UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.    )

Filed by the Registrant  ¨                            Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ¨

Check the appropriate box:

March 22, 201327, 2015

Dear Shareholder:

Please accept our invitation to attend our Annual Meeting of Shareholders on Wednesday, May 1, 20136, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. This year’s meeting will be held at Fox Hill ClubAMP by Strathmore located at the Trust’s Pike & Residences, 8300 Burdette Road,Rose property, 11810 Grand Park Avenue, North Bethesda, Maryland.

The business to be conducted at the meeting is described in the formal notice that follows. In addition, management will provide a review of 20122014 operating results and discuss the outlook for the future. After the formal presentation, our Trustees and management will be available to answer any questions you may have.

You may vote by mail by completing, signing and returning the enclosed proxy card. You also may vote either by telephone (1-800-PROXIES or 1-800-776-9437) or on the Internet (www.voteproxy.com) by following the instructions on your proxy card. We also encourage you to read the section titled “How may “registered” shareholders and shareholders holding Shares in “street name” elect to receive future shareholder materials electronically” included in this proxy statement. This section provides information on how to receive future shareholder materials, including proxy materials and annual reports, electronically either through e-mail or by accessing the Internet rather than by mail. These online services not only allow you to access these materials more quickly than ever before, but help us reduce printing and postage costs and be more environmentally friendly while decreasing the amount of paper delivered to your home.

Your vote is important and we urge you to vote by one of the three methods mentioned above.

We look forward to seeing you on May 1.6.

Sincerely,

Joseph S. Vassalluzzo		Donald C. Wood
Non-Executive Chairman of the Board		President and Chief Executive Officer

FEDERAL REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

TO BE HELD MAY 1, 20136, 2015

To Our Shareholders:

The 20132015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Federal Realty Investment Trust (the “Trust”) will be held at Fox Hill Club & Residences, 8300 Burdette Road,AMP by Strathmore located at11810 Grand Park Avenue, North Bethesda, Maryland, on Wednesday, May 1, 2013,6, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of considering and acting upon the following:

Shareholders of record at the close of business on March 14, 201320, 2015 are entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting.

For the Trustees:

Dawn M. Becker

Executive Vice President—General

Counsel and Secretary

Your vote is important. Even if you plan to attend the meeting, please vote by completing, signing and returning the enclosed proxy card by mail, by telephone (1-800-PROXIES or 1-800-776-9437) or on the Internet (www.voteproxy.com) by following the instructions on your proxy card.

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE SHAREHOLDER MEETING TO BE HELD ON MAY 1, 20136, 2015

The 20132015 Proxy Statement and 20122014 Annual Report to Shareholders, which includes our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012,2014, are available at www.federalrealty.com.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FEDERAL REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST

1626 East Jefferson Street, Rockville, Maryland 20852

PROXY STATEMENT

March 15, 201321, 2015

We are providing these proxy materials in connection with the 20132015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (“Annual Meeting”) of Federal Realty Investment Trust (the “Trust”). These materials will assist you in voting your common shares of beneficial interest of the Trust (“Shares”) by providing information on matters that will be presented at the Annual Meeting.

ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING

Who is soliciting my vote?

The Board of Trustees (the “Board” or “Board of Trustees”) of the Trust is soliciting your proxy to vote on matters that will be presented at our Annual Meeting.

When will the Annual Meeting take place?

The Annual Meeting will be held at 10:00 a.m. EDT, Wednesday, May 1, 2013,6, 2015, at Fox Hill Club & Residences, 8300 Burdette Road,AMP by Strathmore, 11810 Grand Park Avenue, North Bethesda, Maryland.

What is the purpose of the Annual Meeting?

To vote on the following matters:

What are the Board’s recommendations?

The Board recommends a vote:

Why am I receiving these proxy materials?

You are receiving these materials because you owned our Shares as a “registered” shareholder or you held Shares in “street name” at the close of business on the record date for the Annual Meeting.

What is the difference between a “registered” shareholder and holding Shares in “street name?”

If your Shares are registered directly in your name with American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, our transfer agent, you are a “registered” shareholder. If you own Shares through a broker, bank, trust or other nominee rather than in your own name, you are the beneficial owner of the Shares, but considered to be holding the Shares in “street name.”

Why did I receive a “Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials” in the mail regarding the Internet availability of proxy materials instead of a paper copy of proxy materials?

As permitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we are furnishing proxy materials including this proxy statement and our 20122014 Annual Report to Shareholders, which includes our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012,2014, to our shareholders who hold their Shares in “street name” by providing access to such documents on the Internet instead of mailing printed copies. A “Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials” (“Notice”) describes how to access and review our proxy materials online, how to submit your vote online and how to request a printed copy of our proxy materials. The Notice is being mailed to our shareholders who hold their Shares in “street name” on or about March 22, 2013.27, 2015.

Can I vote my Shares by filling out and returning the Notice?

No. The Notice identifies the items to be voted on at the Annual Meeting, but you cannot vote by marking the Notice and returning it. The Notice provides instructions on how to vote by (i) Internet, (ii) telephone, (iii) requesting and returning a paper proxy card or voting instruction form; or (iv) submitting a ballot in person at the meeting.

Why did I receive a paper copy of the proxy materials?

This proxy statement, the accompanying proxy card and our 20122014 Annual Report to Shareholders, which includes our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012,2014, are being mailed to our “registered” shareholders on or about March 26, 2013April 1, 2015 who have not elected to receive proxy materials electronically.

How may “registered” shareholders and shareholders holding Shares in “street name” elect to receive future shareholder materials electronically?

Opting to receive all future proxy materials electronically saves us the cost of producing and mailing documents to your home or business and helps us to conserve natural resources. “Registered” shareholders who wish to receive their proxy materials electronically rather than by mail may register to do so on American Stock Transfer & Trust Company’s website atwww.amstock.com. “Registered” shareholders who choose to receive future proxy materials electronically will receive an email containing links to our proxy materials. “Registered” shareholders who hold Shares in different ways (i.e., joint tenancy, trusts, custodial accounts) or in multiple accounts will need to complete this process for each account. Your election to receive your proxy materials by electronic email delivery will remain in effect for all future annual meetings until you revoke it.

If you own Shares in “street name” and wish to receive your proxy materials electronically via an email containing links to our proxy materials, you must contact your broker, bank, trust or nominee for instructions on how to receive future proxy materials in this manner. Shareholders who hold Shares in “street name” in different ways (i.e., joint tenancy, trusts, custodial accounts) or in multiple accounts will need to complete this process for each account. Your election to receive your proxy materials by electronic email delivery will remain in effect for all future annual meetings until you revoke it.

Who is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting?

The Board established March 14, 201320, 2015 as the record date for the Annual Meeting. Holders who owned our Shares at the close of business on that date are entitled to receive notice of and may attend and vote at the Annual

Meeting or any postponements or adjournments of the meeting. We had 65,238,93068,677,816 Shares outstanding on March 14, 2013.20, 2015.

How many votes must be present to hold the Annual Meeting?

A quorum is required for our shareholders to conduct business at the Annual Meeting. A quorum occurs when a majority of the Shares entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting are present in person or by proxy. Properly executed proxy cards marked “for,” “against”, “withhold” or “abstain” and broker “non-votes” will be counted as present at the Annual Meeting for purposes of determining a quorum.

How many votes do I have?

As to each item, you are entitled to cast one vote per Share; however, as to the election of Trustees, you are entitled to cast one vote per Share for each of the seven open trustee positions. The proxy card indicates the number of Shares you owned on the record date.

What if I don’t vote my Shares?

If you do not vote your Shares, your Shares will not be counted for purposes of determining a quorum or for determining whether the matters presented at the meeting are approved.

What if I return my proxy card but don’t give specific voting instructions?

If you are a “registered” shareholder and you sign and return your proxy card without indicating how you want your Shares to be voted, Dawn M. Becker and James M. Taylor, Jr. will vote your Shares in accordance with the recommendations of the Board. If you own Shares in “street name,” you must give your broker, bank, trust or nominee specific instructions on how to vote your Shares with respect to Items 1, 3 and 3.4. If you fail to give your broker, bank, trust or nominee specific instructions on how to vote your Shares on those matters, your vote will NOT be counted for those matters. It is important for every shareholder’s vote to be counted on these matters so we encourage you to provide your broker, bank, trust or nominee with voting instructions. If you fail to give your broker, bank, trust or nominee specific instructions on how to vote your Shares on Item 2, such broker, bank, trust or nominee will generally be able to vote on Item 2 as he, she or it determines.

What is a proxy?

A proxy is your legal designation of another person (the “proxy”) to vote your Shares on your behalf. By completing and returning the enclosed proxy card, you are giving Dawn M. Becker and James M. Taylor, Jr. the authority to vote your Shares in the manner you indicate on your proxy card.

What if I return my proxy card but abstain?

Abstentions are counted as present for determining a quorum; however, abstentions will have no effect on any of the items to be considered at the Annual Meeting.

May I change my vote after I return my proxy card?

Yes. A proxy may be revoked by a “registered” shareholder at any time before it is exercised at the Annual Meeting by submitting a proxy bearing a later date or by voting in person at the Annual Meeting. If you hold your Shares in “street name,” you must contact your broker, bank, trust or other nominee to determine how to revoke your original proxy. In general, submitting a subsequent proxy executed by the party that executed the original proxy will revoke the earlier proxy.

