
82.6 |
% |
| |
|
75 & 125 Shoreway Road |
|
Peninsula |
|
82,712 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
82,712 |
|
1 |
|
2,054 |
|
94.2 |
% |
|
94.2 |
% |
| |
|
849/863 Mitten Road & 866 Malcolm Road |
|
Peninsula |
|
103,963 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
103,963 |
|
1 |
|
2,960 |
|
95.4 |
% |
|
95.4 |
% |
| |
|
249 E. Grand Avenue |
|
South San Francisco |
|
129,501 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
129,501 |
|
1 |
|
5,084 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
341/343 Oyster Point Blvd |
|
South San Francisco |
|
107,960 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
107,960 |
|
2 |
|
2,852 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
400/450 East Jamie Court |
|
South San Francisco |
|
- |
|
- |
|
162,000 |
|
162,000 |
|
2 |
|
- |
|
N |
/A |
|
N |
/A |
| |
|
500 Forbes Boulevard |
|
South San Francisco |
|
155,685 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
155,685 |
|
1 |
|
5,540 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
600/630/650 Gateway Boulevard |
|
South San Francisco |
|
150,960 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
150,960 |
|
3 |
|
3,645 |
|
78.0 |
% |
|
78.0 |
% |
| |
|
681 Gateway Boulevard |
|
South San Francisco |
|
126,971 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
126,971 |
|
1 |
|
6,161 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
7000 Shoreline Court |
|
South San Francisco |
|
136,393 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
136,393 |
|
1 |
|
4,272 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
901/951 Gateway Boulevard |
|
South San Francisco |
|
170,244 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
170,244 |
|
2 |
|
5,913 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
California - San Francisco Bay |
|
|
|
1,879,290 |
|
- |
|
255,388 |
|
2,134,678 |
|
22 |
|
$ |
67,098 |
|
95.8 |
% |
|
95.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Greater Boston |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
100 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
255,441 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
255,441 |
|
1 |
|
$ |
17,304 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
200 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
177,101 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
177,101 |
|
1 |
|
9,846 |
|
96.5 |
% |
|
96.5 |
% |
| |
|
300 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
175,609 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
175,609 |
|
1 |
|
10,551 |
|
93.7 |
% |
|
93.7 |
% |
| |
|
400 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
177,662 |
|
17,114 |
|
- |
|
194,776 |
|
1 |
|
6,264 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
91.2 |
% |
| |
|
500 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
184,207 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
184,207 |
|
1 |
|
9,871 |
|
95.3 |
% |
|
95.3 |
% |
| |
|
600 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
128,224 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
128,224 |
|
1 |
|
4,493 |
|
99.6 |
% |
|
99.6 |
% |
| |
|
700 Technology Square |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
48,930 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
48,930 |
|
1 |
|
1,773 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
161 First Street |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
46,356 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
46,356 |
|
1 |
|
1,839 |
|
99.5 |
% |
|
99.5 |
% |
| |
|
167 Sidney Street |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
26,589 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
26,589 |
|
1 |
|
1,388 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
215 First Street |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
333,668 |
|
33,001 |
|
- |
|
366,669 |
|
1 |
|
9,556 |
|
92.1 |
% |
|
83.8 |
% |
| |
|
300 Third Street |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
131,639 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
131,639 |
|
1 |
|
7,100 |
|
98.3 |
% |
|
98.3 |
% |
| |
|
480 Arsenal |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
140,744 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
140,744 |
|
1 |
|
4,529 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
500 Arsenal Street |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
45,000 |
|
47,500 |
|
- |
|
92,500 |
|
1 |
|
2,054 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
48.6 |
% |
| |
|
780/790 Memorial Drive |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
98,497 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
98,497 |
|
2 |
|
6,296 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
79/96 Charlestown Navy Yard |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
24,940 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
24,940 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
| |
|
99 Erie Street |
|
Cambridge/Inner Suburbs |
|
27,960 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
27,960 |
|
1 |
|
552 |
|
42.3 |
% |
|
42.3 |
% |
| |
|
100 Beaver Street |
|
Rte 128 |
|
82,330 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
82,330 |
|
1 |
|
2,302 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
13-15 DeAngelo Drive |
|
Rte 128 |
|
30,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
30,000 |
|
1 |
|
441 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
19 Presidential Way |
|
Rte 128 |
|
128,325 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
128,325 |
|
1 |
|
3,398 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
29 Hartwell Avenue |
|
Rte 128 |
|
59,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
59,000 |
|
1 |
|
2,671 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
3 Preston Court |
|
Rte 128 |
|
30,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
30,000 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
| |
|
35 Hartwell Avenue |
|
Rte 128 |
|
46,700 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
46,700 |
|
1 |
|
1,650 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
35 Wiggins Avenue |
|
Rte 128 |
|
48,640 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
48,640 |
|
1 |
|
724 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
44 Hartwell Avenue |
|
Rte 128 |
|
26,828 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
26,828 |
|
1 |
|
1,105 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
45-47 Wiggins Avenue |
|
Rte 128 |
|
38,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
38,000 |
|
1 |
|
1,235 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
60 Westview Street |
|
Rte 128 |
|
40,200 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
40,200 |
|
1 |
|
1,257 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
6-8 Preston Court |
|
Rte 128 |
|
54,391 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
54,391 |
|
1 |
|
603 |
|
84.0 |
% |
|
84.0 |
% |
| |
|
