Fair Value Measurements | Fair Value Measurements Fair Value of Financial Instruments The following table presents the carrying value and estimated fair value of the Company’s financial instruments. June 30, 2015 December 31, 2014 Carrying Value Fair Value Carrying Value Fair Value Financial liabilities: Mortgages payable, net $ 1,438,806 $ 1,537,338 $ 1,634,465 $ 1,749,671 Unsecured notes payable, net $ 498,851 $ 502,704 $ 250,000 $ 258,360 Unsecured credit facility $ 560,000 $ 562,243 $ 450,000 $ 451,502 Derivative liability $ 539 $ 539 $ 562 $ 562 The carrying values of mortgages payable, net and unsecured notes payable, net in the table are included in the condensed consolidated balance sheets under the indicated captions. The carrying value of the Unsecured Credit Facility is comprised of the “Unsecured term loan” and the “Unsecured revolving line of credit” and the carrying value of the derivative liability is included in “Other liabilities” in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. Recurring Fair Value Measurements The following table presents the Company’s financial instruments, which are measured at fair value on a recurring basis, by the level in the fair value hierarchy within which those measurements fall. Methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of these instruments are described after the table. Fair Value Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total June 30, 2015 Derivative liability $ — $ 539 $ — $ 539 December 31, 2014 Derivative liability $ — $ 562 $ — $ 562 Derivative liability: The fair value of the derivative liability is determined using a discounted cash flow analysis on the expected future cash flows of each derivative. This analysis utilizes observable market data including forward yield curves and implied volatilities to determine the market’s expectation of the future cash flows of the variable component. The fixed and variable components of the derivative are then discounted using calculated discount factors developed based on the LIBOR swap rate and are aggregated to arrive at a single valuation for the period. The Company also incorporates credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect both its own nonperformance risk and the respective counterparty’s nonperformance risk in the fair value measurements. Although the Company has determined that the majority of the inputs used to value its derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with its derivatives utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads to evaluate the likelihood of default by itself and its counterparties. However, as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , the Company has assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of its derivative positions and has determined that the credit valuation adjustments are not significant to the overall valuation. As a result, the Company has determined that its derivative valuations in their entirety are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. In adjusting the fair value of its derivative contracts for the effect of nonperformance risk, the Company has considered any applicable credit enhancements. The Company’s derivative instruments are further described in Note 9 to the condensed consolidated financial statements. Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements The following table presents the Company’s assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , aggregated by the level within the fair value hierarchy in which those measurements fall. The table includes information related to properties remeasured to fair value during the six months ended June 30, 2015 and the year ended December 31, 2014 , except for those properties sold prior to June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , respectively. Methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of these assets are described after the table. Fair Value Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total Provision for Impairment (a) June 30, 2015 Investment properties - held for sale (b) $ — $ 5,450 $ — $ 5,450 $ 1,655 December 31, 2014 Investment properties $ — $ — $ 86,500 (c) $ 86,500 $ 59,352 Investment properties - held for sale (d) $ — $ 17,233 $ — $ 17,233 $ 563 (a) Excludes impairment charges recorded on investment properties sold prior to June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , respectively. (b) Represents an impairment charge recorded during the three months ended June 30, 2015 for Traveler’s Office Building, which was classified as held for sale as of June 30, 2015. Such charge, calculated as the expected sales price from the executed sales contract less estimated transaction costs as compared to the Company’s carrying value of its investment, was determined to be a Level 2 input. The estimated transaction costs totaling $154 are not reflected as a reduction to the fair value disclosed in the table above, but were included in the calculation of the impairment charge. (c) Represents the fair values of the Company’s Shaw’s Supermarket, The Gateway, Hartford Insurance Building and Citizen’s Property Insurance Building investment properties. The estimated fair values of Shaw’s Supermarket and The Gateway of $3,100 and $75,400 , respectively, were determined using the income approach. The income approach involves discounting the estimated income stream and reversion (presumed sale) value of a property over an estimated holding period to a present value at a risk-adjusted rate. Discount rates, growth assumptions and terminal capitalization rates utilized in this approach are derived from property-specific information, market transactions and other industry data. The terminal capitalization rate and discount rate are significant inputs to this valuation. The following were the key Level 3 inputs used in estimating the fair value of Shaw’s Supermarket and The Gateway as of September 30, 2014, the date the assets were measured at fair value. 2014 Low High Rental growth rates Varies (i) Varies (i) Operating expense growth rates 1.39% 3.70% Discount rates 8.25% 9.50% Terminal capitalization rates 7.50% 8.50% (i) Since cash flow models are established at the tenant level, projected rental revenue growth rates fluctuate over the course of the estimated holding period based upon the timing of lease rollover, amount of available space and other property and space-specific factors. The estimated fair values of Hartford Insurance Building and Citizen’s Property Insurance Building of $5,000 and $3,000 , respectively, were based upon third party comparable sales prices, which contain unobservable inputs used by these third parties to determine the estimated fair values. (d) Represents an impairment charge recorded during the three months ended December 31, 2014 for Aon Hewitt East Campus, which was classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2014. Such charge, calculated as the expected sales price from the executed sales contract less estimated transaction costs as compared to the Company’s carrying value of its investment, was determined to be a Level 2 input. The estimated transaction costs totaling $738 are not reflected as a reduction to the fair value disclosed in the table above, but were included in the calculation of the impairment charge. Fair Value Disclosures The following table presents the Company’s financial liabilities, which are measured at fair value for disclosure purposes, by the level in the fair value hierarchy within which those measurements fall. Methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of these instruments are described after the table. Fair Value Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total June 30, 2015 Mortgages payable, net $ — $ — $ 1,537,338 $ 1,537,338 Unsecured notes payable, net $ 244,690 $ — $ 258,014 $ 502,704 Unsecured credit facility $ — $ — $ 562,243 $ 562,243 December 31, 2014 Mortgages payable, net $ — $ — $ 1,749,671 $ 1,749,671 Unsecured notes payable $ — $ — $ 258,360 $ 258,360 Unsecured credit facility $ — $ — $ 451,502 $ 451,502 Mortgages payable, net: The Company estimates the fair value of its mortgages payable by discounting the future cash flows of each instrument at rates currently offered to the Company by its lenders for similar debt instruments of comparable maturities. The rates used are not directly observable in the marketplace and judgment is used in determining the appropriate rate for each of the Company’s individual mortgages payable based upon the specific terms of the agreement, including the term to maturity, the quality and nature of the underlying property and its leverage ratio. The rates used range from 2.2% to 5.6% and 2.2% to 4.0% as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , respectively. Unsecured notes payable, net: The quoted market price as of June 30, 2015 was used to value the Company’s 4.00% notes. The Company estimates the fair value of its Series A and B notes by discounting the future cash flows at rates currently offered to the Company by its lenders for similar debt instruments of comparable maturities. The rates used are not directly observable in the marketplace and judgment is used in determining the appropriate rates. The weighted average rate used was 3.95% and 3.97% as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , respectively. Unsecured Credit Facility: The Company estimates the fair value of its Unsecured Credit Facility by discounting the future cash flows related to the credit spreads at rates currently offered to the Company by its lenders for similar facilities of comparable maturities. The rates used are not directly observable in the marketplace and judgment is used in determining the appropriate rates. The rates used to discount the credit spreads were 1.30% and 1.35% for the unsecured term loan as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , respectively, and 1.35% for the unsecured revolving line of credit as of June 30, 2015 . There were no amounts drawn on the unsecured revolving line of credit as of December 31, 2014. There were no transfers between the levels of the fair value hierarchy during the six months ended June 30, 2015 . |