Why did I receive more than one Notice, proxy card, voting instruction form and/or email?

You will receive more than one Notice, proxy card, voting instruction form or email, or any combination of these if you hold your Shares in different ways (i.e., joint tenancy, trusts, custodial accounts) or in multiple

accounts. You should provide voting instructions for all Notices, proxy cards, voting instruction forms and email links you receive.

Are there other matters to be acted upon at the Annual Meeting?

The Trust does not know of any matter to be presented at the Annual Meeting other than those described in the proxy statement. If, however, other matters are properly presented for action at the Annual Meeting, Dawn M. Becker and James M. Taylor, Jr. will have the discretion to vote on such matters in accordance with their best judgment.

Who is paying for the solicitation of proxies?

The cost of this solicitation of proxies will be borne by us. In addition to the use of the mail, we may solicit proxies in person and by telephone or facsimile, and may request brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries to forward soliciting materials to the beneficial owners of Shares and reimburse them for their reasonable expenses. We may also hire a proxy solicitation firm at a standard industry compensation rate.

What if I have questions about the Notice, voting or electronic delivery?

Questions regarding the Notice, voting or electronic delivery should be directed to our Investor Relations Department at (800) 937-5449 or by email atIR@federalrealty.com.

SHARE OWNERSHIP

Who are the largest owners of Shares?

Based upon our records and the information reported in filings with the SEC, the following were beneficial owners of more than 5% of our Shares as of March 14, 2013:20, 2015:

(2)	Information based on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 12, 201310, 2015 by The Vanguard Group, Inc. The Schedule 13G/A states that The Vanguard Group, Inc., an investment advisor, has sole voting

power over 164,079159,301 Shares, shared voting power over 49,20055,300 Shares, sole dispositive power over 7,316,5979,287,819 Shares and shared dispositive power over 124,880121,599 Shares; that Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Vanguard Group, Inc., is the beneficial owner of 44,88039,799 Shares as a result of serving as investment manager of collective trust accounts, the voting of which it directs; and that Vanguard Investments Australia, Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of The Vanguard Group, Inc., is the beneficial owner of 199,199201,302 Shares as a result of serving as investment manager of Australian investment offerings, the voting of which it directs.

(3)

Information based on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on January 11, 20139, 2015 by BlackRock, Inc., which states BlackRock, Inc., a parent holding company, has sole voting andpower over 7,171,968 Shares, sole dispositive power over 6,645,5067,578,057 Shares and that none of its subsidiaries owns 5% or more of Shares. The Schedule 13G/A states that BlackRock, Inc.’s subsidiaries are BlackRock Advisors, LLC, BlackRock Capital Management, Inc., BlackRock Financial Management, Inc., BlackRock Investment Management, LLC , BlackRock Investment Management (Australia) Limited, BlackRock (Luxembourg) S.A., BlackRock (Netherlands) B.V., BlackRock Fund ManagersAdvisors (UK) Limited, BlackRock Life Limited, BlackRock Asset Management Australia Limited,Advisors, LLC, BlackRock Asset Management Canada Limited, BlackRock Asset Management Deutschland AG , BlackRock Asset Management Ireland Limited, BlackRock Advisors (UK)Asset Management North Asia Limited, BlackRock Financial Management, Inc., BlackRock Fund Advisors, BlackRock International Limited,Fund Managers Ltd., BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A., BlackRock International Limited, BlackRock Investment Management (Australia) Limited, BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd., BlackRock Investment Management, LLC, BlackRock Japan Co. Ltd. and BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Life Limited.

(4)

Information based on a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 11, 2013 by State Street Corporation, which states State Street Corporation, a parent holding company, has shared voting and dispositive power over 4,348,637 Shares. The Schedule 13G also states that State Street Corporation’s subsidiaries are State Street Global Advisors France S.A., an investment advisor, State Street Bank and Trust Company, a bank, SSGA Funds Management, Inc., an investment advisor, Tuckerman Group, LLC, an investment advisor, State Street Global Advisors Limited, an investment advisor, State Street Global Advisors LTD, an investment advisor, State Street Global Advisors, Australia Limited, an investment advisor, State Street Global Advisors Japan Co., LTD., an investment advisor and State Street Global Advisors, Asia Limited, an investment advisor.

(5)

Information based on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 14, 20136, 2015 by Vanguard Specialized Funds – Vanguard REIT Index Fund. The Schedule 13G/A states that Vanguard Specialized Funds – Vanguard REIT Index Fund, an investment company registered under Section 8 of the Investment Company Act of 1940, has sole voting power over 4,244,0345,026,726 Shares.

(5)

Information based on a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 12, 2015 by State Street Corporation, which states State Street Corporation, a parent holding company, has shared voting and dispositive power over 4,287,498 Shares. The Schedule 13G also states that State Street Corporation’s subsidiaries are State Street Global Advisors France S.A., SSGA Funds Management, Inc., State Street Global Advisors Limited, State Street Global Advisors Ltd., State Street Global Advisors, Australia Limited, State Street Global Advisors Japan Co., Ltd. and State Street Global Advisors, Asia Limited, each an investment advisor and State Street Bank and Trust Company, a bank.

(6)

Information based on a Schedule 13G/A13G filed with the SEC on February 14, 201311, 2015 by Cohen & Steers, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc., and Cohen & Steers Europe S.A.Invesco Ltd. The Schedule 13G/A13G states that Cohen & Steers, Inc.Invesco Ltd. is the parent holding company of Cohen & Steersthe following subsidiary investment advisors: Invesco PowerShares Capital Management, Invesco Asset Management (Japan) Limited, Invesco Advisers, Inc., an investment advisor,Invesco Asset Management Deutschland GmbH and that Cohen & Steers, Inc. and Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc., together own Cohen & Steers Europe S.A., an investment advisor.Invesco Investment Advisers, LLC. The Schedule 13G/A13G also states that Cohen & Steers, Inc.Invesco Ltd. has sole voting power over 1,865,6731,888,825 Shares and sole dispositive power over 3,951,671 Shares, Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc., has sole voting power over 1,865,673 Shares and sole dispositive power over 3,937,180 Shares and Cohen & Steers Europe S.A. has sole dispositive power over 14,491 Shares.3,803,940.

How many Shares do our Trustees and executive officers own?

As of March 14, 2013,20, 2015, our Trustees and executive officers, both individually and collectively, beneficially owned the Shares reflected in the table below. The number of Shares shown in this table reflects beneficial ownership determined in accordance with Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and, therefore, includes unvested Shares and Shares that have not been issued but as to which options are outstanding and may be exercised within 60 days of the date of this proxy statement. Except as noted in the footnotes that follow the table, each Trustee and executive officer has sole voting and investment power as to all Shares listed. Fractional Shares have been rounded to the nearest full Share.Share.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Independence of Trustees

Article III, Section 1 of our Bylaws provides that no more than one of our Trustees can fail to qualify as independent under the requirements of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), the SEC, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and other applicable rules and regulations. At its first quarterly meeting each calendar year, the Board reviews all relationships between us and each Trustee to determine whether each Trustee is independent under all applicable requirements. That review includes a determination of whether there are any material relationships between us and the Trustee which, in the opinion of the Board, adversely affect the Trustee’s ability to exercise independent judgment as a trustee. The Board also considers independence on an ongoing basis throughout the year if there are any changes in circumstances that could impact a Trustee’s independence.

The Board, on recommendation of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and after considering all relevant facts and circumstances, determined in each of February 20122014 and February 20132015 that, except for Mr. Wood, the Trust’s Chief Executive Officer, each Trustee then serving on the Board satisfied all applicable requirements to be considered independent. In making that determination, the Board concluded that a Trustee’s position as a director of a company with which we do business does not constitute a material relationship so long as payments made by that company do not account for more than five percent (5%) of our gross revenues or more than ten percent (10%) of the gross revenues of that company. This standard is set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines. Further, the Board has concluded that except for Mr. Wood, who is an employee of the Trust, there are no relationships, material or otherwise, between us and any of the Trustees except as described below. All of these relationships were considered by the Board in making its determination that all Trustees other than Mr. Wood are independent. The specific relationships considered by the Board in

making its independence determinations were the following, which includes all of those relationships described in the “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” section below:

In no instance did the payments made to us by any tenant with which our Trustees are affiliated, or the payments made by us to Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, account for more than five percent (5%) of our gross revenues or more than ten percent (10%) of the gross revenues of any tenant or Pebblebrook Hotel Trust. Further, the payments made by us to Pebblebrook Hotel Trust accounted for less than 2% of both our and

Pebblebrook Hotel Trust’s consolidated gross revenues in 2012 and the payments made to us by two of Thompson Hospitality Corporation’s wholly-owned subsidiaries collectively accounted for less than 2% of both our and Thompson Hospitality Corporation’s consolidated gross revenues for each of the last three fiscal years.