111 Forbes Boulevard |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
58,280 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
58,280 |
|
1 |
|
260 |
|
28.6 |
% |
|
28.6 |
% |
| |
|
130 Forbes Boulevard |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
97,566 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
97,566 |
|
1 |
|
871 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
155 Fortune Boulevard |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
36,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
36,000 |
|
1 |
|
806 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
20 Walkup Drive |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
- |
|
113,045 |
|
- |
|
113,045 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
N/A |
|
0.0 |
% |
| ||
|
30 Bearfoot Road |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
60,759 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
60,759 |
|
1 |
|
2,765 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
306 Belmont Street |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
78,916 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
78,916 |
|
1 |
|
1,139 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
350 Plantation Street |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
11,774 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
11,774 |
|
1 |
|
173 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
377 Plantation Street |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
92,711 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
92,711 |
|
1 |
|
2,082 |
|
85.1 |
% |
|
85.1 |
% |
| |
|
381 Plantation Street |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
92,423 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
92,423 |
|
1 |
|
1,733 |
|
85.0 |
% |
|
85.0 |
% |
| |
|
One Innovation Drive |
|
Rte 495/Worcester |
|
115,179 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
115,179 |
|
1 |
|
2,646 |
|
96.3 |
% |
|
96.3 |
% |
| |
|
Greater Boston |
|
|
|
3,250,589 |
|
210,660 |
|
- |
|
3,461,249 |
|
38 |
|
$ |
121,277 |
|
93.6 |
% |
|
87.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square Feet |
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy Percentage |
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
Annualized |
|
|
|
Operating and |
| |||
|
Address |
|
Submarket |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelopment |
|
Development |
|
Total |
|
Properties |
|
Base Rent |
|
Operating |
|
Redevelopment |
| |||
|
NYC/New Jersey/Suburban Philadelphia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
100 Phillips Parkway |
|
Bergen County |
|
78,501 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
78,501 |
|
1 |
|
$ |
2,292 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
450 E. 29th Street |
|
Midtown Manhattan |
|
308,388 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
308,388 |
|
1 |
|
24,858 |
|
92.4 |
% |
|
92.4 |
% |
| |
|
102 Witmer Road |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
50,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
50,000 |
|
1 |
|
3,345 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
200 Lawrence Road |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
111,451 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
111,451 |
|
1 |
|
1,246 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
210 Welsh Pool Road |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
59,415 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
59,415 |
|
1 |
|
946 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
5100 Campus Drive |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
21,782 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
21,782 |
|
1 |
|
325 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
701 Veterans Circle |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
35,155 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
35,155 |
|
1 |
|
735 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
702 Electronic Drive |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
40,000 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
40,000 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
| |
|
279 Princeton Road |
|
Princeton |
|
42,600 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
42,600 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
| |
|
NYC/New Jersey/Suburban Philadelphia |
|
|
|
747,292 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
747,292 |
|
9 |
|
$ |
33,747 |
|
85.8 |
% |
|
85.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Southeast |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
555 Heritage Drive |
|
Palm Beach |
|
44,855 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
44,855 |
|
1 |
|
$ |
439 |
|
60.4 |
% |
|
60.4 |
% |
|
|
100 Capitola Drive |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
65,992 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
65,992 |
|
1 |
|
990 |
|
99.4 |
% |
|
99.4 |
% |
| |
|
108/110/112/114 Alexander Road |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
158,417 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
158,417 |
|
1 |
|
4,954 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
2525 E. NC Highway 54 |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
81,580 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
81,580 |
|
1 |
|
1,655 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
5 Triangle Drive |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
32,120 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
32,120 |
|
1 |
|
824 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
601 Keystone Park Drive |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
77,395 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
77,395 |
|
1 |
|
1,360 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
| |
|
6101 Quadrangle Drive |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
- |
|
30,000 |
|
- |
|
30,000 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
N |
/A |
|
0.0 |
% |
| |
|
7 Triangle Drive |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
- |
|
- |
|
97,000 |
|
97,000 |
|
1 |
|
- |
|
N |
/A |
|
N |
/A |
| |
|
7010/7020/7030 Kit Creek |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
133,654 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
133,654 |
|
3 |
|
2,957 |
|
89.4 |
% |
|
89.4 |
% |
| |
|
800/801 Capitola Drive |
|
Research Triangle Park |
|
119,208 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
119,208 |
|
2 |
|
2,305 |
|
87.4 |
% |
|
87.4 |
% |
| |
|
Southeast |
|
|
|
713,221 |
|
30,000 |
|
97,000 |
|
840,221 |
|
13 |
|
$ |
15,484 |
|
93.4 |
% |
|
89.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Suburban Washington, D.C. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
8000/9000/10000 Virginia Manor Road |
|
Beltsville |
|
191,884 |
|
- |
|
- |
|
191,884 |
|
1 |
|
$ |
2,348 |
|
93.2 |
% |
|
93.2 |
% |
|
|
1201 Clopper Road |
|
Gaithersburg |
|
143,585 |
|
- |
| |||||||||||||||