Board of Trustees and Board Committees

Board of Trustees:

The Board of Trustees discharges its responsibilities through regularly scheduled meetings as well as through telephonic meetings, action by written consent and other communications with management as appropriate. During 2012,2014, the Board of Trustees held sixfive meetings. The non-management Trustees (all of whom are independent) held four executive sessions at the meetings that were open for participationattended by all non-management Trustees. Mr. Vassalluzzo, the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board, presided over all Board meetings as well as all executive sessions of the non-management Trustees during 2012.2014. The Non-Executive Chairman of the Board is expected to preside over all future Board meetings and executive sessions of non-management Trustees. Since 2003, we have operated under a governance structure where the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer are separate positions held by different individuals. At its meetings in February 20122014 and 2013,2015, the Board discussed whether this structure was still the best structure for us and concluded that it was. Having the Board operate under the leadership and direction of someone independent from management provides the Board with the most appropriate mechanism to fulfill its oversight responsibilities and hold management accountable for the performance of the Trust. It also allows our Chief Executive Officer to focus his time on running our day-to-day business. The Board believes that one of the most important attributes for the Board is independence from management and that belief has been reflected in the separation of the chairman and CEO roles as well as in our Corporate Governance Guidelines which permit no more than one member of the Board to be a non-independent trustee.

Each of the Trustees attended at least 75% of all meetings of the Board and the Board committees on which each Trustee served during 2012.2014. On an aggregate basis, the Trustees attended 96%99% of all Board and Board committee meetings on which each Trustee served in 2012.2014. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that all Trustees are expected to attend all meetings of the Board and the Board committees on which he or she serves as well as the Annual Meeting of Shareholders. All Trustees attended our 20122014 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

Board Committees:

The Board has three standing committees which are the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Each committee operates under a written charter which is available in the Investors section of our website atwww.federalrealty.com. Each member of these committees meets, and throughout 20122014 met, the independence, experience and, with respect to the Audit Committee, the financial literacy requirements, of the NYSE, the SEC and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The membership, primary functions and number of meetings during 20122014 for each of these standing committees are described below:

Identifying individuals to stand for election as Trustees

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee (the “Nominating Committee”) is responsible for identifying individuals to stand for election as Trustees. It begins the process by determining whether there are any changes that should be made to the Board in terms of size or skill sets in order for the Board to appropriately perform its responsibilities. If the Nominating Committee concludes that no changes are needed, it first reviews each of the incumbent Trustees whose terms are expiring to determine whether those individuals should be nominated for reelection to the Board. If the Nominating Committee determines that the Board should be expanded or that the incumbent Trustees whose terms are expiring should not be nominated for reelection and those positions need to be filled, the Nominating Committee will seek recommendations from other Board members for possible candidates. If no appropriate candidates are identified, the Nominating Committee will

the Committee will consider retaining a search firm. Recommendations provided by shareholders will also be considered and will be evaluated on the same basis as all other Board candidates.

The primary factors included in the Nominating Committee’s determination are whether the individual possesses skills which are desirable for the effective oversight of the Trust’s operation and complementary to the skills of the other Trustees. If the individual is an incumbent Trustee, the Nominating Committee also considers whether he or she is performing his or her responsibilities as a Trustee well and adding value to the Board and its operations as reflected on the most recent individual Trustee evaluations. All candidates for election to the Board should, at a minimum, possess public company, real estate, retail and/or other financial experience and have a history of honesty, integrity and fair dealing with third parties. The Board has no specific policy on diversity but believes that Board membership should reflect diversity in a broad sense, including, among other things, geography, gender and ethnicity. In addition, the Board specifically reviews and considers the backgrounds, experience and competencies of each Trustee nominee and Trustee to ensure that the Board reflects as a whole an appropriate diversity of knowledge, experience, skill and expertise required to enable the Board to perform its responsibilities in managing and directing our business efficiently and effectively.

Once a candidate is identified who has not previously served on the Board, the Nominating Committee arranges meetings between the candidate and Board members as well as our senior management. The Nominating Committee also undertakes whatever investigative and due diligence activities it deems necessary to verify the candidate’s credentials and determine whether the candidate would be a positive contributor to the operations of the Board and a good representative of our shareholders. Critical to this whole process is the Nominating Committee’s determination that any candidate presented to the shareholders for election to the Board satisfies all of the independence requirements imposed by the NYSE, the SEC, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and other applicable rules and regulations.

Any shareholder may propose a candidate to be nominated for election to the Board by following the procedures outlined in Article II, Section 13 of our Bylaws. Any shareholder wishing to present a candidate for consideration as a Trustee for election at the Trust’s 20142016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders must provide the Nominating Committee with the name of the shareholder proposing the candidate as well as contact information for that shareholder, the name of the individual proposed for election, a resume or similar summary that includes the individual’s qualifications and such other factual information that would be necessary or helpful for the Nominating Committee to evaluate the individual. The information should be sent to the Nominating Committee, in care of the Trust’s Secretary, by no later than November 26, 2013December 3, 2015 so that the Secretary can forward it to the Nominating Committee chair for consideration. The Nominating Committee will not have sufficient time to evaluate any candidate submitted after that date. A copy of our Bylaws may be obtained by sending a written request to Investor Relations at 1626 East Jefferson Street, Rockville, MD 20852.

Risk Management Oversight

Although ourthe Board has delegated to ourthe Audit Committee responsibility for overseeing our risks and exposures on an ongoing basis, the entire Board regularly receives regular updates from management on the continued viability of our business plan, market conditions, capital position, and our business results and specifically reviews potential risks from time to time. The Board reviews that information together with our quarterly and annual financial statements and operating results and short and long-term business prospects to assess the risks that we may encounter and to establish appropriate direction to avoid or minimize the potential impact of the identified risks. Some of the details that are discussed as part of the Board’s review of potential risks facing us include, without limitation: (a) the impact of market conditions on our business; (b) operational risks such as the ability of our tenants to be successful and the ability to grow the company through increasing rents and redeveloping our properties; (c) liquidity and credit risks, including our ability to access capital to run and grow our business and our overall cost of capital and the impact on our profitability; (d) investment risks from acquisitions and our development and redevelopment projects; (e) regulatory risks that may impact our profitability such as environmental laws and regulations, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and various

other federal, state and local laws; (f) REIT risks such as our failure to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes; (g) cybersecurity risks; and (g)(h) general risks inherent in the real estate industry.

As part of the Board’s risk oversight function, our Compensation Committee reviewed in February 20132015 our compensation policies and practices for all of our employees to determine whether any of such policies or programs created any risk that could have a material adverse impact on us. Approximately 95% of our employees participate in compensation programs tied to either corporate performance or regionaldivisional performance necessary to achieve corporate objectives and the Compensation Committee believes that those programs do not encourage excessive and unnecessary risk taking. The Compensation Committee focused its review on the approximately 5% of our employees (11 individuals) who are compensated on a full or partial commission/bonus basis where significant portions of their annual compensation is driven by completing leasing transactions or closing acquisitions or achieving specific milestones on development projects.acquisitions. As part of that review, the Compensation Committee reviewed the internal approval processes of the Trust and determined that none of the individuals who are compensated on a transactional commission/bonus basis can complete any leasing acquisition or developmentacquisition transaction without getting approval from the Board and/or one or more members of senior management whose compensation is tied to achieving corporate objectives.

Trustee Compensation

The Trustees received the following fees for their service on the Board in 2012:2014:

Each non-employee Trustee and the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board are paid sixty percent (60%) of his/her annual retainer ($90,000105,000 for other Trustees and $150,000 for the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board) in the form of Shares. All Shares paid as part of the annual retainer vested immediately upon issuance. The equity portion of the annual retainer for 20122014 was paid in Shares on January 2, 2013.2015. The number of Shares actually received by each Trustee on January 2, 20132015 was determined by dividing the amount of the annual retainer to be paid in Shares by $104.02,$133.46, the closing price of our stock on the NYSE on December 31, 2012,2014, the last business day prior to the date the Shares were issued. The remainder of the annual retainer as well as the annual fees paid to the Chairs of the Audit, Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees were paid in cash. Each Trustee is required to hold at all times an amount of Shares valued at least at five times the amount of the cash portion of the annual retainer. As of December 31, 2012,2014, all Trustees complied with the required level of stock ownership.

In addition to the annual retainer described above, Mr. Vassalluzzo receives administrative support for both Trust business and personal use from our regional office in Wynnewood, Pennsylvania. Except for the annual fee for serving as a Trustee, the annual fee for serving as the chair of a committee and the use of administrative support made available to Mr. Vassalluzzo, all as described above, there were no additional fees paid to any Trustee, including the Non-Executive Chairman, for service on any of the Board committees or for attendance at any Board or committee meetings.

Total compensation awarded to Trustees for service in 20122014 was as follows:

Communications with the Board

Any shareholder of the Trust or any other interested party may communicate with the Board as a whole, the non-management Trustees of the Board as a group, the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board, and/or any individual Trustee by sending the communication to the Trust’s corporate offices at 1626 East Jefferson Street, Rockville, MD 20852 in care of the Trust’s Secretary. All such communication should identify the party to whom it is being sent, and any communication which indicates it is for the Board of Trustees or fails to identify a particular Trustee will be deemed to be a communication intended for the Trust’s Non-Executive Chairman of the Board. The Trust’s Secretary will promptly forward to the appropriate Trustee all communications she receives for the Board or any individual Trustee which relate to the Trust’s business, operations, financial condition, management, employees or similar matters. The Trust’s Secretary will not forward to any Trustee any advertising, solicitation or similar materials.

Other Corporate Documents

The Board of Trustees has adopted a Code of Ethics for senior financial officers as well as a Code of Business Conduct that applies to all of our Trustees and employees. In addition, the Board operates under Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Code of Ethics for our senior financial officers, our Code of Business Conduct and our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available in the Investors section of our website atwww.federalrealty.com.

ITEM 1

ELECTION OF TRUSTEES

Composition of the Board

Our Board of Trustees has seven Trustees. Section 5.2 of the Trust’s Declaration of Trust provides that all Trustees be elected at each annual meeting of shareholders. As a result, the nominees for Trustee this year will be elected to serve one-year terms until the 20142016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The Board, on recommendation of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, approved the nomination of the following individuals, all of whom are currently serving on the Board, for election as trustees to hold office until the 20142016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and until their successors have been duly elected and qualified:

In connection with reviewing nominees to stand for election at the 20132015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, the Nominating Committee considered the following qualifications for each Trustee nominee:

Jon E. Bortz, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, a REIT that acquires and operatesinvests in upper upscale hotels in large US cities (from 2009 to the present); Chief Executive Officer and a Trustee (from 1998 to 2009), President (from 1998 to 2008) and Chairman of the Board (from 2001 to 2009) of LaSalle Hotel Properties, a multi-tenant, multi-operator hotel REIT; and various real estate related positions with Jones Lang LaSalle (from 1981 to 1998). Mr. Bortz brings to the Board public company, REIT and real estate experience. His experience as chief executive officer of LaSalle Hotel Properties and Pebblebrook Hotel Trust provide a valuable perspective for running a public real estate company while his real estate experience at Jones Lang LaSalle provides fundamental real estate experience critical to our core business.

David W. Faeder, Managing Partner of Fountain Square Properties, a diversified real estate company, since 2003; Vice Chairman (from 2000 to 2003), President (from 1997 to 2000) and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (from 1993 to 1997) of Sunrise Senior Living, Inc., a provider of senior living services in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada; and prior to that time, Vice President of Credit Suisse First Boston (formerly First Boston Corporation) from 1991 to 1993, directing the real estate advisory business for the RTC in the Washington, DC area; Vice President ofand Morgan Stanley and Company, Inc., a brokerage firm, from 1984 to 1991 specializing in real estate transactionstransactions. Director of Arlington Asset Investment Corp., a company that acquires and financings;holds mortgage-related and priorother assets, including residential mortgage-backed securities issued by U.S. government agencies or guaranteed as to that time, various other accounting positions with Ernstprincipal and Whinney, Better Homes of Virginia,U.S. government agencies or U.S. government-sponsored entities and Goodman and Company.mortgage-backed securities issued by private organizations. Mr. Faeder is a valuable member of the Board because of his public company and accounting experience, having previously served as the chief financial officer of Sunrise Senior Living, and his real estate investment experience from his time as a private real estate investor.

Kristin Gamble, President of Flood, Gamble Associates, Inc., an investment counseling firm, since 1984; and prior to that time, various management positions with responsibility for investments and investment research with brokerage firms and other financial services companies. Director of Ethan Allen Interiors Inc., a furniture manufacturer and retailer. Ms. Gamble benefits the Board through her broad financial related experience from an

investor perspective, including as President of her own investment counseling company for over 30 years, and before that, as an executive with responsibility for investments and investment research with various brokerage firms and other financial services companies.

Gail P. Steinel, Owner of Executive Advisors (from 2007 to present), which provides consulting services to chief executive officers and leadership seminars to companies. Executive Vice President with BearingPoint, Inc. (from 2002 to 2007), a management and technology consulting firm that provides application services, technology solutions and managed services to companies and government organizations with responsibility for overseeing the global commercial services business unit; global managing partner and a founding member of Arthur Andersen’s business consulting practice (from 1984 to 2002). Director of MTS Systems Corporation, a provider of mechanical test systems, material testing, fatigue testing and tensile testing equipment as well as motion simulation systems and calibration services. Ms. Steinel has over 25 years of auditing and consulting experience that provides the Board with a helpful perspective on managing risk and systems operations.

Warren M. Thompson, President and Chairman of Thompson Hospitality Corporation, a food service company that owns and operates restaurants and contract food services, since founding the company in October 1992. Mr. Thompson is the president, chairman and founder of his own private food service company, Thompson Hospitality Corporation since 1992. Mr. Thompson’s experience running restaurants owned by Thompson Hospitality provides the Board and management with a unique perspective that is shared by a large percentage of the Trust’s retail tenants.

Joseph S. Vassalluzzo, Non-Executive Chairman of the Board of Trustees since February 2006; Vice Chairman of Staples, Inc. (from 2000 to 2005), a retailer specializing in home, office, and computer products, with responsibility for overseeing domestic and international growth in its retail and commercial operations; various other officer positions with Staples’ and Staples Realty & Development, a subsidiary of Staples, Inc. (from 1997 to 2000); Director of iParty Corp., a premier multi-channel party supply and party planning company; Lead Director of Life Time Fitness, Inc., an operator of distinctive and large sports, athletic, fitness and family recreation centers.centers; Director of Office Depot, Inc., a global supplier of office products and services. Mr. Vassalluzzo’s extensive background in retail and real estate as a result of having served as an executive with Staples, expanding the real estate owned by Staples Realty & Development, a subsidiary of Staples, Inc. for over 10 years and serving on the boards of a number of retailers provides the board and management with retail and retail real estate expertise that is essential to our core business.

Donald C. Wood, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Trust since January 2003; prior to that time, various officer positions with the Trust, including President and Chief Operating Officer (from 2001 to 2003), Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (from 2000 to 2001), Senior Vice President-Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer (from 1999 to 2000) and Senior Vice President-Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer (from 1998 to 1999); Chairman of the Board of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts from November 2011 to November 2012; Directormember of the Real Estate Roundtable from July 2011 to July 2012;Executive Committee of the International Council of Shopping Centers since February 2014; Director of Post Properties, Inc., a developer and operator of upscale multifamily communities in the United States. Mr. Wood has been employed by the Trust for nearlyover fifteen years and serves on the Board as the sole non-independent Trustee. His tenure with the Trust and his responsibilities as chief executive officer provides the Board with familiarity and details on all aspects of the operations of the Trust.

Vote Required

The affirmative vote of a plurality of votes cast at the Annual Meeting, in person or by proxy, is required for the election of Trustees. If any Trustee does not receive at least 50% of the votes cast at the Annual Meeting, he or she must tender his or her resignation to the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee within five (5) business days after certification of the vote. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will promptly consider the resignation and make a recommendation to the Board of Trustees. In deciding whether to accept or reject a resignation that has been tendered, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and the Board will consider such factors as they deem appropriate and

relevant which may include, among others: (a) the stated reasons why votes were withheld from the Trustee and whether those reasons can be cured; (b) the Trustee’s length of service, qualifications and contributions as a Trustee; (c) listing requirements of the NYSE, rules and regulations of the SEC and other applicable rules and regulations; (d) our Corporate Governance Guidelines; and (e) such other factors as the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

or the Board deems appropriate. Any rejection of a resignation may (but does not have to) be conditioned on curing the underlying reason for the withheld votes. The Board will take action on any resignation no later than sixty (60) days after the certification of the vote, and will disclose the action taken with a full explanation of the process used by the Board and the reason for its decision in a Form 8-K filed with the SEC within four (4) business days after the Board’s decision. If a Trustee’s resignation is accepted by the Board of Trustees, then the Board of Trustees may fill the resulting vacancy pursuant to our Bylaws. The Trustee who tenders his or her resignation will not participate in the recommendation of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee or the decision of the Board.

If you are a “registered” shareholder and fail to give any instructions on your proxy card on this matter, the proxies identified on the proxy card will vote FOR the election of the named individuals. An abstention or broker non-vote will have no effect on the outcome of the vote on this proposal. You are entitled to cast one vote per Share for each of the seven named individuals. Proxies may not be voted for more than seven individuals.

THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE ���FOR”“FOR” THE SEVEN NOMINEES FOR TRUSTEE.

REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

The following Report of the Audit Committee does not constitute soliciting material and should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any other Trust filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent the Trust specifically incorporates this Report by reference therein.

Management is responsible for the financial reporting process, including the system of internal controls, for the preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) and for management’s report on internal control over financial reporting. The Trust’s independent registered public accounting firm, Grant Thornton LLP (“GT”), is responsible for auditing the consolidated financial statements and expressing an opinion on the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. The Audit Committee oversees the financial reporting process on behalf of the Board. In addition, the Audit Committee oversees the work of our internal audit function, which is providedperformed by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”).

The Audit Committee meets at least quarterly and at such other times as it deems necessary or appropriate to carry out its responsibilities. The Audit Committee met four times during 2012,2014, and all four of these quarterly meetings included executive sessions with our independent accountantGT without management being present. In the course of fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, the Audit Committee met with both management and GT to review and discuss all annual and quarterly financial statements and quarterly operating results prior to their issuance. Management advised the Audit Committee that all financial statements were prepared in accordance with GAAP. The Audit Committee also discussed with GT matters required to be discussed pursuant to applicable Public Company Accounting Oversight Board audit standards, including the reasonableness of judgments and the clarity and completeness of financial disclosures.

In addition, the Audit Committee discussed with GT matters relating to its independence and has received from GT the written disclosures and letter required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, and has discussed with GT its independence.

The Audit Committee continually monitors the non-audit services provided by GT. During 2012,2014, the Audit Committee limited non-audit services primarily to income tax formreturn preparation for us and our subsidiaries and

the provision of advice on the tax impacts and structuring of acquisition and other property related transactions.

GT also performed the 20122014 audit of the financial statements of our joint venture with affiliates of a discretionary fund created and advised by ING Clarion Partners in which we own a 30% equity interest. The Audit Committee approved GT’s performing this audit only after determining that it would not adversely impact GT’s independence.

In 2012 as part of its oversight of our internal audit function, theThe Audit Committee after a lengthy interview process, engaged PwC to provide our internal audit function. Duringfunction in 2012 the Audit Committeeand continued to oversee the internal auditor’sPwC’s ongoing testing of the effectiveness of our internal controls.controls during 2014. The findings of the internal auditorPwC were reported to the Audit Committee on a quarterly basis.three times during 2014, and the Audit Committee met in executive session with PwC without management being present twice during 2014. GT, as part of its 20122014 audit of our financial statements, independently reviewed our internal controls and concluded that there were no material weaknesses.

On the basis of the reviews and discussions the Audit Committee has had with GT, our internal auditorPwC and management, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Trustees that the Board approve the inclusion of our audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20122014 for filing with the SEC.

Submitted by:

Gail P. Steinel, Chairperson

Jon E. Bortz

David W. Faeder

Warren M. Thompson

RELATIONSHIP WITH INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

GT has served as our independent registered public accounting firm for the years 2002 through 2012.year 2014. The Audit Committee approves in advance all fees paid to and services provided by GT. In addition, the Audit Committee has considered those services provided by GT and has determined that such services are compatible with maintaining the independence of GT. During 20122014 and 2011,2013, we retained GT to provide services in the following categories and amounts:

ITEM 2

RATIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees has retained GT as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 20132015 and is asking the shareholders to ratify that selection. Our organizational documents do not require ratification of the selection of our independent registered public accounting firm; however, we are seeking ratification because we believe that it is a matter of good corporate practice to do so. If the selection of GT is not ratified, the Audit Committee may reconsider whether to retain GT. Even if the selection of GT is ratified, the Audit Committee may change the appointment of GT at any time if it determines such a change would be in the best interests of the Trust and our shareholders.

A representative of GT will be present at the Annual Meeting and will have the opportunity to make a statement and answer appropriate questions from shareholders.

The Audit Committee believes that GT is qualified to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm. GT is familiar with our affairs and financial procedures, having served as our independent accountant since June 2002. GT is registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Pursuant to its charter, the Audit Committee must pre-approve all audit and non-audit services provided by GT. For 20132015, the Audit Committee to date has approved GT providing the following non-audit services: (a) tax planning and other consultation for purposes of structuring acquisitions, dispositions, joint ventures and other investment or financing opportunities as well as consultation associated with financial reporting matters (e.g. implementation of newly issued accounting standards) provided that the aggregate amount paid to GT for such services does not exceed $100,000; (b) issuance of comfort letters and consents in connection with capital markets transactions approved in accordance with the Trust’s policies and procedures provided that the aggregate amount paid to GT for such services does not exceed $125,000; (c) issuance of audit opinions related to acquisition audits required under Rule 3-14 of Regulation S-X provided that the aggregate amount paid to GT for such services does not exceed $75,000; and (d) a Limited Review ofagreed-upon procedures related to the Trust’s letter to the State of California Department of Environmental QualityEPA provided that the aggregate amount paid to GT for such services does not exceed $3,000, if requested by$3,150. The scope and amount of non-audit services that GT can perform in 2015 has remained relatively unchanged the State of California.last few years.

Once the pre-approved dollar limit for the applicable non-audit service has been reached, no additional services of that type can be provided by GT without further approval by the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee has concluded that GT’s providing these permissible non-audit services up to the aggregate pre-approved amounts would not compromise GT’s independence. The Audit Committee may approve GT providing additional non-audit services or services in excess of the amounts specified above if it determines that it is in our best interest and that GT’s independence would not be compromised. All audit and non-audit services provided to the Trust by GT for the 20122014 fiscal year are described in the “Relationship With Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” section above.

In addition to the foregoing non-audit services, the Audit Committee also has approved GT performing the audit of the financial statements for our equity joint venture with affiliates of a discretionary fund created and advised by ING Clarion Partners for the fiscal yearsyear ending 2004 through 2012.December 31, 2014. We own a 30% interest in that joint venture. The Audit Committee approved GT performing this audit using the same criteria it uses for approving non-audit services. Although we do not consolidate the results of the joint venture, we do include our share of the joint venture’s results in our financial statements. The Audit Committee concluded that having GT perform the joint venture’s audit facilitates the inclusion of those results in our financial statements.

Vote Required

The affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast at the Annual Meeting, in person or by proxy, is required to approve the proposal to ratify the Audit Committee’s selection of GT as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2013.2015. If you fail to give any instructions on your proxy card on this matter, the proxies

identified on the proxy card will vote FOR this proposal. An “abstention” or broker “non-vote” will have no

effect on the outcome of the vote on this proposal, however, if you fail to give instructions to your broker, your broker may have authority to vote the shares for this proposal.

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE PROPOSAL TO RATIFY THE AUDIT COMMITTEE’S SELECTION OF GT AS OUR INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR 2013.2015.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Our current named “executive“named executive officers” are:

Donald C. Wood, Information for Mr. Wood is provided above in “Item 1—Election of Trustees.”

James M. Taylor, Jr.,Executive Vice President-Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Trust since August 15, 2012, with responsibility for overseeing the Trust’s capital markets, financial reporting, investor relations, corporate communications, information technology and East Coast acquisitions functions; Executive Vice President of the Trust from July 30, 2012 until August 14, 2012; and a senior managing director in the real estate investment banking division of Eastdil Secured and predecessors Wachovia Securities and First Union Securities (1998 to 2012). Prior to his career in investment banking, Mr. Taylor practiced corporate and securities law at Hunton & Williams (1994 to 1998) and worked as a senior accountant for Price Waterhouse (1988 to 1991).

Dawn M. Becker, Executive Vice President – Chief Operating Officer (since February 2010) and General Counsel and Secretary of the Trust (since April 2002), with responsibility for overseeing all of the Trust’s operations and asset management functions and the Trust’s Legal and Human Resources Departments; and prior to that time, various officer positions with the Trust, including Vice President–Real Estate and Finance Counsel (2000 to 2002).

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

You will be asked in Item 3 of this proxy statement to provide a non-binding, advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers as described in the following sections of this proxy statement. Please keep that in mind as you review the CD&A, summary compensation table, the supplemental tables and narrative disclosures that follow.

Executive SummarySummary:

Performance:

2012 was an exceptional year of performance inWe executed on all aspectsphases of our business. Onbusiness plan in 2014 with continued growth of the operating front, we delivered record levelscore portfolio through increasing rental rates and redevelopment, the opening of initial phases of new development projects and advancing the planning for additional phases of those projects, the addition of new properties to our portfolio and the continued strengthening of our balance sheet. Some of the 2014 highlights included:

With respect to specific compensation actions in 2014, the Compensation Committee did the following:

2012 was also a year of transition for our Chief Financial Officer

Given that more than a decade and was added to the team to provide depth and experience to our ability to source and evaluate corporate business development and strategic opportunities.

Our strong and consistent performance over the past several years coupled with the visibility for future growth through our development pipeline and our prudent balance sheet management helped to push our stock price to a record level in 2012 and has resulted in strong total returns for our shareholders on both a relative and absolute basis over the past one, three and five year periods.

2012 Compensation Actions:

At our 2012 annual meeting of shareholders, our advisory vote on say on pay was overwhelmingly approved by our shareholders, garnering support from 97% of the votes cast at our 2014 annual shareholder meeting supported our say on pay proposal, the meeting. We considered our 2012 compensation programs in light of that vote as well as our evaluation of the effectiveness ofCompensation Committee did not make any changes to our compensation programs in achieving our compensation philosophies. Ultimately we concluded that our compensation programs were accomplishing their intended purpose and as a result, we made no changes to the compensation programs for 2012.plans during 2014.

With respectTotal Direct Compensation:

The following table provides the total direct compensation paid to the compensation of our current named executive officers we tookfor 2014, 2013 and 2012. This chart does not include all of the items required by the SEC to be included in the Summary Compensation Table nor does it calculate the amounts shown in the same manner as the SEC requires in the Summary Compensation Table. The total compensation reflected in the following actions for 2012:table consists of:

As a result of these actions and our strong 2012 performance, the compensationlong-term incentive equity award earned by each of our currentthe named executive officers duringofficer for the 3-year performance period that ended on December 31, 2012 (and for comparison purposes, the performance periods ending on December 31 2011 and 2010) was as follows:of the year indicated. The actual award of the equity earned is not made until the following year

Pay for Performance Alignment:

The numbersBecause such a large portion of the compensation of our named executive officers is in the annual bonus andform of equity columns of this chart differ from the numbers reflected in the Summary Compensation Table because it reflects compensation earned for the one and three year performance periods ending December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 as opposed to compensation required to be reported for the applicable period pursuant to SEC rules. We believe that providing compensation informationunder our LTIAP which is calculated based on thea 3-year performance period, during which it was earned (as we have in the chart above and the graph below) enables our shareholders to more effectively compare that compensation to ourpay for performance alignment is most evident when looking at total shareholder returns for the same period and better see the alignment achieved by our pay for performance philosophy.3-year period. The following graph shows the compensation earned by our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer positions for each of 2008-20122010-2014 compared to the total annual shareholder return we delivered to our shareholders for the 3-year period ending on December 31 in each of those years. For the CFO position, the compensation for Mr. Blocherour

former CFO is included for 2008 through2010 and 2011 and the compensation for Mr. Taylor (with base salary annualized to reflect a full year of employment) is included for 2012.2012 through 2014.

2010 compensation does not include a one-time $5 million retention equity award made to Mr. Wood when he was being actively pursued to become the chief executive officer of another REIT.

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives:

Our compensation programs are designed to create a compensation package for each named executive officer that is sufficiently competitive to attract and retain top-level real estate professionals and to motivate those individuals to achieve superior results for us and our shareholders. As part of this compensation philosophy, we try to provide a strong link between an executive’s total earnings opportunity and both our short-term and long-term performance based on the achievement of pre-determined financial targets and operating goals and to encourage our executives to enhance shareholder value by acting and thinking like shareholders. The key principles guiding our compensation decisions are:

1. Total compensation opportunities must be competitive with the marketplace so that we can attract, retain and motivate talented executives who are necessary for achieving superior results for the Trust; however, the aggregate compensation levels must be reasonable in the context of our overall cost structure and must support our business strategy.

2. The compensation of our named executive officers should include a significant portion that is “at risk” and variable depending on both our short-term financial performance and long-term creation of shareholder value with the largest portion of that “at risk” compensation designed to incentivize the creation of sustainable, long-term shareholder value. The “at risk” portion of 20122014 compensation for our named executive officers is

comprised of annual bonuses under our Annual Bonus Plan and long-term equity awards under our LTIAP, both of which are earned only if the Trust meets pre-established performance hurdles andhurdles. These “at risk” portions of

compensation represented 90%84% of the total 20122014 compensation earned by our Chief Executive Officer 86%and 72% of the total 20122014 compensation earned by our Chief Financial Officer and 75% of the total 2012 compensation earned by our Chief Operating Officer.

3. A significant portion of each executive’s total compensation opportunity should be equity based. Our executives should act in the best interest of our shareholders and the best way to encourage them to do that is through compensating them with an equity stake in the Trust and requiring that they maintain a meaningful ownership position. To facilitate this objective, we have adopted guidelines requiring that Mr. Wood, as our CEO, have an equity ownership in the Trust having a value of at least three times his base salary and annual bonus and that Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor each have an equity ownership in the Trust having a value of at least two and one-half times their respective base salary and annual bonus. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee confirmed that each of Mr. Wood, and Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor were in compliance with the minimum stock ownership requirements at December 31, 2012. Given2014. In addition, we adopted a policy in 2013 that Mr. Taylor only joinedexpressly prohibits all of our officers and Trustees from engaging in any hedging or pledging activities with respect to the Trust in July 2012, he was not in compliance with the ownership requirements as of December 31, 2012. Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Mr. Taylor has five years within which to meet the ownership requirements.Trust’s stock.

4. The amount each executive actually earns out of his or her total compensation opportunity should vary based on the individual’s performance, contribution and overall value to the business. The proportion of an individual’s total compensation that varies with individual and company performance objectives should increase as the individual’s business responsibilities increase.

In crafting our compensation policies and programs, we also consider whether they will encourage excessive or unnecessary risk taking and as described in the “Risk Management Oversight” section, we have concluded that our compensation programs do not do so. We do not currently have any policy that addresses the ability of our named executive officers to hedge their stock ownership position in us nor do we currently have any “clawback” or other compensation recovery policy with respect to compensation that may have been paid on the basis of incorrect financial results. We do expectThe Nominating Committee discussed with the Board clawback policies during 2014 and given the expectation that the SEC will issue in 2015 guidance on the nature of the clawback policy that will be required to adopt such policies in the futurebe adopted to comply with the terms of the Dodd-Frank Act.Act, the Nominating Committee and the Board decided not to adopt any clawback policy in 2014. The Nominating Committee and Board intend to reconsider adoption of a clawback policy in 2015 if the SEC has not issued the requisite guidance by the end of 2015.

Compensation Methodology

The Compensation Committee of the Board is responsible for approving all compensation for our named executive officers. The Compensation Committee periodically reviews all elements of compensation to ensure that we remain competitive in the market and to ensure that overall compensation, including the means by which payment is made, is aligned with our business objectives, our performance and the interests of our shareholders. The Compensation Committee conducts an annual review of our CEO’s performance and takes those results into consideration when setting compensation for our CEO. Our CEO plays a significant role in setting the compensation for our other named executive officers by providing the Compensation Committee with an evaluation of their performances and recommendations for their compensation, including recommendations for

any adjustments to annual bonus and long-term equity payouts which are otherwise determined formulaically. The Compensation Committee has the discretion to accept, reject or modify the CEO’s recommendations.

The total potential compensation for our named executive officers is established based on the scope of their individual responsibilities and contributions to our performance taking into account competitive market compensation paid for similar positions. Competitive market compensation for our named executive officers is generally determined by the Compensation Committee members applying their individual understanding, experiences and judgments in the national marketplace of senior level real estate positions and related industry pay in both public and private concerns that may compete for our executives, considering the relative importance of various positions at the Trust given our business plan and organization compared with the business plans of our major competitors. The Compensation Committee consulted the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust’s 20112013 and 20122014 Compensation Surveys (“NAREIT Surveys”) to confirm its assessment of appropriate market compensation for

our executive officers, both the information reported for each position by the 113130 real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) that participated in the survey as well as by the approximately 1722 retail focused REITs that participated in the survey. Not all REITs that participated in the survey provided information for each of the named executive officer positions and it is not possible to determine from the NAREIT Survey which of the participating REITs provided information for which executive officer position. Once the Compensation Committee determines an appropriate level of aggregate compensation for our named executive officers, an individual compensation package is created using a combination of base salary, annual bonus and long-term equity incentives, all in accordance with the compensation philosophy and objectives described earlier. In addition, in late 2014 the Compensation Committee retained Mercer Consulting, a nationally recognized compensation consultant (“Mercer”), to perform a compensation study for our Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and one other officer, the results of which were anticipated to be considered in connection with setting 2015 compensation.

In addition to consulting the NAREIT Survey, the Compensation Committee retained Mercer Consulting, a nationally recognized compensation consultant (“Mercer”) in late 2010 to benchmark comparable real estate companies and make recommendations for compensation for our CEO and other members of senior management, including our other named executive officers. The total fees paid for this report in 2010 were $35,448. For benchmarking purposes, Mercer used the following publicly traded REITs:

Although not specifically included in the peer group for benchmarking purposes, Mercer also looked at information for each of General Growth, Simon Property Group and Vornado Realty Trust as additional points of reference. The peer group includes US based publicly traded REITs with sales ranging from one-half (1/2) to two (2) times the sales of the Trust at the time the study was done and that have a market capitalization in excess of $1 billion with a primary focus on retail REITs with a few other non-retail, market leading REITs added in order to increase the size of the peer group. The report prepared by Mercer was considered by the Compensation Committee in establishing a total compensation range for our CEO which was used by the Compensation Committee to establish base salary, annual bonus potential and potential equity award payouts for 2010 through 2012.2014. The information in the report prepared for our other named executive officers was used solely as a point of reference and not specifically to set compensation packages for those positions. Except for thisthese benchmarking studystudies and a benchmarking study performed for our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee in 2010 with respect to Board compensation, Mercer has not and does not provide any other services to us.

Elements of Total Compensation

Base Salaries

Base salaries are used to compensate the executive for services rendered during the year. Base salaries are set at the beginning of each year and are intended to be competitive with the market and commensurate with the

executive’s level of responsibility, experience and sustained individual performance. Base salaries provide retention value and also align the executive with shareholder interests. Generally, we believe that executive base salaries should account for a relatively modest portion of each individual’s total compensation package. Because we start our process with determining an appropriate level of total compensation, we do not target base salaries to any specific level. We did, however, use information in the NAREIT Survey and the reports prepared by Mercer as a guide to confirm that the base salaries for our named executive officers are within market parameters.

The base salaries for Mr. Wood and Ms. Beckerall of our named executive officers for 20122014 were unchanged from 2011, remaining at $850,000 and $425,000, respectively. Mr. Taylor’s base salary for 2012 was $400,000 which was established as part of his initial hiring package which is discussed in more detail below.2013.

Annual Bonus:

Annual bonuses for Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Tayloreach of our named executive officers are determined each year in accordance with our Annual Bonus Plan that covers approximately 95% of our employees. The Annual Bonus Plan is a cash based

plan that is intended to compensate individuals for performance during a calendar year. Payment under the Annual Bonus Plan is dependent on achieving an annual level of FFO per share that is consistent with our business objectives for that year and for achieving individual annual performance objectives as subjectively evaluated: (a) by the Board with respect to our CEO; and (b) by our CEO with respect to each of Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor. Under our Annual Bonus Plan, the Compensation Committee sets annually a potential bonus payout for each of Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylorour named executive officers for achieving various levels of FFO per share for that calendar year. The Compensation Committee also has the ability to decrease the final annual bonus payout to any of these individuals based on their performance for the year. Each of Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylorour named executive officers (as well as approximately 4058 other employees) has the option to receive up to 25% of the annual bonus in the form of Shares that vest equally over three years. The amount an individual elects to receive in Shares is paid out at 120% of that amount in consideration of the extended vesting.

The level of FFO per share at which payouts are established are set at the beginning of each year by the Compensation Committee after a thorough review and discussion of our budget and investor expectations for that year and considering recommendations of our CEO. The FFO per share levels established by the Compensation Committee are intended to reflect acceptable to exceptional performance in light of our business objectives. FFO is widely accepted in the REIT industry as an appropriate measurement of operating performance on an annual basis and as a result, we believe FFO per share is an appropriate metric to use for determining short-term financial success which is being rewarded in annual performance bonuses. The following chart shows the potential 20122014 annual bonus payouts established by the Compensation Committee for each of Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylorour named executive officers at various levels of FFO per share and the final potential annual bonus payout based on our 20122014 results:

In 2012,2014, we achieved FFO of $4.31$4.79 per share which when interpolated,included a charge of approximately $10.5 million, or $0.15 per share, for prepaying approximately $186 million of debt. That level of FFO per share would have resulted in no payment being made under the Annual Bonus Plan. The Compensation Committee determined that such a final potential payoutresult would not be appropriate and would have penalized management for making the well-reasoned business decision to prepay near-term maturing debt and replacing that debt with 30-year debt while interest rates remained at approximately 92%or near historical lows. As a result, for purposes of calculating payments under the Annual Bonus Plan, the Compensation Committee elected to exclude the net impact of the maximum potential.prepayment from the calculation of FFO which resulted in FFO per share for bonuses purposes of $4.95 per share. A reconciliation of net income to FFO available for common shareholders can be found on page 47,48, in Item 7, of our Form 10-K for calendar year 20122014 filed with the SEC on February 12, 2013.10, 2015.

We were able to achieve operating results at the higher end of the FFO range we had established primarily through higher than anticipated revenue with the key drivers of that higher revenue being: (a) the ability to leverage the strong non-economic terms of our leases in order to negotiate favorable payments from several underperforming tenants that allowed them to terminate their leases early and gave us the opportunity to replace those tenants with stronger performing tenants at strong rents; and (b) our record level of leasing in 2012 that resulted in a 1.7% increase in occupancy (approximately 330,000 square feet) in our portfolio (excluding acquired properties) by the end of 2012.

The Compensation Committee determined, after reviewing individual performance, that Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Tayloreach of our named executive officers should each be paid the full amount of the annual bonus to which he or she is entitled based on the Trust’s 20122014 results, as adjusted, as shown in the table above. The Compensation Committee’s determination with respect to Mr. Wood took into consideration our financial results for the year, progress made with our acquisitions and development projects to set the Trust up for future long-term growth, Mr. Wood’s effectiveness in leading the company, long-term strategic planning, succession planning, relationship with the Board, and relationship with shareholders and other stakeholders, among other factors. With respect to each of Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor, the Compensation Committee accepted Mr. Wood’s recommendations as to the amount of their annual bonus payouts. Mr. Wood’s recommendations as to the bonus payouts for each of Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor were based on his subjective assessment of each individual’s contributions to the Trust’s performance in 20122014 in their respective job functions.

Those contributions included, without limitation, the following: (a) Ms. Becker’s oversight of the day to day operations of the Trust that resulted in year over year increases in FFO, FFO per share and property operating income; and (b) Mr. Taylor’s work in re-establishing a fuller acquisitions capability on the East Coastfinancing our development pipeline and developing and refining financing strategies for the Trust’s development pipeline.growing our portfolio through acquisitions.

For 2012, Ms. Becker elected to receive 25% of her annual bonus in Shares and2014, each of Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor elected to receive 20%25% of his or her annual bonus in Shares. The cash portion of the annual bonuses is reflected in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column in the Summary Compensation Table in this proxy statement. The stock portion of these annual bonuses will be included in the “Stock Awards” column in the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table in next year’s proxy statement.

Annual Long-Term Equity Incentives:

We believe that outstanding long-term performance is achieved through an ownership culture that encourages a focus on long-term performance by our executive officers through the use of equity-based awards. Long-term incentive awards are made annually to all officers and participants in our leadership education and development program under our LTIAP. This program was structured to align the most significant portion of compensation for our senior management team, including Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor, with the creation of long-term shareholder value. Recipients of awards under this program realize value over a minimum 6-year time horizon comprised of a 3-year performance period followed by a minimum of a 3-year time based vesting period. We believe that the combination of this extended period with the requirements described above for Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylorour named executive officers to continually hold a meaningful equity position in the company creates a strong long-term alignment of interests between those individuals and our shareholders.

The performance metrics used under the LTIAP, the levels of performance required to be achieved for Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylorour named executive officers to earn an LTIAP award and the performance actually achieved for the three year period from January 1, 20102012 through December 31, 20122014 are set forth below:

The Compensation Committee believes that relative total shareholder return, absolute total shareholder return and return on invested capital are appropriate metrics to use for rewarding long-term performance. The relative shareholder return metric reflects how well we have performed for our shareholders as compared to other companies facing the same general market dynamics. The Compensation Committee determined that the BBRESHOP (Bloomberg REIT Shopping Center Index) was the best index to use because the BBRESHOP is an industry index made up of primarily companies that own and operate strip shopping centers whose businesses are most closely aligned with ours. Absolute shareholder return measures whether we have actually created any value for our shareholders during this time while return on invested capital determines how effectively we have invested our shareholders’ capital. These performance metrics support the objectives of the company and the LTIAP and remain unchanged from prior years.

The potential LTIAP payments for both Mr. Wood and Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor at the various levels of performance for each of the performance metrics under the LTIAP and the amounts actually earned by each of Mr. Wood and Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor for the prior 3-year period are set forth in the following table:

The Compensation Committee approved paying each of Mr. Wood and Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylor the full amount of the LTIAP award to which they were entitled. The Compensation Committee has the discretion to increase or decrease any LTIAP award by up to 20% to reflect individual performance but did not exercise that discretion for the 20122014 LTIAP awards for any ofeither Mr. Wood or Ms. Becker orBecker. With respect to Mr. Taylor.Taylor, the Compensation Committee elected in February 2014 to advance Mr. Taylor’s LTIAP award for the period ending December 31, 2014 and make that award in February 2014 instead of February 2015. The Compensation Committee determined that making this award in advance was warranted given Mr. Taylor’s relatively short tenure with us, and therefore his relatively small equity ownership in the company, and Mr. Taylor’s importance to us in financing our growth plans over the next several years. The Compensation Committee determined that the benefit of making this award in advance outweighed the issues associated with not waiting to make the award at the end of the performance period. This decision resulted in Mr. Taylor’s receiving $450,000 more of equity than he would have if the award has not been made until February 2015. In exchange for the acceleration of the timing of the award and to increase the retention value of the award, the Compensation Committee extended the vesting for this award from the normal 3 year vesting period to a 5 year vesting period.

The LTIAP awards are made in the form of restricted Shares that vest in equal installments over a three-year period; however, each individual can elect to take up to 50% of his or her award in the form of options which vest equally over five years. Although the Compensation Committee believes that paying these awards in restricted Shares provides the most retention value for employees, it has agreed to permit individuals to elect to take up to 50% of the award in options in order to give the individual employee some ability to structure his or her own equity compensation in a way that best matches the individual’s needs and provides the most value to that individual. The Compensation Committee has concluded that individual employees place value in having the ability to match the form of their equity compensation to their individual financial objectives and that this value to employees outweighs any diminution in the retention value of LTIAP awards by permitting up to 50% to be paid in options. Shares or options are issued under the LTIAP only after all performance has been achieved during the prior three-year period and thereafter, the Shares or options are subject to time-based vesting over an additional three-year period for Shares and five-year period for options. Dividends are paid on all Shares issued under the LTIAP.

Each of Mr. Wood, Ms. Becker and Mr. Taylorour named executive officers elected to take the entirety of their 20122014 LTIAP award in Shares. The number of Shares actually awarded to each individual was determined by dividing the amount of the award by $106.99,$142.30, with respect to Mr. Wood and Ms. Becker and by $111.70 with respect to Mr. Taylor. Those amounts reflected the closing price of our stock on the NYSE on February 7, 2013, the date the award wasawards were made. There is no amount included in the Summary Compensation Table or Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table in this proxy statement for thesethe awards to Mr. Wood or Ms. Becker or Mr. Taylor.Becker. The LTIAP awards reflected in the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table for Mr. Wood and Ms. Becker in this proxy statement relate to performance for the 3-year period ending December 31, 20112013 which were awarded in February 2012, with respect2014. The LTIAP awards reflected in the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table for Mr. Taylor in this proxy statement include the award made to Mr. Wood and Ms. Becker.him for the 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2013 which was made in February 2014 as well as the award made to him in February 2014 in advance of the completion of the 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2014.

Chief Executive Officer Compensation

Mr. Wood’s compensation plan for 2012 was unchanged from 2011. The basic componentsMore than 65% of Mr. Wood’s compensation – base salary, annual bonus target and LTIAP target award level – were established by the Compensation Committee in October 2010 taking into account the compensation survey conducted by Mercer described above, our historical outperformance in total shareholder return since Mr. Wood became our Chief Executive Officer, the prospects for continued outperformance in the future, the active recruiting for Mr. Wood’s services in the marketplace at the time the target levels for each compensation component were set, the related strong desire to retain Mr. Wood, and the ability of Mr. Wood and the current senior management team to take advantage of future opportunities to increase shareholder value. The components of Mr. Wood’s compensation plan as established by the Compensation Committee in 2010 and used for 2012 compensation decisions are: (a) base salary of $850,000; (b) a range for Mr. Wood’s annual bonus from $0 to $1,593,750 with a target of $1,275,000; and (c) a target equity award under the LTIAP of $4,000,000 creating a range for a potential LTIAP award from $0 to $6,000,000. These targets create a compensation package where 86% of the total targeted compensation is considered at risk and will vary with company performance and more than 65% of the compensation will be paid in the form of equity. Basedequity under our LTIAP which is calculated based on a 3-year performance period. Accordingly, the Trust’s resultspay for performance alignment is most evident when looking at total shareholder returns for the performance period ending December 31, 2012 and the Committee’s assessment of individual performance, the Committee awarded Mr. Wood an annual bonus for 2012 of $1,466,250 and a 2012 LTIAP award of $6,000,000.

same 3-year period. The following chartgraph shows the compensation earned by Mr. Wood based on company results delivered in the performance periods ending on December 31 offor each of 2008-20122010-2014 compared to the total annual shareholder return we delivered to our shareholders for the 3-year periods ending on December 31 in each of those years. We believe that providing compensation information based on the performance period during which it was earned (as we have in the graph below) is the best way to evaluate whether there is an alignment between executive compensation and performance.

We purchased for2010 compensation does not include a one-time $5 million retention equity award made to Mr. Wood in 1998 a split dollar life insurance policywhen he was being actively pursued to become the chief executive officer of another REIT.

In addition to the base salary, annual bonus and consistent with the terms of that arrangement approved by the Compensation Committee in 1998,LTIAP award described above, we continued to hold in 2012 an outstanding interest free loan for the benefit of Mr. Wood secured by that split dollar life insurance policy. We reflect the amount of interest that would have been payable by Mr. Wood on that loan in 2012 under the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table. That loan is scheduled to be repaid by its terms in 2013. We also have an agreement in place with Mr. Wood (“Health Coverage Continuation Agreement”) pursuant to which we have agreed to provide to Mr. Wood, his spouse and his dependents continuation of health coverage after Mr. Wood’s termination upon death, disability, retirement, change in control or otherwise (other

than a termination with cause or resignation). The coverage will continue as to Mr. Wood and his spouse until their death, or with respect to his spouse until divorce, if earlier. As to Mr. Wood’s children, coverage will continue as to three of the children until each reaches age twenty-five and as to one of the children, until her death. The continued medical coverage is required to be at least the same level as provided to Mr. Wood and his family at the time of his termination and such coverage will be secondary to certain other coverages that may be available to Mr. Wood and his family. The Compensation Committee has determined that these perquisites and other personal benefits are a relatively small

portion of Mr. Wood’s overall compensation, are reasonable in light of the total compensation package for Mr. Wood and are consistent with our compensation objectives of creating programs that will allow us to retain talented executives.

Chief Financial Officer Transition and Compensation:

On August 15, 2012, Mr. Taylor replaced Mr. Blocher as our Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Taylor had been an outside advisor to the Trust for more than a decade and as such, was very familiar with the company and well known to the Board and the senior management team. Given this level of familiarity, Mr. Taylor’s skill set, and market data for compensation of a chief financial officer position as reflected in the NAREIT Survey, the Committee approved the following target compensation package for Mr. Taylor: (a) base salary of $400,000; (b) annual bonus target equal to 75% of his base salary resulting in a payout range of $0 to $375,000 with a target of $300,000; (c) a target LTIAP award of $750,000 with a total potential payout range of $0 to $900,000; (d) a sign-on and make whole bonus of $1,500,000 which was intended to replace a portion of the value of unvested compensation and other benefits at his prior employer that Mr. Taylor was required to forfeit in order to join the Trust. $1,000,000 of this bonus was paid in cash and the remaining $500,000 was paid in the form of 4,612 Shares issued at a price of $108.42, the closing price of our Shares on the NYSE on July 30, 2012 which was Mr. Taylor’s first day of employment with the Trust. Those Shares vested immediately on issuance; and (e) a severance arrangement on terms consistent with those in place with Ms. Becker which are described in more detail in the “Potential Payments on Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control” section below. As an inducement for Mr. Taylor to leave his former employer and forfeit certain compensation and other benefits that had been earned for 2012 and given the depth of the experience the Board had with Mr. Taylor during his more than a decade as an outside advisor to the Trust, the Committee agreed that Mr. Taylor’s annual bonus and LTIAP award for 2012 would not be pro-rated.

As part of the transition of the chief financial officer position to Mr. Taylor, Mr. Blocher’s last day with the Trust was September 30, 2012 and on his exit from the Trust, Mr. Blocher was paid in accordance with his Severance Agreement as described in more detail in the “Potential Payments on Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control” section below. Because Mr. Blocher was not employed by the Trust at the end of 2012, he was not eligible for a 2012 bonus or an equity award under the LTIAP.

Timing of Equity Grants:

Equity awards to our employees under our Annual Bonus Plan and LTIAP described above are made at the Compensation Committee’s meeting that occurs in February of each calendar year. Whether these awards are made before or after we release financial results for the prior fiscal year depends solely on when the Compensation Committee meets in relation to the meetings of the Board and the Audit Committee, the dates for all of which are set during the preceding year. We have no policy that times the granting of equity awards relative to the release of material non-public information. Equity awards to new hires are generally made on the first day on which the employee starts work and equity awards to employees who are promoted generally are made on the day on which the promotion has been fully approved. All of our options are awarded at the closing price of our Shares on the NYSE on the date the award is made. The Compensation Committee has never re-priced options, granted options with an exercise price that is less than the closing price on the NYSE on the date of the grant or granted options which are priced on a date other than the grant date. Equity awards for Vice Presidents and above for the 3-year performance through 2012period ending on December 31, 2014 were made at the Compensation Committee’s meeting on February 7, 20136, 2015 based on the closing price of our Shares on the NYSE on that date.

Termination and Change-in-Control Arrangements:

We have agreements in place with each of our named executive officers providing for various payments and benefits to be made to them if there is a change in control or their employment with us is terminated for certain reasons. The circumstances in which payments may be made and the potential amounts of those payments are described in more detail in the “Potential Payments on Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control” section below. We believe that the payments provided for in these agreements are reasonable and appropriate as part of the total compensation packages available for our named executive officers.

Deductibility of Executive Compensation in Excess of $1.0 Million:

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code generally prohibits any publicly held corporation from taking a federal income tax deduction for compensation in excess of $1 million in any taxable year to an executive officer who is named in the Summary Compensation Table. Exceptions are made for qualified performance-based compensation, among other things. In structuring our compensation programs, the Compensation Committee considers this Section 162(m) exception; however, the Compensation Committee does not believe that it is necessarily in our best interests and the best interests of our shareholders for all compensation to meet the requirements of Section 162(m) for deductibility. As a result, the Compensation Committee has determined that it is appropriate at times to make compensation awards that are non-deductible under Section 162(m). Further, because of ambiguities and uncertainties under Section 162(m), we cannot give any assurance that compensation that we intend to satisfy the requirements for deductibility under Section 162(m) will in fact be deductible.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee of the Board has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

Submitted by:

David W. Faeder, Chairman

Kristin Gamble

Gail P. Steinel

Joseph S. Vassalluzzo

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

The following table summarizes the total compensation earned by each of the named executive officers for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012, 20112014, 2013 and 2010,2012, in accordance with current SEC rules. The Summary Compensation Table below does not include the value of the Shares issued to our named executive officers on February 7, 20136, 2015 for the performance period ending December 31, 2012.2014. Those awards will appear in next year’s proxy statement in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table as well as the “Stock Awards” column of the Summary Compensation Table. The cash portion of the annual bonuses awarded pursuant to the Annual Bonus Plan in February 20132015 based on 20122014 performance is included below in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column.

(4)

Amounts shown in this column represent only the cash portion paid under our Annual Bonus Plan and include amounts deferred by our named executive officers into our non-qualified deferred compensation plan. For 2014, all of the named executive officers received 75% of their Annual Bonus in cash. For 2013 and 2012, Messrs. Wood and Taylor received 80% of their Annual Bonus in cash and Ms. Becker received 75% of her Annual Bonus in cash. For 2011, Messrs. Wood and Blocher received 80% of their Annual Bonus in cash and Ms. Becker received 75% of her Annual Bonus in cash. For 2010, each of Mr. Wood, Mr. Blocher and Ms. Becker received 80% of his or her Annual Bonus in cash. The remaining amounts earned under the Annual Bonus Plan in 2012, 20112014,

2013 and 20102012 were paid in Shares in an amount equal to 120% of the cash value in consideration of a 3-year vesting schedule. The aggregate Annual Bonus paid to Ms. Becker and Messrs. Wood and Taylor for 20122014 including both cash and Shares is as follows: