UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One) |
ý | | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE |
| | SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| | For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 |
OR |
o | | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE |
| | SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| | For the transition period from to . |
Commission File Number: 1-9044
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Indiana | | 35-1740409 |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) | | (IRS Employer Identification Number) |
| | |
600 East 96th Street, Suite 100 Indianapolis, Indiana | | 46240 |
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) | | (Zip Code) |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (317) 808-6000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class: | | Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered: |
Common Stock ($.01 par value) | | New York Stock Exchange |
Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/10 interest in 8.45% | | |
Series I Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares ($.01 par value) | | New York Stock Exchange |
Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/10 interest in 6.625% | | |
Series J Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares ($.01 par value) | | New York Stock Exchange |
Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/10 interest in 6.5% | | |
Series K Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares ($.01 par value) | | New York Stock Exchange |
Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/10 interest in 6.6% | | |
Series L Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares ($.01 par value) | | New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/10 interest in 7.99% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares ($.01 par value)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ý No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer ý Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No ý
The aggregate market value of the voting shares of the registrant’s outstanding common shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant is $4.5 billion based on the last reported sale price on June 30, 2005.
The number of common shares, $.01 par value outstanding as of March 1, 2006 was 134,819,571.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Certain portions of Duke Realty Corporation’s Definitive Proxy Statement for its 2006 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “Proxy Statement”) to be filed pursuant to Rule 14a-6 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K. Other than those portions of the Proxy Statement specifically incorporated by reference pursuant to Items 10 through 14 of Part III hereof, no other portions of the Proxy Statement shall be deemed so incorporated.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Form 10-K
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained or incorporated by reference into this Annual Report, including those related to our future operations, constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. (the “Exchange Act”). These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause our actual results, performance or achievements, or industry results, to differ materially from any predictions of future results, performance or achievements that we express or imply in this report. Some of the risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may affect future results include, among others:
• Changes in general economic and business conditions, including performance of financial markets;
• Our continued qualification as a real estate investment trust;
• Heightened competition for tenants and potential decreases in property occupancy;
• Potential increases in real estate construction costs; potential changes in the financial markets and interest rates;
• Our continuing ability to favorably raise debt and equity in the capital markets;
• Our ability to successfully identify, acquire, develop and/or manage properties on terms that are favorable to us;
• Our ability to successfully dispose of properties on terms that are favorable to us;
• Inherent risks in the real estate business including tenant defaults, potential liability relating to environmental matters and liquidity of real estate investments; and
• Other risks and uncertainties that are described herein, including but not limited to the items discussed in “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of this report, and that are otherwise described from time to time in our reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).
The words “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “seek” and similar expressions or statements regarding future periods are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Although we believe that the plans, expectations and results expressed in or suggested by the forward-looking statements are reasonable, all forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain as they involve substantial risks and uncertainties beyond our control. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict the nature or assess the potential impact of each new factor on our business. Given these uncertainties, we caution you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any of our forward-looking statements for events or circumstances that arise after the statement is made.
PART I
Item 1. Business
Background
We are a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”), which began operations upon completion of our initial public offering in February 1986. In October 1993, we completed an additional common shares offering and acquired the rental real estate and service businesses of Duke Associates, whose operations began in 1972. As of December 31, 2005, our diversified portfolio of 690 rental properties (including 26 properties totaling more than 6.8 million square feet under development)
1
encompass more than 105.4 million rentable square feet and are leased by a diverse and stable base of approximately 3,500 tenants whose businesses include manufacturing, retailing, wholesale trade, distribution and professional services. We also own or control approximately 4,800 acres of unencumbered land ready for development.
Through our Service Operations, we provide, on a fee basis, leasing, property and asset management, development, construction, build-to-suit and other tenant-related services for approximately 120 tenants in more than 6.7 million square feet of space at properties owned by third-party clients. With 13 primary operating platforms, we concentrate our activities in the Midwest and Southeast United States. See Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” for financial information. Our rental operations are conducted through Duke Realty Limited Partnership (“DRLP”). In addition, we conduct our Service Operations through Duke Realty Services LLC (“DRS”), Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership (“DRSLP”) and Duke Construction Limited Partnership (“DCLP”). In this Form 10-K Report, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the Company and those entities owned or controlled by the Company.
Our headquarters and executive offices are located in Indianapolis, Indiana. In addition, we have twelve regional offices located in Atlanta, Georgia; Cincinnati, Ohio; Columbus, Ohio; Cleveland, Ohio; Chicago, Illinois; Dallas, Texas; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Nashville, Tennessee; Orlando, Florida; Raleigh, North Carolina; St. Louis, Missouri; and Tampa, Florida. We had approximately 1,100 employees as of December 31, 2005.
Business Strategy
Our business objective is to increase Funds From Operations (“FFO”) by (i) maintaining and increasing property occupancy and rental rates through the management of our portfolio of existing properties; (ii) developing and acquiring new properties for rental operations in our existing markets; (iii) expanding geographically by acquiring and developing properties in new markets; (iv) using our construction expertise to act as a general contractor in our existing markets and other domestic markets on a fee basis; (v) developing properties in our existing markets and other markets which we will sell through our merchant building development program and (vi) providing a full line of real estate services to our tenants and to third parties. FFO is used by industry analysts and investors as a supplemental operating performance measure of an equity REIT. FFO is calculated in accordance with the definition that was adopted by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). FFO, as defined by NAREIT, represents net income (loss) determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), excluding extraordinary items as defined under GAAP and gains or losses from sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets, plus certain non-cash items such as real estate asset depreciation and amortization, and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets in accordance with GAAP implicitly assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. Since real estate values instead have historically risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors and analysts have considered presentation of operating results for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to be insufficient by themselves. Thus, NAREIT created FFO as a supplemental measure of REIT operating performance that excludes historical cost depreciation, among other items, from GAAP net income. Management believes that the use of FFO, combined with the required primary GAAP presentations, improves the understanding of operating results of REITs among the investing public and makes comparisons of REIT operating results more meaningful. Management considers FFO to be a useful measure for reviewing comparative operating and financial performance (although FFO should be reviewed in conjunction with net income which remains the primary measure of performance) because by excluding gains or losses related to sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets and excluding real estate asset depreciation and amortization, FFO assists in comparing the operating performance of a company’s real estate between periods or as compared to different companies.
2
As a fully integrated commercial real estate firm, we provide in-house leasing, management, development and construction services which, coupled with our significant base of commercially zoned and unencumbered land in existing business parks, should give us a competitive advantage both as a real estate operator and in future development activities.
We believe that the management of real estate opportunities and risks can be done most effectively at regional or local levels. As a result, we intend to continue our emphasis on increasing our market share and effective rents in the primary markets where we own properties. We also expect to utilize approximately 4,800 acres of unencumbered land and our many business relationships with approximately 3,500 commercial tenants to expand our build-to-suit business (development projects substantially pre-leased to a single tenant) and to pursue other development and acquisition opportunities in our primary markets. We believe that this regional focus will allow us to assess market supply and demand for real estate more effectively as well as to capitalize on the strong relationships with our tenant base. In addition, we seek to further capitalize on strong customer relationships to provide third-party construction and build-for-sale services outside our primary markets and to expand into high growth and seaport markets across the United States.
Our strategy is to seek to develop and acquire primarily Class A commercial properties located in markets with high growth potential for large national and international companies and other quality regional and local firms. Our industrial and suburban office development focuses on business parks and mixed-use developments suitable for multiple projects on a single site where we can create and control the business environment. These business parks and mixed-use developments often include restaurants and other amenities, which we believe will create an atmosphere that is particularly efficient and desirable. Our retail development focuses on lifestyle, community and neighborhood centers in our existing markets and is developed primarily for held-for-sale opportunities. In 2004, we executed a new initiative with a prominent healthcare real estate developer to jointly develop, construct and lease medical office and related healthcare facilities on a merchant building basis. As a fully integrated real estate company, we are able to arrange for or provide to our industrial, office, medical and retail customers not only well located and well maintained facilities, but also additional services such as build-to-suit construction, tenant finish construction, and expansion flexibility.
All of our properties are located in areas that include competitive properties. Institutional investors, other REITs or local real estate operators generally own such properties; however, no single competitor or small group of competitors is dominant in our current markets. The supply and demand of similar available rental properties may affect the rental rates we will receive on our properties.
Financing Strategy
We seek to maintain a well-balanced, conservative and flexible capital structure by: (i) extending and sequencing the maturity dates of debt; (ii) borrowing primarily at fixed rates by targeting a variable rate component of total debt less than 20%; (iii) pursuing current and future long-term debt financings and refinancing on an unsecured basis; (iv) maintaining conservative debt service and fixed charge coverage ratios; and (v) issuing attractively priced perpetual preferred shares for 5-10% of our total capital structure. Management believes that these strategies have enabled and should continue to enable us to favorably access capital markets for our long-term requirements such as debt refinancing and financing development and acquisitions of additional rental properties. In addition, as discussed under Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” we have a $500 million unsecured line of credit available for short-term fundings of development and acquisition of additional rental properties. In January 2006, the capacity of this line was increased to $1.0 billion. Further, we pursue favorable opportunities to dispose of assets that no longer meet our long-term investment criteria and recycle the proceeds into new investments that we believe have excellent long-term growth prospects. Our debt to total market capitalization ratio (total market capitalization is defined as the total market value of all outstanding common and preferred shares and units of limited partnership interest (“Units”) in DRLP plus
3
outstanding indebtedness) at December 31, 2005 was 31.8%. Our ratio of earnings to debt service and ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the year ended December 31, 2005 were 1.78x and 2.08x, respectively. In computing the ratio of earnings to debt service, earnings have been calculated by adding interest expense (excluding amortization of debt issuance costs) to income from continuing operations, less preferred dividends, and minority interest in earnings of DRLP. Debt service consists of interest expense and recurring principal amortization (excluding maturities) and excludes amortization of debt issuance costs. In computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges, earnings have been calculated by adding interest expense to income from continuing operations and minority interest in earnings of DRLP. Fixed charges consist of interest costs, whether expensed or capitalized, the interest component of rental expense and amortization of debt issuance costs.
Corporate Governance
Since our inception, we not only have strived to be a top-performer operationally, but also to lead in issues important to investors such as disclosure and corporate governance. Our system of governance reinforces this commitment. Summarized below are the highlights of our Corporate Governance initiatives.
Board Composition | | Board is controlled by supermajority (85%) of Independent Directors as of |
| | January 25, 2006 |
| | |
Board Committees | | Board Committee members are all Independent Directors |
| | |
Lead Director | | The Chairman of the Corporate Governance Committee serves as Lead Director of the Independent Directors |
| | |
Board Policies | | No Shareholder Rights Plan (Poison Pill) |
| | Code of Conduct applies to all Directors and employees, including the Chief Executive Officer and senior financial officers; waivers require the vote of Independent Directors |
| | Effective orientation program for new Directors |
| | Independence of Directors is reviewed annually |
| | Independent Directors meet at least quarterly in executive session |
| | Independent Directors receive no compensation from Duke other than as Directors |
| | Equity-based compensation plans require shareholder approval |
| | Board effectiveness and performance is reviewed annually by the Corporate Governance Committee |
| | Corporate Governance Committee conducts an annual review of the Chief Executive Officer succession plan |
| | Independent Directors and all Board Committees may retain outside advisors, as they deem appropriate |
| | Policy governing retirement age for Directors |
| | Outstanding stock options may not be repriced |
| | Directors required to offer resignation upon job change |
| | Majority voting for election of Directors |
| | Majority Voting Policy for Director elections |
| | |
Ownership | | Minimum Stock Ownership Guidelines apply to all Directors and Executive Officers |
Our Code of Conduct (which applies to all Directors and employees, including the Chief Executive Officer and senior financial officers) and the Corporate Governance Guidelines are available in the investor information/corporate governance section of our website at www.dukerealty.com. A copy of these documents may also be obtained without charge by writing to Duke Realty Corporation, 600 East 96th Street, Suite 100, Indianapolis, Indiana 46240, Attention: Investor Relations.
4
Other
For additional information regarding our investments and operations, see Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” For additional information about our business segments, see Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
Available Information and Exchange Certifications
In addition to this Annual Report, we file quarterly and special reports, proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). All documents that are filed with the SEC are available free of charge on our corporate website, which is www.dukerealty.com. You may also read and copy any document filed at the public reference facilities of the SEC at 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 25049. Please call the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 for further information about the public reference facilities. These documents also may be accessed through the SEC’s electronic data gathering, analysis and retrieval system (“EDGAR”) via electronic means, including the SEC’s home page on the Internet (http://www.sec.gov). In addition, since some of our securities are listed on the New York Stock Exchange, you may read SEC filings at the offices of the New York Stock Exchange, 20 Broad Street, New York, New York 10005.
The New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) requires that the Chief Executive Officer of each listed company certify annually to the NYSE that he or she is not aware of any violation by the company of NYSE corporate governance listing standards as of the date of such certification. We submitted the certification of our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Dennis D. Oklak, with our 2005 Annual Written Affirmation to the NYSE on March 27, 2005.
We included the certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related rules, relating to the quality of the Company’s public disclosure, in this report as Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Our operations involve various risks that could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, ability to pay distribution on our common stock and the market price of our common stock. In addition to the other information contained in this Annual Report, you should carefully consider the following risk factors in evaluating an investment in our securities.
If we were to cease to qualify as a real estate investment trust, we and our shareholders would lose significant tax benefits.
We intend to continue to operate so as to qualify as a real estate investment trust (a “REIT”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Qualification as a REIT provides significant tax advantages to us and our shareholders. However, in order for us to continue to qualify as a REIT, we must satisfy numerous requirements established under highly technical and complex Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. Satisfaction of these requirements also depends on various factual circumstances not entirely within our control. The fact that we hold our assets through an operating partnership and its subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Although we believe that we can continue to operate so as to qualify as a REIT, we cannot offer any assurance that we can continue to do so or that legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions will not significantly change the qualification requirements or the federal income tax consequences of qualification. If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, it would have the following effects:
5
• We would not be allowed a deduction for distributions to shareholders and would be subject to federal income tax (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) on our taxable income at regular corporate rates;
• Unless we were entitled to relief under certain statutory provisions, we would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which we ceased to qualify as a REIT;
• Our net earnings available for investment or distribution to our shareholders would decrease due to the additional tax liability for the year or years involved; and
• We would no longer be required to make any distributions to shareholders in order to qualify as a REIT.
As such, failure to qualify as a REIT would likely have a significant adverse effect on the value of our securities.
Real estate investment trust distribution requirements limit the amount of cash we will have available for other business purposes, including amounts that we need to fund our future growth.
To maintain our qualification as a REIT under the Code, we must annually distribute to our shareholders at least 90% of our ordinary taxable income, excluding net capital gains. We intend to continue to make distributions to our shareholders to comply with the 90% distribution requirement. However, this requirement limits our ability to accumulate capital for use for other business purposes. If we do not have sufficient cash or other liquid assets to meet the distribution requirements, we may have to borrow funds or sell properties on adverse terms in order to meet the distribution requirements. If we fail to make a required distribution, we would cease to qualify as a REIT.
U.S. federal income tax developments could affect the desirability of investing in us for individual taxpayers.
In May 2003, federal legislation was enacted that reduced the maximum tax rate for dividends payable to individual taxpayers generally from 38.6% to 15% (from January 1, 2003 through 2008). However, dividends payable by REITs are not eligible for this treatment, except in limited circumstances. Although this legislation did not have a direct adverse effect on the taxation of REITs or dividends paid by REITs, the more favorable treatment for non-REIT dividends could cause individual investors to consider investments in non-REIT corporations as more attractive relative to an investment in us as a REIT.
U.S. federal income tax treatment of REITs and investments in REITs may change, which may result in the loss of our tax benefits of operating as a REIT.
The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of a REIT and an investment in a REIT may be modified by legislative, judicial or administrative action at any time. Revisions in U.S. federal income tax laws and interpretations of these laws could adversely affect us and the tax consequences of an investment in our common shares.
Our net earnings available for investment or distribution to shareholders could decrease as a result of factors outside of our control.
Our business is subject to the risks incident to the ownership and operation of commercial real estate, many of which involve circumstances not within our control. Such risks include the following:
• Changes in the general economic climate;
• Increases in interest rates;
• Local conditions such as oversupply of property or a reduction in demand;
• Competition for tenants;
• Changes in market rental rates;
• Oversupply or reduced demand for space in the areas where our properties are located;
• Delay or inability to collect rent from tenants who are bankrupt, insolvent or otherwise unwilling or unable to pay;
• Difficulty in leasing or re-leasing space quickly or on favorable terms;
6
• Costs associated with periodically renovating, repairing and reletting rental space;
• Our ability to provide adequate maintenance and insurance on our properties;
• Our ability to control variable operating costs;
• Changes in government regulations;
• Changes in interest rate levels;
• The availability of financing on favorable terms; and
• Potential liability under, and changes in, environmental, zoning, tax and other laws.
Further, a significant portion of our costs, such as real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance costs and our debt service payments, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a decrease in cash flow from our properties.
Many real estate costs are fixed, even if income from properties decreases.
Our financial results depend on leasing space in our real estate to tenants on terms favorable to us. Our income and funds available for distribution to our stockholders will decrease if a significant number of our tenants cannot pay their rent or we are unable to lease properties on favorable terms. In addition, if a tenant does not pay its rent, we may not be able to enforce our rights as landlord without delays and we may incur substantial legal costs. Costs associated with real estate investment, such as real estate taxes and maintenance costs, generally are not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the investment.
Our real estate development activities are subject to risks particular to development.
We intend to continue to pursue development activities as opportunities arise. These development activities generally require various government and other approvals. We may not receive the necessary approvals. We are subject to the risks associated with development activities. These risks include:
• Unsuccessful development opportunities could result in direct expenses to us;
• Construction costs of a project may exceed original estimates, possibly making the project less profitable than originally estimated, or possibly unprofitable;
• Time required to complete the construction of a project or to lease up the completed project may be greater than originally anticipated, thereby adversely affecting our cash flow and liquidity;
• Occupancy rates and rents of a completed project may not be sufficient to make the project profitable; and
• Favorable sources to fund our development activities may not be available.
We are exposed to risks associated with entering new markets.
We consider entering new markets from time to time. The construction and/or acquisition of properties in new markets involves risks, including the risk that the property will not perform as anticipated and the risk that any actual costs for rehabilitation, repositioning, renovation and improvements identified in the pre-construction or pre-acquisition due diligence process will exceed estimates. There is, and it is expected that there will continue to be, significant competition for investment opportunities that meet our investment criteria as well as risks associated with obtaining financing for acquisition activities, if necessary.
We may be unsuccessful in operating completed real estate projects.
We face the risk that the real estate projects we develop or acquire will not perform in accordance with our expectations. This risk exists because of factors such as the following:
• Prices paid for acquired facilities are based upon a series of market judgments; and
• Costs of any improvements required to bring an acquired facility up to standards to establish the market position intended for that facility might exceed budgeted costs.
Further, we can give no assurance that acquisition targets meeting our guidelines for quality and yield will be available when we seek them.
7
We are exposed to the risks of defaults by tenants.
Any of our tenants may experience a downturn in their businesses that may weaken their financial condition. In the event of default or the insolvency of a significant number of our tenants, we may experience a substantial loss of rental revenue and/or delays in collecting rent and incur substantial costs in enforcing our rights as landlord. If a tenant files for bankruptcy protection, a court could allow the tenant to reject and terminate its lease with us. Our income and distributable cash flow would be adversely affected if a significant number of our tenants became unable to meet their obligations to us, became insolvent or declared bankruptcy.
We may be unable to renew leases or relet space.
When our tenants decide not to renew their leases upon their expiration, we may not be able to relet the space. Even if our tenants do renew or we are able to relet the space, the terms of renewal or reletting (including the cost of renovations, if necessary) may be less favorable than current lease terms. If we are unable to promptly renew the leases or relet the space, or if the rental rates upon such renewal or reletting are significantly lower than current rates, then our income and distributable cash flow would be adversely affected, especially if we were unable to lease a significant amount of the space vacated by tenants in our properties.
Our insurance coverage on our properties may be inadequate.
We maintain comprehensive insurance on each of our facilities, including property, liability, fire, flood and extended coverage. We believe this coverage is of the type and amount customarily obtained for real property. However, there are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods or acts of war or terrorism that may be uninsurable or not economically insurable. We use our discretion when determining amounts, coverage limits and deductibles for insurance. These terms are determined based on retaining an acceptable level of risk at a reasonable cost. This may result in insurance coverage that in the event of a substantial loss would not be sufficient to pay the full current market value or current replacement cost of our lost investment. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors also may make it unfeasible to use insurance proceeds to replace a facility after it has been damaged or destroyed. Under such circumstances, the insurance proceeds we receive may not be adequate to restore our economic position in a property. If an insured loss occurred, we could lose both our investment in and anticipated profits and cash flow from a property, and we would continue to be obligated on any mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the property. Although we believe our insurance is with highly rated providers, we are also subject to the risk that such providers may be unwilling or unable to pay our claims when made.
Acquired properties may expose us to unknown liability.
From time to time, we may acquire properties subject to liabilities and without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, with respect to unknown liabilities. As a result, if a liability were asserted against us based upon ownership of those properties, we might have to pay substantial sums to settle or contest it, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flow. Unknown liabilities with respect to acquired properties might include:
• liabilities for clean-up of undisclosed environmental contamination;
• claims by tenants, vendors or other persons against the former owners of the properties;
• liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business; and
• claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the former owners of the properties.
8
We could be exposed to significant environmental liabilities as a result of conditions of which we currently are not aware.
As an owner and operator of real property, we may be liable under various federal, state and local laws for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous substances released on or in our property. Such laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of the hazardous substances. In addition, we could have greater difficulty in selling real estate on which hazardous substances were present or in obtaining borrowings using such real estate as collateral. It is our general policy to have Phase I environmental audits performed for all of our properties and land by qualified environmental consultants. These Phase I environmental audits have not revealed any environmental liability that would have a material adverse effect on our business. However, a Phase I environmental audit does not involve invasive procedures such as soil sampling or ground water analysis, and we cannot be sure that the Phase I environmental audits did not fail to reveal a significant environmental liability or that a prior owner did not create a material environmental condition on our properties or land which has not yet been discovered. We could also incur environmental liability as a result of future uses or conditions of such real estate or changes in applicable environmental laws.
Certain of our officers and directors hold units in our operating partnership and may not have the same interests as our shareholders with regard to certain tax matters.
Certain of our officers and directors own limited partnership units in our operating partnership, Duke Realty Limited Partnership. Owners of limited partnership units may suffer adverse tax consequences upon the sale of certain of our properties, the refinancing of debt related to those properties or in the event we are the subject of a tender offer or merger. As such, owners of limited partnership units, including certain of our officers and directors, may have different objectives regarding the appropriateness of the pricing and timing of these transactions. Though we are the sole general partner of the operating partnership and have the exclusive authority to sell all of our wholly-owned properties or to refinance such properties, officers and directors who hold limited partnership units may influence us not to sell or refinance certain properties even if such sale may be financially advantageous to our shareholders. Adverse tax consequences may also influence the decisions of these officers and directors in the event we are the subject of a tender offer or merger.
We do not have exclusive control over our joint venture investments.
We have interests in joint ventures and partnerships and may in the future conduct business through joint ventures and partnerships. These investments involve risks that are not present in our wholly-owned projects. For example, co-investors or partners may become bankrupt or have business interests or goals inconsistent with ours. Further, our co-investors or partners may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions and our interests, including action that may jeopardize our qualification as a REIT.
Our use of debt financing could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
We are subject to the risks normally associated with debt financing, including the risk that our cash flow will be insufficient to meet required principal and interest payments and the risk that we will be unable to refinance our existing indebtedness, or that the terms of such refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of our existing indebtedness. If our debt cannot be paid, refinanced or extended, we may not be able to make distributions to shareholders at expected levels or at all. Further, if prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of a refinancing result in higher interest rates or other restrictive financial covenants upon the refinancing, then such refinancing would adversely affect our cash flow and funds available for operation, development and distribution. We are also subject to financial covenants under our existing debt instruments. Should we fail to comply with the covenants in our existing debt instruments, then we would not only be in breach under the applicable debt instruments but we would also likely be unable to borrow any further amounts under these instruments, which could adversely affect our ability to fund operations. We also have incurred and may incur in the future indebtedness that bears interest at variable rates. Thus, as market interest rates increase, so will our debt expense, affecting our cash flow and our ability to make distributions to shareholders.
9
We are subject to various financial covenants under existing credit agreements.
The terms of our various credit agreements and other indebtedness require that we comply with a number of customary financial and other covenants, such as maintaining debt service coverage and leverage ratios and maintaining insurance coverage. These covenants may limit our flexibility in our operations, and breaches of these covenants could result in defaults under the instruments governing the applicable indebtedness even if we have satisfied our payment obligations. If we are unable to refinance our indebtedness at maturity or meet our payment obligations, the amount of our distributable cash flow would be adversely affected.
We are subject to certain provisions that could discourage change-of-control transactions, which may reduce the likelihood of our shareholders receiving a control premium for their shares.
Indiana anti-takeover legislation and certain provisions in our governing documents, as we discuss below, may discourage potential acquirers from pursuing a change-of-control transaction with us. As a result, our shareholders may be less likely to receive a control premium for their shares.
Unissued Preferred Stock. Our charter permits our board of directors to classify unissued preferred stock by setting the rights and preferences of the shares at the time of issuance. This power enables our board to adopt a shareholder rights plan, also known as a poison pill. Although we have repealed our previously existing poison pill and our current board of directors has adopted a policy not to issue preferred stock as an anti-takeover measure, our board can change this policy at any time. The adoption of a poison pill would discourage a potential bidder from acquiring a significant position in the company without the approval of our board.
Business-Combination Provisions of Indiana Law. We have not opted out of the business-combination provisions of the Indiana Business Corporation Law. As a result, potential bidders may have to negotiate with our board of directors before acquiring 10% of our stock. Without securing board approval of the proposed business combination before crossing the 10% ownership threshold, a bidder would not be permitted to complete a business combination for five years after becoming a 10% shareholder. Even after the five-year period, a business combination with the significant shareholder would require a “fair price” as defined in the Indiana Business Corporation Law or the approval of a majority of the disinterested shareholders.
Control-Share-Acquisition Provisions of Indiana Law. We have not opted out of the provisions of the Indiana Business Corporation Law regarding acquisitions of control shares. Therefore, those who acquire a significant block (at least 20%) of our shares may only vote a portion of their shares unless our other shareholders vote to accord full voting rights to the acquiring person. Moreover, if the other shareholders vote to give full voting rights with respect to the control shares and the acquiring person has acquired a majority of our outstanding shares, the other shareholders would be entitled to special dissenters’ rights.
Supermajority Voting Provisions. Our charter prohibits business combinations or significant disposition transactions with a holder of 10% of our shares unless:
• The holders of 80% of our outstanding shares of capital stock approve the transaction;
• The transaction has been approved by three-fourths of those directors who served on the board before the shareholder became a 10% owner; or
• The significant shareholder complies with the “fair price” provisions of our charter.
Among the transactions with large shareholders requiring the supermajority shareholder approval are dispositions of assets with a value of $1,000,000 and business combinations.
Operating Partnership Provisions. The limited partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership contains provisions that could discourage change-of-control transactions, including a requirement that holders of at least 90% of the outstanding partnership units held by us and other unit holders approve:
10
• Any voluntary sale, exchange, merger, consolidation or other disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the Operating Partnership in one or more transactions other than a disposition occurring upon a financing or refinancing of the Operating Partnership;
• Our merger, consolidation or other business combination with another entity unless after the transaction substantially all of the assets of the surviving entity are contributed to the Operating Partnership in exchange for units;
• Our transfer of our interests in the Operating Partnership other than to one of our wholly owned subsidiaries; and
• Any reclassification or recapitalization or change of outstanding shares of our common stock other than certain changes in par value, stock splits, stock dividends or combinations.
We are dependent on key personnel.
Our executive officers and other senior officers have a significant role in the success of our Company. Our ability to retain our management group or to attract suitable replacements should any members of the management group leave our Company is dependent on the competitive nature of the employment market. The loss of services from key members of the management group or a limitation in their availability could adversely impact our financial condition and cash flow. Further, such a loss could be negatively perceived in the capital markets.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
We have no unresolved comments with the SEC staff regarding our periodic or current reports under the Exchange Act.
Item 2. Properties
Product Review
As of December 31, 2005, we own an interest in a diversified portfolio of 690 commercial properties encompassing over 105.4 million net rentable square feet (including 26 properties comprising 6.8 million square feet under development) and approximately 4,800 acres of land for future development.
Industrial Properties: We own interests in 416 industrial properties encompassing approximately 73.6 million square feet (70% of total square feet) more specifically described as follows:
• Bulk Warehouses – Industrial warehouse/distribution buildings with clear ceiling heights of 20 feet or more. We own 330 buildings totaling more than 68.1 million square feet of such properties.
• Service Centers – Also known as flex buildings or light industrial, this product type has 12-18 foot clear ceiling heights and a combination of drive-up and dock-height loading access. We own 86 buildings totaling approximately 5.5 million square feet of such properties.
Office Properties: We own interests in 268 office buildings totaling more than 31.2 million square feet (30% of total square feet). These properties include primarily suburban office properties.
Retail Properties: We own interests in 6 retail projects totaling more than 600,000 square feet (less than 1% of total square feet). These properties include primarily community shopping centers.
Land: We own or control approximately 4,800 acres of land located primarily in existing business parks. The land is ready for immediate use and is unencumbered. Approximately 69 million square feet of additional space can be developed on these sites and substantially all of the land is zoned for either office, industrial or retail development.
Service Operations: We provide property and asset management, development, leasing and construction services to third party owners in addition to our own properties. Our current property management base for third parties includes more than 6.7 million square feet of properties serving approximately 120 tenants.
11
Property Descriptions
The following schedule represents the geographic highlights of properties in our primary markets.
12
Duke Realty Corporation
Geographic Highlights
In Service Properties as of December 31, 2005
| | Square Feet (1) | | | | Percent of | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Annual Net | | Annual Net | |
| | Industrial | | | | | | | | Percent of | | Effective | | Effective | |
| | Service Center | | Bulk | | Office | | Retail | | Overall | | Overall | | Rent (2) | | Rent | |
Primary Market | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Indianapolis | | 1,561,778 | | 17,140,955 | | 3,199,846 | | - | | 21,902,579 | | 22.20 | % | | $ | 78,078,465 | | 14.11 | % | |
Cincinnati | | 239,200 | | 8,112,724 | | 4,521,348 | | 566,316 | | 13,439,588 | | 13.63 | % | | 71,292,083 | | 12.89 | % | |
Atlanta | | 621,576 | | 6,973,935 | | 3,323,501 | | 25,881 | | 10,944,893 | | 11.10 | % | | 64,906,753 | | 11.73 | % | |
St. Louis | | 1,223,194 | | 2,659,640 | | 3,550,068 | | - | | 7,432,902 | | 7.54 | % | | 60,947,760 | | 11.02 | % | |
Chicago | | 276,344 | | 5,721,480 | | 3,394,494 | | 18,370 | | 9,410,688 | | 9.54 | % | | 59,161,987 | | 10.69 | % | |
Columbus | | - | | 3,561,480 | | 3,346,814 | | - | | 6,908,294 | | 7.00 | % | | 46,645,692 | | 8.43 | % | |
Raleigh | | 575,008 | | 1,532,814 | | 2,136,723 | | - | | 4,244,545 | | 4.30 | % | | 36,646,091 | | 6.62 | % | |
Cleveland | | - | | 2,131,591 | | 2,217,501 | | - | | 4,349,092 | | 4.41 | % | | 33,239,695 | | 6.01 | % | |
Minneapolis | | 259,185 | | 3,518,328 | | 876,405 | | - | | 4,653,918 | | 4.72 | % | | 26,919,893 | | 4.87 | % | |
Central Florida | | - | | 2,282,221 | | 1,278,238 | | - | | 3,560,459 | | 3.61 | % | | 24,568,754 | | 4.44 | % | |
Nashville | | 230,523 | | 2,342,577 | | 832,877 | | - | | 3,405,977 | | 3.45 | % | | 22,651,563 | | 4.09 | % | |
Dallas | | 470,754 | | 6,648,553 | | 152,000 | | - | | 7,271,307 | | 7.37 | % | | 17,329,367 | | 3.13 | % | |
South Florida | | - | | - | | 677,748 | | - | | 677,748 | | 0.69 | % | | 10,261,599 | | 1.85 | % | |
Other (3) | | - | | 436,139 | | - | | - | | 436,139 | | 0.44 | % | | 557,914 | | 0.10 | % | |
Total | | 5,457,562 | | 63,062,437 | | 29,507,563 | | 610,567 | | 98,638,129 | | 100.00 | % | | $ | 553,207,615 | | 100.00 | % | |
| | 5.53% | | 63.93 | % | | 29.91 | % | | 0.62 | % | | 100.00 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Occupancy % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | Industrial | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Service Center | | Bulk | | Office | | Retail | | Overall | | | | | | | |
Primary Market | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Indianapolis | | 90.35 | % | | 95.79 | % | | 89.18 | % | | - | | | 94.44 | % | | | | | | | |
Cincinnati | | 93.46 | % | | 98.59 | % | | 90.01 | % | | 95.96 | % | | 95.50 | % | | | | | | | |
Atlanta | | 98.53 | % | | 95.12 | % | | 88.99 | % | | 100.00 | % | | 93.47 | % | | | | | | | |
St. Louis | | 95.37 | % | | 94.65 | % | | 89.00 | % | | - | | | 92.07 | % | | | | | | | |
Chicago | | 100.00 | % | | 89.77 | % | | 83.63 | % | | 91.04 | % | | 87.86 | % | | | | | | | |
Columbus | | - | | | 93.35 | % | | 91.09 | % | | - | | | 92.25 | % | | | | | | | |
Raleigh | | 83.72 | % | | 99.90 | % | | 96.16 | % | | - | | | 95.83 | % | | | | | | | |
Cleveland | | - | | | 93.07 | % | | 80.01 | % | | - | | | 86.41 | % | | | | | | | |
Minneapolis | | 86.57 | % | | 88.67 | % | | 89.37 | % | | - | | | 88.69 | % | | | | | | | |
Central Florida | | - | | | 98.88 | % | | 91.93 | % | | - | | | 96.39 | % | | | | | | | |
Nashville | | 96.48 | % | | 69.50 | % | | 93.51 | % | | - | | | 77.20 | % | | | | | | | |
Dallas | | 93.43 | % | | 95.31 | % | | 100.00 | % | �� | - | | | 95.28 | % | | | | | | | |
South Florida | | - | | | - | | | 97.01 | % | | - | | | 97.01 | % | | | | | | | |
Other (3) | | - | | | 100.00 | % | | - | | | - | | | 100.00 | % | | | | | | | |
Total | | 92.68 | % | | 94.07 | % | | 89.14 | % | | 95.98 | % | | 92.53 | % | | | | | | | |
(1) Includes all wholly owned and joint venture projects shown at 100% as of report date .
(2) Represents the average annual rental property revenue due from tenants in occupancy as of the date of this report, excluding additional rent due as operating expense reimbursements, landlord allowances for operating expenses and percentage rents. Joint Venture properties are shown at the Company’s ownership percentage.
(3) Represents properties not located in the Company’s primary markets. These properties are located in similar midwest or southeast markets.
Note: Excludes buildings that are in the held for sale portfolio.
13
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
We are not subject to any material pending legal proceedings, other than ordinary routine litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. Our management expects that these ordinary routine legal proceedings will be covered by insurance and does not expect these legal proceedings to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the quarter ended December 31, 2005.
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
Robert M. Chapman, age 52. Mr. Chapman has served as Senior Executive Vice President, Real Estate Operations, since November 2003. From 1999 through November 2003, Mr. Chapman served in various real estate investment and operating positions within the Company.
Matthew A. Cohoat, age 46. Mr. Cohoat was named Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer on January 1, 2004. From 1990 through 2003, Mr. Cohoat held various positions in financial areas of the Company.
James B. Connor, age 47. Mr. Connor has served as Regional Executive Vice President for our Chicago Region since December 2003. Previously, Mr. Connor served as Senior Vice President responsible for our Chicago Operations since joining us in 1998.
Howard L. Feinsand, age 58. Mr. Feinsand has served as our Executive Vice President and General Counsel since 1999. Mr. Feinsand served on our Board of Directors from 1988 to January 2003.
Donald J. Hunter, age 46. Mr. Hunter was named Executive Vice President, Indianapolis Region, in 2005. From 1988 to 2005, Mr. Hunter served in various capacities, most recently as Senior Vice President, Columbus Operations.
Steven R. Kennedy, age 49. Mr. Kennedy was named Executive Vice President, Construction on January 1, 2004. From 1986 until 2004, he served in various capacities in the construction group, most recently as Senior Vice President.
Dennis D. Oklak, age 52. Mr. Oklak was named Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company in April 2005. He served as President and Chief Executive Officer from April 2004 to April 2005. He was Co-Chief Operating Officer from April 2002 through January 2003, at which time he was named President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Oklak assumed the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer in 1997. From 1986 through 1997, Mr. Oklak served in various financial positions in the Company.
Christopher L. Seger, age 38. Mr. Seger was appointed Executive Vice President, National Development/Construction in December 2003. From 2001 to 2003, Mr. Seger was Senior Vice President of our Florida Group. From 1999 to 2001, Mr. Seger was Senior Vice President of our Indiana Office Group.
PART II
Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Our common shares are listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “DRE.” The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices of the common stock for the periods indicated and the dividend paid per share during each such period. Comparable cash dividends are expected in the future. As of March 1, 2006, there were 11,548 record holders of common shares.
14
| | | | 2005 | | | | | | 2004 | | | |
Quarter Ended | | High | | Low | | Dividend | | High | | Low | | Dividend | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
December 31 | | 35.09 | | 31.22 | | $.470 | | $36.00 | | $32.78 | | $.465 | |
September 30 | | 34.30 | | 30.77 | | $.470 | | 34.70 | | 30.46 | | $.465 | |
June 30 | | 32.25 | | 29.28 | | $.465 | | 35.16 | | 27.49 | | $.460 | |
March 31 | | 34.37 | | 29.45 | | $.465 | | 34.73 | | 30.44 | | $.460 | |
On January 25, 2006, we declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.47 per share, payable on February 28, 2006, to common shareholders of record on February 14, 2006.
A summary of the tax characterization of the dividends paid per common share for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 follows:
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Common shareholders dividend | | $1.87 | | $1.85 | | $1.83 | |
Common shareholders dividend - special | | 1.05 | | - | | - | |
Total dividends paid per share | | $ | 2.92 | | $ | 1.85 | | $ | 1.83 | |
| | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | 44.2 | % | | 69.3 | % | | 69.7 | % | |
Return of capital | | 0 | % | | 17.5 | % | | 19.1 | % | |
Capital gains | | 55.8 | % | | 13.2 | % | | 11.2 | % | |
| | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
From time to time, we repurchase our common shares under a $750 million share repurchase program that initially was approved by the board of directors and publicly announced in October 2001 (the “Repurchase Program”). In July 2005, the Board of Directors authorized management to purchase up to $750 million of common shares pursuant to this plan. Under the Repurchase Program, we also execute share repurchases on an ongoing basis associated with certain employee elections under our compensation and benefit programs.
The following table shows the share repurchase activity for each of the three months in the quarter ended December 31, 2005:
| | | | | | | | Maximum Number | |
| | | | | | | | (or Approximate | |
| | | | | | Total Number of | | Dollar Value) of | |
| | | | | | Shares Purchased as | | Shares that May | |
| | Total Number of | | | | Part of Publicly | | Yet be Purchased | |
| | Shares | | Average Price | | Announced Plans or | | Under the Plans or | |
Month | | Purchased (1) | | Paid per Share | | Programs | | Programs (2) | |
| | | | | | | | | |
October 1 through 31, 2005 | | | 3,193,654 | | | $32.90 | | | 3,193,654 | | | | |
November 1 through 30, 2005 | | | 2,060,956 | | | $33.73 | | | 2,060,956 | | | | |
December 1 through 31, 2005 | | | 881,094 | | | $33.83 | | | 881,094 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | 6,135,704 | | | $33.31 | | | 6,135,704 | | | | |
(1) Includes 23,739 common shares repurchased under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 46,946 shares swapped to pay the exercise price of stock options, 2,543 common shares repurchased through a Rabbi Trust under our Executives’ Deferred Compensation Plan and 6,062,475 common shares repurchased under our Share Repurchase Plan.
(2) The number of common shares that may yet be repurchased in the open market to fund shares purchased under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan was 223,388 as of December 31, 2005, and approximately $452.9 million under our Share Repurchase Plan.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following sets forth selected financial and operating information on a historical basis for each of the years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2005. The following information should be read in conjunction with Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in this Form 10-K (in thousands, except per share amounts):
15
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | | 2002 | | 2001 | |
Results of Operations: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Revenues: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Rental Operations from Continuing Operations | | $ | 706,183 | | $ | 641,155 | | $ | 584,403 | | $ | 550,232 | | $ | 554,305 | |
Service Operations from Continuing Operations | | | 81,941 | | | 70,803 | | | 59,456 | | | 68,580 | | | 80,459 | |
Total Revenues from Continuing Operations | | $ | 788,124 | | $ | 711,958 | | $ | 643,859 | | $ | 618,812 | | $ | 634,764 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Income from Continuing Operations | | $ | 139,753 | | $ | 144,832 | | $ | 151,974 | | $ | 166,030 | | $ | 232,009 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Net Income Available for common shareholders | | $ | 309,183 | | $ | 151,279 | | $ | 161,911 | | $ | 153,969 | | $ | 227,743 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Per Share Data : | | | | | | | | | | | |
Basic income per common share: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Continuing operations | | $ | .66 | | $ | .76 | | $ | .84 | | $ | .84 | | $ | 1.37 | |
Discontinued operations | | 1.53 | | .31 | | .35 | | .31 | | .39 | |
Diluted income per common share: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Continuing operations | | .65 | | .75 | | .84 | | .84 | | 1.36 | |
Discontinued operations | | 1.52 | | .31 | | .35 | | .30 | | .38 | |
Dividends paid per common share | | 1.87 | | 1.85 | | 1.83 | | 1.81 | | 1.76 | |
Dividends paid per common share – special | | 1.05 | | - | | - | | - | | - | |
Weighted average common shares outstanding | | 141,508 | | 141,379 | | 135,595 | | 133,981 | | 129,660 | |
Weighted average common and dilutive potential common shares | | 155,877 | | 157,062 | | 151,141 | | 150,839 | | 151,710 | |
Balance Sheet Data (at December 31): | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Assets | | $ | 5,647,560 | | $ | 5,896,643 | | $ | 5,561,249 | | $ | 5,348,823 | | $ | 5,330,033 | |
Total Debt | | 2,600,651 | | 2,518,704 | | 2,335,536 | | 2,106,285 | | 1,814,856 | |
Total Preferred Equity | | 657,250 | | 657,250 | | 540,508 | | 440,889 | | 608,664 | |
Total Shareholders’ Equity | | 2,452,798 | | 2,825,869 | | 2,666,749 | | 2,617,336 | | 2,785,323 | |
Total Common Shares Outstanding | | 134,697 | | 142,894 | | 136,594 | | 135,007 | | 131,416 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Other Data: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Funds From Operations (1) | | $ | 341,189 | | $ | 352,469 | | $ | 335,989 | | $ | 321,886 | | $ | 340,315 | |
(1) Funds From Operations (“FFO”) is used by industry analysts and investors as a supplemental operating performance measure of an equity real estate investment trust (“REIT”). FFO is calculated in accordance with the definition that was adopted by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). FFO, as defined by NAREIT, represents net income (loss) determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), excluding extraordinary items as defined under GAAP and gains or losses from sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets, plus certain non-cash items such as real estate asset depreciation and amortization, and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets in accordance with GAAP implicitly assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. Since real estate values instead have historically risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors and analysts have considered the presentation of operating results for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to be insufficient by themselves. Thus, NAREIT created FFO as a supplemental measure of REIT operating performance that excludes historical cost depreciation, among other items, from GAAP net income. Management believes that the use of FFO, combined with the required primary GAAP presentations, has improved the understanding of operating results of REITs among the investing public and has made comparisons of REIT operating results more meaningful. Management considers FFO to be a useful measure for reviewing comparative operating and financial performance (although FFO should be reviewed in conjunction with net income which remains the primary measure of performance) because, by excluding gains or losses related to sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets and excluding real estate asset depreciation and amortization, FFO assists in comparing the operating performance of a company’s real estate between periods or as compared to different companies.
See reconciliation of FFO to GAAP net income under Year in Review section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
16
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Business Overview
We are a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust that began operations through a related entity in 1972. As of December 31, 2005, we:
• Owned or jointly controlled 690 industrial, office and retail properties (including properties under development), consisting of over 105.4 million square feet primarily located in 13 operating platforms; and
• Owned or jointly controlled approximately 4,800 acres of land with an estimated future development potential of approximately 69 million square feet of industrial, office and retail properties.
We provide the following services for our properties and for certain properties owned by third parties and joint ventures:
• Property leasing;
• Property management;
• Construction;
• Development; and
• Other tenant-related services.
Management Philosophy and Priorities
Our key business and financial strategies for the future include the following:
• Our business objective is to increase Funds From Operations (“FFO”) by (i) maintaining and increasing property occupancy and rental rates through the management of our portfolio of existing properties; (ii) developing and acquiring new properties for rental operations in our existing markets; (iii) expanding geographically by acquiring and developing properties in new markets; (iv) using our construction expertise to act as a general contractor in our existing markets and other domestic markets on a fee basis; (v) developing properties in our existing markets and other markets which we will sell through our merchant building development program and (vi) providing a full line of real estate services to our tenants and to third parties.
See the Year in Review section below for further explanation and definition of FFO.
• Our financing strategy is to actively manage the components of our capital structure including common and preferred equity and debt to maintain a conservatively leveraged balance sheet and investment grade ratings from our credit rating agencies. This strategy provides us with the financial flexibility to fund both development and acquisition opportunities. We seek to maintain a well-balanced, conservative and flexible capital structure by: (i) extending and sequencing the maturity dates of debt; (ii) borrowing primarily at fixed rates by targeting a variable rate component of total debt less than 20%; (iii) pursuing current and future long-term debt financings and refinancing on an unsecured basis; (iv) maintaining conservative debt service and fixed charge coverage ratios; and (v) issuing attractively priced perpetual preferred stock for 5-10% of our total capital structure.
Year in Review
During 2005, we emerged from economic and market challenges that had affected the entire real estate industry to complete a successful year that included improving our portfolio of held for investment buildings through our capital recycling program, increasing our development pipeline to over double that of 2004, and initiating geographic expansion that we anticipate will provide future earnings growth. As a result of these accomplishments, we achieved steady operating results while maintaining a strong balance sheet.
Net income available for common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2005, was $309.2 million, or $2.17 per share (diluted), compared to net income of $151.3 million, or $1.06 per share (diluted) for the year
17
ended 2004. The increase is primarily attributable to the sale of a portfolio of 212 real estate properties, consisting of 14.1 million square feet of primarily light distribution and service center properties (the “Industrial Portfolio Sale”). The net book gain on this sale was approximately $201.5 million. See additional discussion of the transaction below. Through increased leasing activity, we achieved a growth in rental revenues in 2005 over 2004 as our in-service portfolio year-end occupancy increased from 90.9% at the end of 2004 to 92.5% at the end of 2005. We also experienced an increase in our development and construction of new properties for both owned investments and third party construction projects in 2005 as compared to 2004.
As an important performance metric for us as a real estate company, FFO available to common shareholders totaled $341.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to $352.5 million for the same period in 2004. We anticipated a short-term decrease in FFO as a result of the Industrial Portfolio Sale noted above. FFO is used by industry analysts and investors as a supplemental operating performance measure of an equity real estate investment trust (“REIT”). FFO is calculated in accordance with the definition that was adopted by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). FFO, as defined by NAREIT, represents net income (loss) determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), excluding extraordinary items as defined under GAAP and gains or losses from sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets, plus certain non-cash items such as real estate asset depreciation and amortization, and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets in accordance with GAAP implicitly assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. Since real estate values instead have historically risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors and analysts have considered presentation of operating results for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to be insufficient by themselves. Thus, NAREIT created FFO as a supplemental measure of REIT operating performance that excludes historical cost depreciation, among other items, from GAAP net income. Management believes that the use of FFO, combined with the required primary GAAP presentations, improves the understanding of operating results of REITs among the investing public and makes comparisons of REIT operating results more meaningful. Management considers FFO to be a useful measure for reviewing comparative operating and financial performance (although FFO should be reviewed in conjunction with net income which remains the primary measure of performance) because by excluding gains or losses related to sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets and excluding real estate asset depreciation and amortization, FFO assists in comparing the operating performance of a company’s real estate between periods or as compared to different companies.
The following table summarizes the calculation of FFO for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | |
Net income available for common shareholders | | $ | 309,183 | | $ | 151,279 | | $ | 161,911 | |
Adjustments: | | | | | | | |
Depreciation and amortization | | 254,170 | | 228,582 | | 196,234 | |
Company share of joint venture depreciation and amortization | | 19,510 | | 18,901 | | 18,839 | |
Earnings from depreciable property sales – wholly owned | | (227,513) | | (26,510) | | (22,141) | |
Earnings from depreciable | | | | | | | |
property sales – share of joint venture | | (11,096) | | - | | - | |
Minority interest share of adjustments | | | (3,065) | | | | (19,783) | | | | (18,854) | |
Funds From Operations | | | $341,189 | | | $352,469 | | | $335,989 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Throughout 2005, we continued to maintain a conservative balance sheet and investment grade debt ratings from Moody’s (Baa1), Standard & Poors (BBB+) and Fitch (BBB+). Our debt to total market capitalization ratio (total market capitalization is defined as the total market value of all outstanding common and preferred shares and units of limited partner interest in our operating partnership plus outstanding indebtedness) of 31.8% at December 31, 2005 compared to 29.5% at December 31, 2004 continues to provide us financial flexibility to fund new investments.
18
Highlights of our debt financing activity in 2005 are as follows:
• In January 2005, we retired a $65.0 million variable-rate term loan.
• In March 2005, we retired $100.0 million of 6.875% senior unsecured debt that matured.
• In May 2005, we obtained a $400.0 million variable rate term loan. The proceeds from this term loan were used to finance a property portfolio acquisition. The loan was paid off in September 2005 with proceeds from the Industrial Portfolio Sale.
• In September 2005, we retired $100.0 million of 7.375% corporate unsecured debt that matured.
On the equity side of our balance sheet, we repurchased approximately 9 million common shares totaling nearly $300 million during the third and fourth quarters of 2005. With the added liquidity from the Industrial Portfolio Sale, we pursued a prudent repurchase program to supplement our other value creation activities.
In addition to steady operating performance and prudent balance sheet management during 2005, we continued to effectively execute our capital recycling program and began several key initiatives and projects to leverage our development and construction capabilities as follows:
• We disposed of over $1.1 billion of older, non-strategic, held for investment properties and used the proceeds to help fund over $300 million of acquisitions and pay down our operating line of credit. Most significantly, we completed the Industrial Portfolio Sale in September 2005 receiving net proceeds of $955 million. This portfolio consisted of over 14 million square feet comprised of 212 properties across eight Duke markets as well as 50 acres of undeveloped land. Portions of the proceeds were used to pay down $423 million of outstanding debt on our $500 million unsecured line of credit and $400 million term loan. This transaction was a continuation of our long-term strategy of recycling assets into higher yielding new developments. Within the industrial side of our business, it also positions our ownership focus toward newly developed bulk warehouse properties.
• We completed over $300 million of acquisitions in 2005, including a $257 million suburban office portfolio in our Chicago market. The portfolio consisted of five office buildings totaling 1.4 million square feet.
• We increased our investment in undeveloped land to provide greater opportunities to use our development and construction expertise in the improving economic cycle. Throughout 2005, we completed land acquisitions totaling over $135 million. The new land positions include industrial, office and retail positions in Florida where we intend to develop a retail lifestyle center with a joint venture partner and continue office and industrial development in Broward County.
• Our National Development and Construction Group, which was formed in 2004 to pursue development and construction opportunities with companies that have a national presence including those outside our core markets, completed a successful year that included the awarding of a 431,000 square foot office building development in Buffalo, New York. The project is pre-leased to a single tenant with construction expected to be completed in mid-2007.
• The National Development and Construction Group also experienced significant growth of its healthcare business. In 2004, we created a strategic agreement with Bremner Healthcare, a developer of medical office and healthcare related facilities, to jointly develop and sell medical facilities throughout the United States. Bremner develops, leases and manages the facilities while we provide construction financing and general contractor services. We share 50/50 in the profits upon sale of the projects. In 2005, we completed our first project in this venture, a medical office building in Indianapolis, Indiana that was sold in September 2005. As of December 31, 2005, we have six additional healthcare development projects underway, totaling nearly 470,000 square feet.
• We announced our intentions to enter the Phoenix, Arizona and Houston, Texas markets. We believe these markets provide significant growth opportunities in the future and have similar demographics and components that our existing markets provide.
19
• Finally, we will continue to develop long-term investment assets to be held in our portfolio, develop assets to be sold upon completion and perform third party construction projects. With nearly $800 million in our development pipeline at December 31, 2005, we are encouraged about the long-term growth opportunities in our business.
Significant 2006 Activity
We have continued to build on our momentum from 2005 by announcing the following significant transactions in early 2006:
• In January 2006, we announced the acquisition of approximately 5.1 million square feet of bulk industrial properties located at the Port of Savannah for a total purchase price of approximately $194.1 million. The portfolio consists of 18 buildings and is located near one of the fastest growing ports in the country. The properties are 100% leased with a weighted average lease term of 7.5 years. This transaction makes us the largest industrial property owner in the Savannah area and complements our industrial holdings across the Southeast. In addition, we have the option to acquire future completed development projects on 400 acres of land in the same market.
• In January 2006, we issued $184 million of 6.95% Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, which replaced our $75 million 8.45% Series I Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock that we redeemed in February 2006.
• In January 2006, we renewed our unsecured revolving credit facility. The new facility provides borrowing capacity up to $1 billion and, subject to certain conditions, may be increased to $1.3 billion. Under the new facility, which replaces the previous unsecured line of credit agreement, we reduced the interest rate by 7.5 basis points to LIBOR plus 52.5 basis points, increased the borrowing capacity by $500 million and extended the maturity date to January 25, 2010.
• In February 2006, we issued $125.0 million of 5.5% senior notes due 2016.
• In February 2006, we acquired 27 suburban office and light industrial buildings, encompassing more than 2.3 million square feet from The Mark Winkler Company for $619.0 million. The 27 buildings are part of a 32 building portfolio located in three primary submarkets in Northern Virginia. We will close on the remaining five buildings in the portfolio throughout the first and second quarters of 2006. In addition to the 27 buildings we also closed on approximately 166 acres of undeveloped land located in major business parks that can support the future development of approximately 3.7 million square feet of office and industrial buildings. In connection with the acquisition, we obtained a $700 million secured term loan priced at LIBOR plus 52.5 basis points with a scheduled maturity date of September 2006. Subject to Lender’s approval, the maturity date may be extended to March 2007.
Key Performance Indicators
Our operating results depend primarily upon rental income from our office, industrial and retail properties (“Rental Operations”). The following highlights the areas of Rental Operations that we consider critical for future revenue growth. All square footage totals and occupancy percentages reflect both wholly-owned properties and properties in joint ventures.
Occupancy Analysis: As discussed above, our ability to maintain occupancy rates is a principal driver of our results of operations. The following table sets forth occupancy information regarding our in-service portfolio of rental properties as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 (in thousands, except percentage data):
| | Total | | Percent of | | | | | |
| | Square Feet | | Total Square Feet | | Percent Occupied | |
Type | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Industrial | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Service Centers | | 5,457 | | 12,924 | | 5.6 | % | 11.8 | % | 92.7 | % | 85.2 | % |
Bulk | | 63,062 | | 67,940 | | 63.9 | % | 62.0 | % | 94.1 | % | 93.4 | % |
Office | | 29,508 | | 28,175 | | 29.9 | % | 25.7 | % | 89.1 | % | 87.1 | % |
Retail | | | 611 | | | 596 | | | 0.6 | % | | 0.5 | % | | 96.0 | % | | 100.0 | % |
Total | | | 98,638 | | | 109,635 | | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 92.5 | % | | 90.9 | % |
20
The overall improvement in occupancy was driven by a number of factors, but the most significant factor was the volume of leasing activity for the year. We experienced significant activity in the fourth quarter of 2005 when we signed nearly 9.7 million square feet of new leases and renewals, which was the highest quarterly leasing activity in our history. Our industrial and office product types both showed improvement in occupancy and activity in our markets was strong in 2005.
Lease Expiration and Renewals: Our ability to maintain and grow occupancy rates primarily depends upon our continuing ability to re-lease expiring space. The following table reflects our in-service lease expiration schedule by property type as of December 31, 2005. The table indicates square footage and annualized net effective rents (based on December 2005 rental revenue) under expiring leases (in thousands, except percentage data):
| | Total Portfolio | | Industrial | | Office | | Retail | |
| | Square | | Ann. Rent | | % of | | Square | | Ann. Rent | | Square | | Ann. Rent | | Square | | Ann. Rent | |
Year of Expiration | | Feet | | Revenue | | Revenue | | Feet | | Revenue | | Feet | | Revenue | | Feet | | Revenue | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
2006 | | 7,938 | | $ | 52,743 | | 8 | % | | 5,764 | | $ | 24,571 | | 2,173 | | $ | 28,154 | | 1 | | $ | 18 | |
2007 | | 10,938 | | 67,978 | | 11 | % | | 8,287 | | 33,087 | | 2,642 | | 34,768 | | 9 | | 123 | |
2008 | | 13,263 | | 84,550 | | 14 | % | | 9,675 | | 39,927 | | 3,569 | | 44,288 | | 19 | | 335 | |
2009 | | 11,190 | | 73,741 | | 12 | % | | 7,685 | | 30,128 | | 3,501 | | 43,535 | | 4 | | 78 | |
2010 | | 11,444 | | 90,491 | | 15 | % | | 7,449 | | 34,400 | | 3,988 | | 55,986 | | 7 | | 105 | |
2011 | | 8,470 | | 58,304 | | 9 | % | | 5,960 | | 24,349 | | 2,486 | | 33,532 | | 24 | | 423 | |
2012 | | 6,316 | | 37,519 | | 6 | % | | 4,639 | | 16,145 | | 1,670 | | 21,041 | | 7 | | 333 | |
2013 | | 4,867 | | 47,676 | | 8 | % | | 2,332 | | 10,371 | | 2,501 | | 36,726 | | 34 | | 579 | |
2014 | | 4,102 | | 21,397 | | 3 | % | | 3,324 | | 11,118 | | 778 | | 10,279 | | - | | - | |
2015 | | 5,492 | | 35,866 | | 6 | % | | 4,228 | | 17,313 | | 1,264 | | 18,553 | | - | | - | |
2016 and Thereafter | | | 7,249 | | | 48,361 | | | 8 | % | | | 5,035 | | | 19,433 | | | 1,734 | | | 25,707 | | | 480 | | | 3,221 | |
| | | 91,269 | | $ | 618,626 | | | 100 | % | | | 64,378 | | $ | 260,842 | | | 26,306 | | $ | 352,569 | | | 585 | | $ | 5,215 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Portfolio Square Feet | | | 98,638 | | | | | | | 68,519 | | | | | 29,508 | | | | | 611 | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Percent Occupied | | | 92.5 | % | | | | | | | 94.0 | % | | | | | 89.1 | % | | | | | 96.0 | % | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
We renewed 74.3% and 73.9% of our leases up for renewal totaling approximately 10.0 million and 9.9 million square feet in 2005 and 2004, respectively. Our lease renewal percentages over the past three years have remained relatively consistent at a 70-75% success rate. We do not expect this renewal percentage in 2006 to differ from that experienced in 2005.
The average term of renewals increased to 4.3 years in 2005 from 3.8 years in 2004. The increase in the average term is due to competitive market conditions with tenants seeking longer leases at attractive rates.
Future Development: Another source of growth in earnings is the development of additional properties. These properties should provide future earnings through Service Operations income upon sale or from Rental Operations growth as they are placed in service. We had 9.0 million square feet of property under development with total estimated costs of $658.7 million at December 31, 2005, compared to 4.2 million square feet and total costs of $194.9 million at December 31, 2004. We have increased our development pipeline significantly through 2005 as we focus on the development side of our business in 2006. We have assessed our markets and determined that between growing demand and the pricing of acquisitions, we can utilize our development expertise and achieve better returns on our own developments. The significant leasing activity experienced in the fourth quarter of 2005 as noted above has provided momentum heading into 2006.
The following table summarizes our properties under development as of December 31, 2005 (in thousands, except percentage data):
21
Anticipated | | | | | | | | Anticipated | |
In-Service | | Square | | Percent | | Project | | Stabilized | |
Date | | Feet | | Leased | | Costs | | Return | |
Held for Rental: | | | | | | | | | |
1st Quarter 2006 | | 844 | | | 16% | | $43,379 | | | 9.7 | % | |
2nd Quarter 2006 | | 3,852 | | | 32% | | 168,286 | | | 9.6 | % | |
3rd Quarter 2006 | | 727 | | | 26% | | 48,682 | | | 9.8 | % | |
Thereafter | | | 1,385 | | | 62% | | | 111,588 | | | 9.4 | % | |
| | | 6,808 | | | 35% | | | 371,935 | | | 9.6 | % | |
Merchant Buildings: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1st Quarter 2006 | | 818 | | | 23% | | 37,651 | | | 9.3 | % | |
2nd Quarter 2006 | | 401 | | | 76% | | 57,351 | | | 9.0 | % | |
3rd Quarter 2006 | | 146 | | | 72% | | 20,689 | | | 10.2 | % | |
Thereafter | | | 831 | | | 95% | | | 171,040 | | | 8.6 | % | |
| | | 2,196 | | | 63% | | | 286,731 | | | 9.0 | % | |
Total | | | 9,004 | | | 42% | | $ | 658,666 | | | 9.3 | % | |
Acquisition and Disposition Activity: In 2005, we continued our capital recycling program by disposing over $1.1 billion of older, non-strategic properties. Most significantly, we completed the Industrial Portfolio Sale for nearly $980 million. The Industrial Portfolio Sale consisted of over 14 million square feet of primarily light distribution and service center properties comprised of 212 properties across eight of our markets. The Industrial Portfolio Sale was a continuation of our strategy of recycling assets into higher yielding new developments. Within the industrial side of our business, it also positions our ownership focus toward newly developed bulk warehouse properties. See further discussion of the Industrial Portfolio Sale in the Year in Review section. As we focus on development in 2006, we will continue to dispose of older assets, but do not anticipate the activity to be comparable to the dispositions activity of 2005.
On the acquisitions side, we completed over $300 million of acquisitions in 2005, including a $257 million suburban office portfolio in our Chicago market. The portfolio consists of five office buildings totaling 1.4 million square feet.
Results of Operations
A summary of our operating results and property statistics for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, follows (in thousands, except number of properties and per share data):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | |
Rental Operations revenues from Continuing Operations | | $706,183 | | $641,155 | | $584,403 | |
Service Operations revenues from Continuing Operations | | 81,941 | | 70,803 | | 59,456 | |
Earnings from Continuing Rental Operations | | 118,547 | | 144,713 | | 148,478 | |
Earnings from Continuing Service Operations | | 41,019 | | 24,421 | | 21,821 | |
Operating income | | 131,731 | | 142,856 | | 148,319 | |
Net income available for common shareholders | | 309,183 | | 151,279 | | 161,911 | |
Weighted average common shares outstanding | | 141,508 | | 141,379 | | 135,595 | |
Weighted average common and dilutive potential common shares | | 155,877 | | 157,062 | | 151,141 | |
Basic income per common share: | | | | | | | |
Continuing operations | | $ | .66 | | $ | .76 | | $ | .84 | |
Discontinued operations | | $ | 1.53 | | $ | .31 | | $ | .35 | |
Diluted income per common share: | | | | | | | | | | |
Continuing operation | | $ | .65 | | $ | .75 | | $ | .84 | |
Discontinued operations | | $ | 1.52 | | $ | .31 | | $ | .35 | |
Number of in-service properties at end of year | | 664 | | 874 | | 883 | |
In-service square footage at end of year | | 98,638 | | 109,635 | | 106,169 | |
Under development square footage at end of year | | 6,808 | | 3,244 | | 2,103 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Comparison of Year Ended December 31, 2005 to Year Ended December 31, 2004
Rental Income from Continuing Operations
Overall, rental income from continuing operations increased from $619.6 million in 2004 to $676.6 million in 2005. The following table reconciles rental income from continuing operations by reportable segment to total
22
reported rental income from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Office | | $491,895 | | $448,682 | |
Industrial | | 174,963 | | 160,709 | |
Non-segment | | | 9,776 | | | 10,178 | | |
Total | | $ | 676,634 | | $ | 619,569 | | |
Both of our reportable segments that comprise Rental Operations (office and industrial) are within the real estate industry; however, the same economic and industry conditions do not affect each segment in the same manner. The primary causes of the increase in rental income from continuing operations, with specific references to a particular segment when applicable, are summarized below:
• In 2005, we have acquired nine new properties and placed 17 development projects in-service. These acquisitions and developments are the primary factor in the $57.1 million overall increase in rental revenue for the year ended 2005, compared to 2004.
The nine property acquisitions provided revenues of $21.0 million. These acquisitions totaled $307.5 million on 2.2 million square feet and were 86.5% leased at December 31, 2005. Revenues from acquisitions that occurred in 2004 grew to $31.8 million in 2005 compared to $13.4 million in 2004.
Developments placed in service in 2005 provided revenues of $5.8 million. Revenues from developments placed in service in 2004 increased $9.9 million to $17.4 million in 2005.
• Our in-service occupancy increased from 90.9% at December 31, 2004, to 92.5% at December 31, 2005.
• Rental income includes lease termination fees. Lease termination fees relate to specific tenants who pay a fee to terminate their lease obligations before the end of the contractual lease term. Lease termination fees in 2005 continued to steadily decrease as a result of improving market conditions. Lease termination fees decreased from $14.7 million in 2004 to $7.3 million in 2005.
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Companies
Equity in earnings represents our ownership share of net income from investments in unconsolidated companies. These joint ventures generally own and operate rental properties and hold land for development. These earnings increased from $21.6 million in 2004 to $29.5 million in 2005. During the second quarter of 2005, one of our ventures sold three buildings with our share of the net gain recorded through equity in earnings totaling $11.1 million.
Rental Expenses and Real Estate Taxes
The following table reconciles rental expenses and real estate taxes by reportable segment to our total reported amounts in the statement of operations for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | |
Rental Expenses: | | | | | |
Office | | $133,383 | | $113,688 | |
Industrial | | 23,073 | | 20,147 | |
Non-segment | | | 1,557 | | | 1,214 | |
Total | | $ | 158,013 | | $ | 135,049 | |
| | | | | |
Real Estate Taxes: | | | | | |
Office | | $ 56,820 | | $ 47,620 | |
Industrial | | 20,827 | | 17,726 | |
Non-segment | | | 5,104 | | | 4,681 | |
Total | | $ | 82,751 | | $ | 70,027 | |
| | | | | | | | |
23
Rental and real estate tax expenses for 2005, as compared to 2004, have increased as a result of our 2004 and 2005 acquisitions as well as our increase in occupancy. This increase in rental and real estate taxes continues to be in line with our expectations.
Interest Expense
Interest expense increased from $109.9 million in 2004 to $120.4 million in 2005, as a result of increased debt levels and higher interest rates. Since August 2004, we had the following debt issuances and redemptions:
• In August 2004, we issued $250 million of 5.40% unsecured notes due in 2014.
• In December 2004, we issued $250 million of unsecured floating rate debt at 26 basis points over LIBOR.
• In March 2005, we paid off $100 million of senior unsecured notes.
• In May 2005, we obtained a $400 million term loan at 30 basis points over LIBOR. This loan was used to temporarily finance the acquisition of five office properties located in our Chicago market.
• In September 2005, we repaid the $400 million term loan, as well as $100 million of corporate unsecured debt, with proceeds from the Industrial Portfolio Sale.
• We assumed approximately $40.7 million of secured debt in conjunction with property acquisitions in August 2004 and June 2005.
Interest expense on our unsecured line of credit totaled $6.2 million in 2005 compared to $6.1 million in 2004. We had $383 million outstanding on the facility at December 31, 2005.
Depreciation and Amortization Expense
Depreciation and amortization expense increased from $181.4 million in 2004 to $226.5 million in 2005 as a result of increased capital spending associated with increased leasing, the additional basis resulting from acquisition and development activity and the application of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) No. 141, Business Combinations (“SFAS 141”) as described below. The points below highlight the significant increase in depreciation and amortization.
• Depreciation expense on tenant improvements increased by approximately $16.4 million.
• Depreciation expense on buildings increased by $16.6 million.
• Lease commission amortization expense increased by $1.6 million.
The amortization expense associated with acquired lease intangible assets increased by approximately $10.5 million. The acquisitions were accounted for in accordance with SFAS 141, which requires the allocation of a portion of a property’s purchase price to intangible assets for leases acquired and in-place at the closing date of the acquisition. These intangible assets are amortized over the remaining life of the leases (generally 3-5 years) as compared to the building basis portion of the acquisition, which is depreciated over 40 years.
Service Operations
Service Operations primarily consist of our merchant building sales and the leasing, management, construction and development services for joint venture properties and properties owned by third parties. These operations are heavily influenced by the current state of the economy as leasing and management fees are dependent upon occupancy while construction and development services rely on the expansion of business operations. Service Operations earnings increased from $24.4 million in 2004 to $41.0 million in 2005. The increase reflects higher construction volumes partially offset by increased staffing costs for our expanded National Development and Construction group in 2005. Other factors impacting service operations are discussed below.
• Our merchant building development and sales program, whereby a building is developed by us and then sold, is a significant component of construction and development income. During 2005, we generated after tax gains of $19.0 million from the sale of 10 properties compared to $16.5 million from the sale of six properties in 2004. Profit margins on these types of building sales fluctuate by sale depending on the type
24
of property being sold, the strength of the underlying tenant and nature of the sale, such as a pre-contracted purchase price for a primary tenant versus a sale on the open market.
• In 2005, we experienced an increase in our third party construction business as evidenced by the increase in general contractor revenues in 2005 over 2004. We achieved a slight increase in our profit margins during 2005, which reflects improved pricing in certain markets and our ability to select more profitable projects as resources are re-positioned to our increasing held-for-investment development pipeline.
• In the first quarter of 2005, we recognized $2.7 million of a deferred gain associated with the sale of our landscaping operations in 2001. The gain was deferred as a result of future performance provisions contained in the original sales agreement. As a result of contract renegotiations effective in the first quarter of 2005, all future performance provisions were removed and the deferred gain was recognized.
General and Administrative Expense
General and administrative expense increased from $26.3 million in 2004 to $27.8 million in 2005. General and administrative expenses are comprised of two components. The first is direct expenses that are not attributable to specific assets such as legal fees, external audit fees, marketing costs, investor relations expenses and other corporate overhead. The second component is the unallocated overhead costs associated with the operation of our owned properties and Service Operations, including construction, leasing and maintenance operations. Overhead costs not allocated to these operations are charged to general and administrative expenses. The increase in general and administrative expenses is primarily the result of an increase in payroll expenses associated with long-term compensation plans and an increase in the number of employees to support our growth in our National Development and Construction practice.
Other Income and Expenses
Earnings from the sale of land and ownership interests in unconsolidated companies, net of impairment adjustments, are comprised of the following amounts in 2005 and 2004, respectively (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Gain on land sales | | $ | 14,459 | | $ | 10,543 | |
Gain on sale of ownership interests in unconsolidated companies | | | - | | | 83 | |
Impairment adjustment | | | (258) | | | (424) | |
Total | | $ | 14,201 | | $ | 10,202 | |
Gain on land sales is derived from sales of undeveloped land that we own. We pursue opportunities to dispose of land in those markets with a high concentration of undeveloped land and in those markets where the land no longer meets our strategic development plans.
We recorded $258,000 and $424,000 of impairment charges associated with contracts to sell land parcels for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. All parcels related to the $258,000 of impairment recorded in 2005 were sold during 2005. One of the parcels on which we recorded an impairment charge in 2004 was sold in the first quarter of 2005, while all remaining parcels of the $424,000 impairment charge were sold in 2004.
Discontinued Operations
The results of operations for properties sold during the year or designated as held-for-sale at the end of the period are required to be classified as discontinued operations. The property specific components of net earnings that are classified as discontinued operations include rental revenues, rental expenses, real estate taxes, interest expense, depreciation expense and minority interest, as well as the net gain or loss on the disposition of properties.
We have classified operations of 320 buildings as discontinued operations as of December 31, 2005. These 320 buildings consist of 292 industrial, 23 office and five retail properties. As a result, we classified net income from operations, net of minority interest, of $11.6 million, $20.0 million and $35.5 million as net income from discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
25
Of these properties, 234 were sold during 2005, 41 properties were sold during 2004, 42 properties were sold during 2003 and three operating properties are classified as held-for-sale at December 31, 2005. The gains on disposal of these properties, net of impairment adjustment and minority interest, of $204.3 million, $23.9 million and $11.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, are also reported in discontinued operations.
Comparison of Year Ended December 31, 2004 to Year Ended December 31, 2003
Rental Income from Continuing Operations
Rental income from continuing operations increased from $560.7 million in 2003 to $619.6 million in 2004. The following table reconciles rental income from continuing operations by reportable segment to total reported rental income from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 (in thousands):
| | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Office | | $ | 448,682 | | $ | 409,071 | |
Industrial | | | 160,709 | | | 142,087 | |
Non-Segment | | | 10,178 | | | | 9,557 | |
Total | | $ | 619,569 | | $ | 560,715 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Both of our reportable segments that comprise Rental Operations (office and industrial) are within the real estate industry; however, the same economic and industry conditions do not affect each segment in the same manner. The primary causes of the increase in rental income from continuing operations, with specific references to a particular segment when applicable, are summarized below:
• Our in-service occupancy increased from 89.3% at December 31, 2003, to 90.9% at December 31, 2004.
• During the year ended 2004, we acquired 19 new properties and placed 18 development projects in-service. These acquisitions and developments are the primary factors in the overall $58.9 million increase in rental revenue for the year ended 2004, compared to the same period in 2003.
The 19 property acquisitions totaled $264.0 million on 2.6 million square feet and were 80.3% leased at December 31, 2004. The two largest acquisitions were office buildings in Atlanta and Cincinnati. The 2004 acquisitions provided revenues of $14.2 million. Revenues from acquisitions that occurred during 2003 were $35.2 million in 2004 compared to $11.9 million in 2003.
Developments placed in service in 2004 provided revenues of $9.9 million, while revenues associated with developments placed in service in 2003 totaled $14.7 million in 2004 compared to $6.6 million in 2003.
• The rental income shown above includes lease termination fees. Lease termination fees relate to specific tenants who pay a fee to terminate their lease obligations before the end of the contractual lease term. Lease termination fees totaled $16.2 million in 2003, compared to $14.7 million in 2004. The decrease in termination fees corresponds with fewer corporate downsizings due to improving market conditions.
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Companies
Equity in earnings represents our ownership share of net income from investments in unconsolidated companies. These joint ventures generally own and operate rental properties and hold land for development. These earnings decreased from $23.7 million in 2003 to $21.6 million in 2004 despite overall occupancy remaining relatively flat around 94%. The decrease in earnings is the result of the following:
• A tenant filed for bankruptcy in one joint venture property resulting in occupancy for the property at the end of 2004 being 69.7% versus 87.4% in 2003.
• We sold our interest in one joint venture in December 2003 and, as a result, no earnings were recorded in 2004.
26
Rental Expenses and Real Estate Taxes
The following table reconciles rental expenses and real estate taxes by reportable segment to our total reported amounts in the statement of operations for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 (in thousands):
| | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Rental Expenses: | | | | | |
Office | | $ | 113,688 | | $ | 100,509 | |
Industrial | | | 20,147 | | | 18,632 | |
Non-Segment | | | | 1,214 | | | 2,295 | |
Total | | $ | 135,049 | | $ | 121,436 | |
Real Estate Taxes: | | | | | | | |
Office | | $ | 47,620 | | $ | 41,921 | |
Industrial | | | 17,726 | | | 16,457 | |
Non-Segment | | | 4,681 | | | 4,447 | |
Total | | $ | 70,027 | | $ | 62,825 | |
| | | | | | | | |
The increased rental and real estate tax expenses for 2004, as compared to 2003, were primarily the result of our increase in average in-service square feet and occupancy. These increases resulted from our acquisition activities and developments placed in service as noted above.
Interest Expense
Interest expense increased from $100.7 million in 2003 to $109.9 million in 2004. We issued new debt to fund debt maturities, new developments and acquisitions and to take advantage of the favorable interest rate environment. The following is a summary of debt activities for 2004:
• In January, we obtained a $65 million floating rate term loan and immediately fixed the rate at 2.18% with two interest rate swaps. We paid off this loan in the first quarter of 2005. Also in January, we issued $125 million of unsecured debt with a four-year maturity at 3.35%. In August we issued $250 million of unsecured debt with a ten-year maturity at an effective rate of 6.33%. In December we issued $250 million of unsecured floating rate debt at 26 basis points over LIBOR. The debt matures in two years, but is callable at our option after six months.
• In August, we paid off $15 million of a $40 million secured floating rate term loan. We also assumed $29.9 million of secured debt in conjunction with a property acquisition in Atlanta.
• The average balance and average borrowing rate of our $500 million revolving credit facility were slightly higher in 2004 than in 2003. At the end of 2004, we were not utilizing our credit facility.
Depreciation and Amortization Expense
Depreciation and amortization expense increased from $151.0 million in 2003 to $181.4 million in 2004 as a result of increased capital spending associated with increased leasing, the additional basis resulting from acquisition and development activity and the application of SFAS 141. The points below highlight the significant increase in depreciation and amortization.
• Depreciation expense on tenant improvements increased by $14.1 million.
• Depreciation expense on buildings increased by $6.0 million.
• Lease commission amortization expense increased by $2.2 million.
• The amortization expense associated with acquired lease intangible assets increased by approximately $10.0 million.
Service Operations
Service Operations earnings increased from $21.8 million in 2003 to $24.4 million in 2004. The increase reflects higher construction volumes partially offset by increased staffing costs for our new National Development and Construction group and construction jobs in certain markets. Other factors impacting service operations are discussed below.
• We experienced a 1.6% decrease in our overall gross profit margin percentage in our general contractor business in 2004 as compared to 2003, due to continued competitive pricing pressure in many of our markets. We expect margins to increase in 2005 as economic conditions improve.
27
However, despite this decrease, we were able to increase our net general contractor revenues from $26.8 million in 2003 to $27.6 million in 2004 because of an increase in volume. This volume increase was attributable to continued low financing costs available to businesses, thereby making it more attractive for them to own instead of lease facilities. We have a substantial backlog of $183.2 million for third party construction as of December 31, 2004, which was carried into 2005.
• Our merchant building development and sales program, whereby a building is developed by us and then sold, is a significant component of construction and development income. During 2004, we generated after tax gains of $16.5 million from the sale of six properties compared to $9.6 million from the sale of four properties in 2003. Profit margins on these types of building sales fluctuate by sale depending on the type of property being sold, the strength of the underlying tenant and nature of the sale, such as a pre-contracted purchase price for a primary tenant versus a sale on the open market.
General and Administrative Expense
General and administrative expense increased from $22.0 million in 2003 to $26.3 million in 2004. The increase was a result of increased staffing and employee compensation costs to support development of our National Development and Construction group. We also experienced an increase in marketing to support certain new projects.
Other Income and Expenses
Earnings from sales of land and ownership interests in unconsolidated companies, net of impairment adjustments, is comprised of the following amounts in 2004 and 2003 (in thousands):
| | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Gain on land sales | | $ | 10,543 | | $ | 7,695 | |
Gain on sale of ownership interests in unconsolidated companies | | | 83 | | | 8,617 | |
Impairment adjustment | | | (424) | | | (560) | |
Total | | $ | 10,202 | | $ | 15,752 | |
In the first quarter of 2003, we sold our 50% interest in a joint venture that owned and operated depreciable investment property. The joint venture developed and operated real estate assets; thus, the gain was not included in operating income.
Gain on land sales are derived from sales of undeveloped land owned by us. We pursue opportunities to dispose of land in markets with a high concentration of undeveloped land and in those markets where the land no longer meets our strategic development plans. The increase was partially attributable to a land sale to a current corporate tenant for potential future expansion.
We recorded $424,000 and $560,000 of impairment charges associated with contracts to sell land parcels for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. As of December 31, 2004, only one parcel on which we recorded impairment charges was still owned by us. We sold this parcel in the first quarter of 2005.
Critical Accounting Policies
The preparation of our consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reported period. Our estimates, judgments and assumptions are continually evaluated based upon available information and experience. Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements includes further discussion of our significant accounting policies.
Our management has assessed the accounting policies used in the preparation of our financial statements and discussed them with our Audit Committee and independent auditors. The following accounting policies are considered critical based upon materiality to the financial statements, degree of judgment involved in estimating reported amounts and sensitivity to changes in industry and economic conditions:
28
Accounting for Joint Ventures: We analyze our investments in joint ventures under Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, to determine if the joint venture is considered a variable interest entity and would require consolidation. To the extent that our joint ventures do not qualify as variable interest entities, we further assess under the guidelines of Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights (“EITF 04-5”), Statement of Position 78-9, Accounting for Investments in Real Estate Ventures; Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, Consolidated Financial Statements and FASB No. 94, Consolidation of All Majority-Owned Subsidiaries, to determine if the venture should be consolidated. We have equity interests ranging from 10%-75% in joint ventures that own and operate rental properties and hold land for development. We consolidate those joint ventures that we control through majority ownership interests or substantial participating rights. Control is further demonstrated by the ability of the general partner to manage day-to-day operations, refinance debt and sell the assets of the joint venture without the consent of the limited partner and inability of the limited partner to replace the general partner. We use the equity method of accounting for those joint ventures where we do not have control over operating and financial polices. Under the equity method of accounting, our investment in each joint venture is included on our balance sheet; however, the assets and liabilities of the joint ventures for which we use the equity method are not included on our balance sheet.
Cost Capitalization: Direct and certain indirect costs, including interest, clearly associated with and incremental to the development, construction, leasing or expansion of real estate investments are capitalized as a cost of the property. The following discusses the significant categories of costs we incur:
Within our Rental Operations, direct and indirect costs are capitalized under the guidelines of SFAS No. 67, Accounting for Costs and Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Projects (“SFAS 67”), and interest costs are capitalized under the guidelines of SFAS No. 34, “Capitalization of Interest Cost” (“SFAS 34”). We capitalize these project costs associated with the initial construction of a property up to the time the property is substantially complete and ready for its intended use. We believe the completion of the building shell is the proper basis for determining substantial completion and that this basis is the most widely accepted standard in the real estate industry. The interest rate used to capitalize interest is based upon our average borrowing rate on existing debt.
In addition, we capitalize costs, including interest costs, on vacant space during extended lease-up periods after construction of the building shell has been completed if costs are being incurred to ready the vacant space for its intended use. If costs and activities incurred to ready the vacant space cease, then cost capitalization is also discontinued until such activities are resumed. Once necessary work has been completed on a vacant space, project costs are no longer capitalized. We cease capitalization of all project costs on extended lease-up periods after the shorter of a one-year period after the completion of the building shell or when the property attains a 90% occupancy. We follow guidelines in SFAS 34 and SFAS 67 in determining the capitalization of project costs during the lease-up period of a property and believe that this treatment is consistent with real estate industry standards for project cost capitalization.
All direct construction and development costs associated with the development of a new property are capitalized. In addition, all leasing commissions paid to third parties for new leases or lease renewals are capitalized. A portion of our indirect costs considered directly related and incremental to construction/development and leasing efforts are capitalized. In assessing the amount of indirect costs to be capitalized, we first allocate payroll costs, on a department-by-department basis, among activities for which capitalization is warranted (i.e., construction, development and leasing) and those for which capitalization is not warranted (i.e., property management, maintenance, acquisitions and dispositions and general corporate functions). To the extent the employees of a department split their time between capitalizable and non-capitalizable activities, the allocations are made based on estimates of the actual amount of time spent in each activity. Once the payroll costs are allocated, the non-payroll costs of each department are allocated among the capitalizable and non-capitalizable activities in the same proportion as payroll costs.
29
To ensure that an appropriate amount of costs are capitalized, the amount of capitalized costs that are allocated to a specific project are limited to amounts using standards we developed. These standards consist of a percentage of the total development costs of a project and a percentage of the total gross lease amount payable under a specific lease. These standards are derived after considering the amounts that would be allocated if the personnel in the departments were working at full capacity. The use of these standards ensures that overhead costs attributable to downtime or to unsuccessful projects or leasing activities are not capitalized by us.
Impairment of Real Estate Investments: We evaluate our real estate investments upon occurrence of significant changes in the operations, but not less than annually, to assess whether any impairment indications are present that affect the recovery of the recorded value. If any real estate investment is considered to be impaired, a loss is provided to reduce the carrying value of the asset to its estimated fair value. We utilize the guidelines established under SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long Lived Assets (“SFAS 144”), to determine if impairment conditions exist. Under SFAS 144, we review the expected undiscounted cash flows of each property in our held for rental portfolio to determine if there are any indications of impairment of a property. The review of anticipated cash flows involves subjective assumptions of estimated occupancy and rental rates and ultimate residual value. In addition to reviewing anticipated cash flows, we assess other factors such as changes in business climate and legal factors that may affect the ultimate value of the property. These assumptions are subjective and the anticipated cash flows may not ultimately be achieved.
Real estate assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of their carrying value amount or the fair value less estimated cost to sell.
Acquisition of Real Estate Property: In accordance with SFAS 141, we allocate the purchase price of acquired properties to net tangible and identified intangible assets based on their respective fair values.
The allocation to tangible assets (buildings, tenant improvements and land) is based upon management’s determination of the value of the property as if it were vacant using discounted cash flow models similar to those used by independent appraisers. Factors considered by management include an estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods considering current market conditions, and costs to execute similar leases. The remaining purchase price is allocated among three categories of intangible assets consisting of the above or below market component of in-place leases, the value of in-place leases and the value of customer relationships.
• The value allocable to the above or below market component of an acquired in-place lease is determined based upon the present value (using an interest rate which reflects the risks associated with the lease) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the lease over its remaining term and (ii) management’s estimate of the amounts that would be paid using current fair market rates over the remaining term of the lease. The amounts allocated to above market leases are included in deferred leasing and other costs in the balance sheet and below market leases are included in other liabilities in the balance sheet; both are amortized to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases.
• The total amount of intangible assets is further allocated to in-place lease values and to customer relationship values, based upon management’s assessment of their respective values. These intangible assets are included in deferred leasing and other costs in the balance sheet and are depreciated over the remaining term of the existing lease, or the anticipated life of the customer relationship, as applicable.
Valuation of Receivables: We are subject to tenant defaults and bankruptcies that could affect the collection of outstanding receivables. In order to mitigate these risks, we perform in-house credit review and analysis on major existing tenants and all significant leases before they are executed. We have established the following procedures and policies to evaluate the collectibility of outstanding receivables and record allowances:
• We maintain a tenant “watch list” containing a list of significant tenants for which the payment of receivables and future rent may be at risk. Various factors such as late rent payments, lease or debt instrument defaults, and indications of a deteriorating financial position are considered when determining whether to include a tenant on the watch list.
30
• As a matter of policy, we reserve the entire receivable balance, including straight-line rent, of any tenant with an amount outstanding over 90 days.
• Straight-line rent receivables for any tenant on the watch list or any other tenant identified as a potential long-term risk, regardless of the status of rent receivables, are reviewed and reserved as necessary.
Revenue Recognition on Construction Contracts: We recognize income on construction contracts where we serve as a general contractor on the percentage of completion method. Using this method, profits are recorded on the basis of our estimates of the overall profit and percentage of completion of individual contracts. A portion of the estimated profits is accrued based upon our estimates of the percentage of completion of the construction contract. Cumulative revenues recognized may be less or greater than cumulative costs and profits billed at any point in time during a contract’s term. This revenue recognition method involves inherent risks relating to profit and cost estimates with those risks reduced through approval and monitoring processes.
With regard to critical accounting policies, management has discussed the following with the Audit Committee:
• Criteria for identifying and selecting;
• Methodology in applying; and
• Impact on the financial statements.
The Audit Committee has reviewed the critical accounting policies we identified.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Sources of Liquidity
We expect to meet our liquidity requirements over the next twelve months, including payments of dividends and distributions as well as recurring capital expenditures relating to maintaining our current real estate assets, primarily through the following:
• working capital; and
• net cash provided by operating activities.
Although we typically do not use other sources of funds to pay for recurring capital expenditures on our current real estate investments, we may rely on the temporary use of borrowings or property disposition proceeds to fund such expenditures during periods of high leasing volume. We expect to meet long-term liquidity requirements, such as scheduled mortgage debt maturities, refinancing of long-term debt, preferred share redemptions, the retirement of unsecured notes and amounts outstanding under the unsecured credit facility, property acquisitions, financing of development activities and other non-recurring capital improvements, primarily from the following sources:
• issuance of additional notes;
• issuance of additional preferred shares;
• undistributed cash provided by operating activities, if any; and
• proceeds received from real estate dispositions.
Rental Operations
We believe our principal source of liquidity, cash flows from Rental Operations, provides a stable source of cash to fund operational expenses. We believe this cash-based revenue stream is substantially aligned with revenue recognition (except for periodic straight-line rental income accruals and amortization of above or below market rents) as cash receipts from the leasing of rental properties are generally received in advance of or in a short time following the actual revenue recognition.
31
We are subject to risks of decreased occupancy through market conditions as well as tenant defaults and bankruptcies, and potential reduction in rental rates upon renewal or re-letting of properties, which would result in reduced cash flow from operations. However, we believe that these risks are mitigated by our strong market presence in most of our locations and the fact that we perform in-house credit review and analysis on major tenants and all significant leases before they are executed.
Credit Facility
We had one unsecured line of credit available at December 31, 2005, summarized as follows (in thousands):
| | Borrowing | | Maturity | | Interest | | Outstanding | |
Description | | Capacity | | | Date | | | | Rate | | | | at December 31, 2005 | |
Unsecured Line of Credit | | $500,000 | | January 2007 | | LIBOR + .60% | | $ | 383,000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
We use this line of credit to fund development activities, acquire additional rental properties and provide working capital.
The line of credit provides us with an option to obtain borrowings from financial institutions that participate in the line, at rates lower than the stated interest rate, subject to certain restrictions.
The line of credit contains various financial covenants that require us to meet defined levels of performance, including variable interest indebtedness, consolidated net worth, and debt-to-market capitalization. As of December 31, 2005, we were in compliance with all financial covenants under our line of credit.
In January 2006, we renewed our unsecured revolving credit facility. The new facility provides borrowing capacity up to $1 billion and, subject to certain conditions, may be increased to $1.3 billion. Under the new facility, which replaces the previous unsecured line of credit agreement, we reduced the interest rate by 7.5 basis points to LIBOR plus 52.5 basis points, increased the borrowing capacity by $500 million and extended the maturity date to January 25, 2010.
Debt and Equity Securities
At December 31, 2005, we had on file with the SEC an effective shelf registration statement that permits us to sell up to an additional $795.0 million of unsecured debt securities and an additional $350.7 million of common and preferred stock. From time to time, we expect to issue additional securities under these registration statements to fund development and acquisition of additional rental properties and to fund the repayment of the credit facility and other long-term debt upon maturity.
The indenture governing our unsecured notes also requires us to comply with financial ratios and other covenants regarding our operations. At December 31, 2005, we were in compliance with all such covenants.
Sale of Real Estate Assets
We utilize sales of real estate assets as an additional source of liquidity. We pursue opportunities to sell real estate assets at favorable prices to capture value created by us as well as to improve the overall quality of our portfolio by recycling sale proceeds into new properties with greater value creation opportunities.
Uses of Liquidity
Our principal uses of liquidity include the following:
• Property investments;
• Recurring leasing/capital costs;
• Dividends and distributions to shareholders and unitholders;
• Long-term debt maturities; and
• Other contractual obligations.
Property Investments
We evaluate development and acquisition opportunities based upon market outlook, supply and long-term growth potential.
32
Recurring Expenditures
One of our principal uses of our liquidity is to fund the development, acquisition and recurring leasing/capital expenditures of our real estate investments. The following is a summary of our recurring capital expenditures for the year ended December 31 (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | |
Tenant improvements | | $ | 60,633 | | $58,847 | | $ | 35,972 | |
Leasing costs | | | 33,175 | | 27,777 | | | 20,932 | |
Building improvements | | | 15,232 | | 21,029 | | | 19,544 | |
Totals | | $ | 109,040 | | $107,653 | | $ | 76,448 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Recurring capital expenditures remained relatively stable for 2005 as compared to 2004. Our lease renewal percentage remained steady in 2005 at 74.3% compared to 73.9% in 2004.
Dividends and Distributions
In order to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we must currently distribute at least 90% of our taxable income to shareholders. We paid dividends per share of $1.87, $1.85 and $1.83 for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. We also paid a one-time special dividend of $1.05 per share in 2005 as a result of the significant gain realized from the Industrial Portfolio Sale. We expect to continue to distribute taxable earnings to meet the requirements to maintain our REIT status. However, distributions are declared at the discretion of our board of directors and are subject to actual cash available for distribution, our financial condition, capital requirements and such other factors, as our board of directors deems relevant.
Debt Maturities
Debt outstanding at December 31, 2005, totaled $2.6 billion with a weighted average interest rate of 5.73% maturing at various dates through 2028. We had $2.4 billion of unsecured debt and $167.3 million of secured debt outstanding at December 31, 2005. Scheduled principal amortization of such debt totaled $46.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.
The following is a summary of the scheduled future amortization and maturities of our indebtedness at December 31, 2005 (in thousands except percentage data):
| | Future | Repayments | | Weighted Average | |
| | Scheduled | | | | | Interest Rate of | |
Year | | Amortization | | Maturities | | | Total | | Future Repayments | |
| | | | | | | | | |
2006 | | $ | 7,094 | | $ | 390,249 | | $ | 397,343 | | 5.49 | % | |
2007 | | | 6,620 | | | 597,615 | | | 604,235 | | 5.08 | % | |
2008 | | | 5,639 | | | 268,968 | | | 274,607 | | 4.90 | % | |
2009 | | | 4,926 | | | 275,000 | | | 279,926 | | 7.38 | % | |
2010 | | | 4,316 | | | 175,000 | | | 179,316 | | 5.39 | % | |
2011 | | | 4,497 | | | 175,000 | | | 179,497 | | 6.95 | % | |
2012 | | | 3,172 | | | 200,000 | | | 203,172 | | 5.87 | % | |
2013 | | | 2,879 | | | 150,000 | | | 152,879 | | 4.65 | % | |
2014 | | | 2,799 | | | 272,112 | | | 274,911 | | 6.27 | % | |
2015 | | | 926 | | | - | | | 926 | | 6.80 | % | |
Thereafter | | | 3,839 | | | 50,000 | | | 53,839 | | 7.10 | % | |
| | $ | 46,707 | | $ | 2,553,944 | | $ | 2,600,651 | | 5.73 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Historical Cash Flows
Cash and cash equivalents were $26.7 million and $5.6 million at December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The following highlights significant changes in net cash associated with our operating, investing and financing activities (in millions):
33
| | Years Ended December 31, |
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Net Cash Provided by | | | | | | | |
Operating Activities | | $404.3 | | $ 375.5 | | $ 368.6 | |
Net Cash Provided by (Used | | | | | | | |
for) Investing Activities | | 328.1 | | (427.2) | | (320.7) | |
Net Cash Provided by (Used | | | | | | | |
for) Financing Activities | | (711.2) | | 44.7 | | (52.7) | |
Operating Activities
Cash flows from operating activities represents the cash necessary to meet normal operational requirements of our rental operations and merchant building activities. The receipt of rental income from rental operations continues to provide the primary source of our revenues and operating cash flows. In addition, we develop buildings with the intent to sell them, which provides another significant source of operating cash flow activity.
• During the year ended December 31, 2005, we incurred merchant building development costs of $83.4 million, compared to $43.1 million and $55.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003. The difference is reflective of the increased activity in our held-for-sale pipeline. The pipeline of held-for-sale projects under construction as of December 31, 2005, has anticipated costs of $286.7 million. In addition, we also acquired a building for $6.0 million during the first quarter of 2005 on which we made improvements of approximately $7.5 million and sold in June 2005 for $20.0 million.
• We sold ten merchant buildings in 2005 compared to six in 2004 and four in 2003, receiving net proceeds of $113.0 million, $72.7 million and $50.1 million, respectively. After-tax gains of $19.0 million, $16.5 million and $9.6 million, respectively, were recognized on these merchant building sales.
Investing Activities
Investing activities are one of the primary uses of our funds. Development and acquisition activities typically generate additional rental revenues and provide cash flows for operational requirements. Highlights of significant cash uses are as follows:
• Sales of land and depreciated property provided $1.1 billion in net proceeds in 2005, compared to $178.3 million in 2004 and $167.6 million in 2003. The Industrial Portfolio Sale provided $955 million of proceeds during the third quarter of 2005. We continue to dispose of non-strategic and older properties as part of our capital recycling program to fund acquisitions and new developments while improving the overall quality of our investment portfolio.
• Development costs increased to $210.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, from $145.6 and $129.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Management anticipated this increase, as a commitment to development activity is part of our strategic plan for 2006.
• During 2005, we acquired $285.3 million of real estate, compared to $204.4 million in 2004 and $201.8 million in 2003. The largest of the 2005 acquisitions was a five-building office complex in our Chicago market for $257.0 million.
• In 2005, we acquired $135.8 million of undeveloped land, compared to $116.7 million in 2004 and $32.9 million in 2003. These acquisitions provide us greater opportunities to use our development and construction expertise in the improving economic cycle.
Financing Activities
The following significant items highlight fluctuations in net cash provided by financing activities:
• In January 2005, we retired a $65.0 million variable-rate term loan.
• In March 2005, we retired $100.0 million of 6.875% senior unsecured debt that matured.
• In September 2005, we retired $100.0 million of 7.375% corporate unsecured debt that matured.
• Throughout the third and fourth quarters of 2005, we repurchased and retired approximately 9.0 million of our common shares.
34
• In December 2005, we paid special dividends of $143.8 million to common shareholders and special distributions of $14.1 million to minority interest common unitholders, representing a one-time dividend of $1.05 per share or per unit that was declared in order to maintain our compliance with the minimum distribution requirements for a REIT. The one-time special dividend was declared as a result of the significant gain realized as a result of the Industrial Portfolio Sale.
Credit Ratings
We are currently assigned investment grade corporate credit ratings on our senior unsecured notes from Fitch Ratings, Moody’s Investor Service and Standard and Poor’s Ratings Group. Currently, Fitch and Standard and Poor’s have assigned a rating of BBB+ and Moody’s Investors has assigned a rating of Baa1 to our senior notes.
We also received investment grade credit ratings from the same rating agencies on our preferred stock. Fitch and Standard and Poor’s have assigned a Preferred Stock rating of BBB and Moody’s Investors has assigned a Preferred Stock rating of Baa2 to our preferred stock.
These senior notes and preferred stock ratings could change based upon, among other things, our results of operations and financial condition.
Financial Instruments
We are exposed to capital market risk, such as changes in interest rates. In order to manage the volatility relating to interest rate risk, we may enter into interest rate hedging arrangements from time to time. We do not utilize derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes. We account for derivative instruments under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (“SFAS 133”), as amended by SFAS No. 138, Accounting for Certain Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activities (“SFAS 138”).
In March 2005, we entered into $300.0 million of cash flow hedges through forward-starting interest rate swaps to hedge interest rates on $300.0 million of estimated debt offerings in 2006. The swaps qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS 133, as amended by SFAS 138, with any changes in fair value recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”). The market value of these interest rate swaps is dependent upon existing market interest rates, which change over time. At December 31, 2005, the estimated fair value of the swaps was a liability of approximately $6.6 million. The effective rates of the swaps were higher than interest rates at December 31, 2005.
In August 2005, we entered into $300.0 million of cash flow hedges through forward-starting interest rate swaps to hedge interest rates on $300.0 million of estimated debt offerings in 2007. The swaps qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS 133, as amended by SFAS 138, with any changes in fair value recorded in OCI. At December 31, 2005, the fair value of these swaps was an asset of $5.3 million. The effective rates of the swaps were lower than interest rates at December 31, 2005.
In June 2004, we simultaneously entered into three forward-starting interest rate swaps aggregating $144.3 million, which effectively fixed the rate on financing expected in 2004 at 5.346%, plus our credit spread over the swap rate. The swaps qualified for hedge accounting under SFAS 133; therefore, changes in the fair value were recorded in OCI. In August 2004, we settled these three swaps when we issued $250.0 million of unsecured notes with an effective interest rate of 6.33%, due in 2014. We paid $6.85 million to unwind the swaps, which is amortized from OCI into interest expense over the life of the new 6.33% notes.
In December 2002, we simultaneously entered into two $50 million forward-starting interest rate swaps as a hedge to effectively fix the rate on unsecured debt financings expected in 2003. Then again in February 2003, we simultaneously entered into two additional $25 million forward-starting interest rate swaps as a hedge to effectively fix the rate on unsecured debt financings expected in 2003. All four swaps qualified for hedge accounting under SFAS 133; therefore, changes in fair value were recorded in OCI. In July 2003, we
35
terminated the swaps for a net gain of $643,000, which is included in other revenue in the Statements of Operations. The swaps were terminated because our capital needs were met through the issuance of the Series J Preferred Stock in lieu of the previously contemplated issuance of debt.
In May 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity (“SFAS 150”). SFAS 150 establishes standards for classifying and measuring as liabilities certain financial instruments that embody obligations of the issuer and have characteristics of both liabilities and equity. SFAS 150 was effective for all financial instruments created or modified after May 31, 2003, and otherwise was effective July 1, 2003. We consolidated the operations of one joint venture in our consolidated financial statements at December 31, 2005. This joint venture is partially owned by unaffiliated parties that have noncontrolling interests. SFAS 150 requires the disclosure of the estimated settlement value of these noncontrolling interests. As of December 31, 2005, the estimated settlement value of the noncontrolling interest in this consolidated joint venture was approximately $1.1 million, as compared to the $24,000 receivable reported in our financial statements for this joint venture.
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
Investments in Unconsolidated Companies
We analyze our investments in joint ventures under FASB Interpretation No. 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (“FIN 46(R)”), to determine if the joint venture is a variable interest entity and would require consolidation. To the extent that our joint ventures do not qualify as variable interest entities, we further assess under the guidelines of Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights (“EITF 04-5”); Statement of Position 78-9, Accounting for Investments in Real Estate Ventures; Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, Consolidated Financial Statements and FASB No. 94, Consolidation of All Majority-Owned Subsidiaries, to determine if the venture should be consolidated.
In 2004, we announced a 50/50 joint venture agreement with a medical office developer to develop healthcare facilities. Under the terms of the agreement, we provide the project financing and construction services while our partner provides the business development, leasing and property management of the co-developed properties. We evaluated this partnership under FIN 46(R) and determined that this joint venture qualifies as a variable interest entity subject to consolidation. We are the primary beneficiary as determined under FIN 46(R) and fully consolidate the joint venture. At December 31, 2005, there were six properties under development with the joint venture. These properties total nearly 470,000 square feet and have an aggregate construction in-process balance of approximately $14.9 million that is consolidated into our balance sheet.
We have equity interests ranging from 10% – 64% in unconsolidated companies that own and operate rental properties and hold land for development. The equity method of accounting is used for these investments in which we have the ability to exercise significant influence, but not control, over operating and financial policies. As a result, the assets and liabilities of these joint ventures are not included on our balance sheet.
Our investment in unconsolidated companies represents 5% of our total assets as of December 31, 2005. These investments provide several benefits to us, including increased market share, tenant and property diversification and an additional source of capital to fund real estate projects.
The following table presents summarized financial information for unconsolidated companies for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 (in thousands, except percentage data):
36
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Other Industrial | | | | | |
| | Dugan | | Dugan | | Dugan | | and Office | | | | | |
| | Realty, LLC | | Texas, LLC | | Office, LLC | | Joint Ventures | | Total | |
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Land, buildings and tenant | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
improvements, net | | $ | 67,377 | | $ 715,931 | | $ 211,818 | | $ 210,524 | | $ 88,303 | | $ 88,088 | | $ 143,756 | | $ 143,525 | | $ 1,121,254 | | $ 1,158,068 | |
Land held for development | | | 11,628 | | | 18,174 | | | 9,222 | | | 11,312 | | | 4,293 | | | 4,293 | | | 22,793 | | | 16,394 | | | 47,936 | | | 50,173 | |
Other assets | | | 35,959 | | | 29,738 | | | 17,347 | | | 13,223 | | | 4,116 | | | 3,256 | | | 15,662 | | | 15,973 | | | 73,084 | | | 62,190 | |
| | $ | 724,964 | | $ 763,843 | | $ 238,387 | | $ 235,059 | | $ 96,712 | | $ 95,637 | | $ 182,211 | | $ 175,892 | | $ 1,242,274 | | $ 1,270,431 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Property indebtedness | | $360,290 | | $412,179 | | $ | 17,999 | | $ | 18,000 | | $67,362 | | $ | 68,393 | | $ | 69,541 | | $ | 72,369 | | $ | 515,192 | | $ | 570,941 | |
Other liabilities | | | 23,903 | | | 18,921 | | | 10,436 | | | 8,791 | | | 2,793 | | | 3,318 | | | 21,093 | | | 20,347 | | | 58,225 | | | 51,377 | |
| | | 384,193 | | | 431,100 | | | 28,435 | | | 26,791 | | | 70,155 | | | 71,711 | | | 90,634 | | | 92,716 | | | 573,417 | | | 622,318 | |
Owners’ equity | | | 340,771 | | | 332,743 | | | 209,952 | | | 208,268 | | | 26,557 | | | 23,926 | | | 91,577 | | | 83,176 | | | 668,857 | | | 648,113 | |
| | $ | 724,964 | | $ | 763,843 | | $ | 238,387 | | $ | 235,059 | | $ | 96,712 | | $ | 95,637 | | $ | 182,211 | | $ | 175,892 | | $ | 1,242,274 | | $ | 1,270,431 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Rental income | | $ | 94,045 | | $ | 98,020 | | $ | 30,481 | | $ | 29,860 | | $ | 11,423 | | $ | 14,776 | | $ | 27,498 | | $ | 25,147 | | $ | 163,447 | | $ | 167,803 | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 41,678 | | $ | 23,398 | | $ | 12,351 | | $ | 13,039 | | $ | (1,517) | | $ | 252 | | $ | 5,049 | | $ | 3,449 | | $ | 57,561 | | $ | 40,138 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total square feet | | | 21,436 | | | 22,763 | | | 6,255 | | | 6,018 | | | 652 | | | 652 | | | 4,573 | | | 4,465 | | | 32,916 | | | 33,898 | |
Percent leased | | | 95.9% | | | 95.0% | | | 90.7% | | | 95.3% | | | 70.2% | | | 69.7% | | | 94.0% | | | 94.2% | | | 94.2% | | | 94.4% | |
Company | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10.0%- | | | 10.0% - | | | | | | | |
ownership percentage | | | 50.0% | | | 50.0% | | | 50.0% | | | 50.0% | | | 50.0% | | | 50.0% | | | 64.0% | | | 64.0% | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as “special purpose entities,” which are generally established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other specific purposes.
Contractual Obligations
At December 31, 2005, we are subject to certain contractual payment obligations as described in the table and notes below (in thousands):
Contractual Obligations | | | Total | | | 2006 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2009 | | 2010 | | Thereafter | |
Long-term debt (1) | | $ | 2,610,618 | | $ | 296,635 | | $ | 326,205 | | $ | 361,330 | | $ | 355,506 | | $ | 234,114 | | $ | 1,036,828 | |
Line of credit (2) | | | 404,166 | | | 18,499 | | | 385,667 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | |
Share of mortgage debt of | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
unconsolidated joint ventures (3) | | | 291,172 | | | 30,187 | | | 60,112 | | | 33,551 | | | 55,826 | | | 106,915 | | | 4,581 | |
Ground leases | | | 8,973 | | | 346 | | | 364 | | | 360 | | | 343 | | | 336 | | | 7,224 | |
Operating leases | | | 1,460 | | | 622 | | | 317 | | | 297 | | | 191 | | | 33 | | | - | |
Development and construction | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
backlog costs (4) | | | 360,216 | | | 333,049 | | | 27,167 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | |
Future land acquisitions (5) | | | 69,269 | | | 59,526 | | | 6,983 | | | 2,760 | | | - | | | - | | | - | |
Service contracts (6) | | | 33,803 | | | 9,028 | | | 8,854 | | | 8,224 | | | 7,697 | | | - | | | - | |
Other (7) | | | 194,110 | | | 194,110 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | |
Total Contractual Obligations | | $ | 3,973,787 | | $ | 942,002 | | $ | 815,669 | | $ | 406,522 | | $ | 419,563 | | $ | 341,398 | | $ | 1,048,633 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(1) | | Our long-term debt consists of both secured and unsecured debt and includes both principal and interest. Interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at December 31, 2005. |
(2) | | Our unsecured line of credit was originally scheduled to mature in 2007. In January 2006, the maturity date was extended to January 2010. |
(3) | | Our share of unconsolidated mortgage debt includes both principal and interest. Interest expense for variable rate debt was calculated using the interest rate at December 31, 2005. |
(4) | | Represents estimated remaining costs on the completion of held-for-rental, held-for-sale and third party construction projects. |
(5) | | These land acquisitions are subject to the completion of due diligence requirements, resolution of certain contingencies and completion of certain contingencies and completion of customary closing conditions. If we were to terminate these contracts, we would forfeit our total escrow amount of $320,000 and would have no further contractual obligations. |
(6) | | Service contracts defined as those which cover periods greater than one year and are not cancelable without cause by either party. |
(7) | | Represents the contracted purchase price of a portfolio of buildings that we expect to acquire in 2006. |
Related Party Transactions
We provide property management, leasing, construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests. For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, we received from these unconsolidated companies management fees of $4.8 million, $4.9 million and $4.9 million, leasing fees of $4.3 million, $2.6 million and $2.3 million and construction and development fees of $2.0 million, $1.5 million and $1.4 million. We recorded these fees at market rates and eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements.
37
Commitments and Contingencies
In October 2000, we sold or contributed industrial properties and undeveloped land with a fair value of $487 million to a joint venture (Dugan Realty LLC) in which we have a 50% interest and recognized a net gain of $35.2 million. This transaction expanded an existing joint venture with an institutional real estate investor. As a result of the total transactions, we received $363.9 million of proceeds. The joint venture partially financed this transaction with $350 million of secured mortgage debt, the repayment of which we directly or indirectly guaranteed. The guarantee associated with $260 million of such debt expired in December 2003 without us being required to satisfy the guarantee. The remaining $90 million of such debt is still guaranteed by us. In connection with this transaction, the joint venture partners were given an option to put up to a $50 million interest in the joint venture to us in exchange for our common stock or cash (at our option), subject to certain timing and other restrictions. As a result of this put option, we deferred $10.2 million of gain on sale of depreciated property and recorded a $50 million liability.
We have guaranteed the repayment of $12.3 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments. We will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service. Management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees.
We also have guaranteed the repayment of a $2 million mortgage loan encumbering the real estate of one of our unconsolidated joint ventures. At December 31, 2005, the outstanding balance on this loan was approximately $1.2 million. Management believes that the value of the real estate exceeds the loan balance and that we will not be required to satisfy this guarantee.
We evaluated all applicable guarantees under FASB Interpretation 45 (“FIN 45”) in order to determine whether there is a need to recognize a liability for the obligations under the guarantees. Based upon our review, no liability was recorded at December 31, 2005.
We have entered into agreements, subject to the completion of due diligence requirements, resolution of certain contingencies and completion of customary closing conditions, for the future acquisition of land totaling $65.0 million. We also have entered into an agreement to acquire an 18 building portfolio for approximately $194.1 million, which is expected to close in 2006.
We renewed all of our major insurance policies in 2005. These policies include coverage for acts of terrorism for our properties. We believe that this insurance provides adequate coverage against normal insurance risks and that any loss experienced would not have a significant impact on our liquidity, financial position, or results of operations.
We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2004, FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (R), Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock Based Compensation. In April 2005, the SEC delayed the effective date on SFAS No. 123 (R) from July 2005 to January 2006. We have completed our preliminary evaluation of the impact of SFAS No. 123 (R) and have determined that the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle will be insignificant to our results of operations. We have selected the modified-prospective method for the adoption of SFAS No. 123 (R).
38
In March 2005, FASB Interpretation No. 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations (“FIN 47”), was issued for all fiscal years ending after December 15, 2005. This is an interpretation of SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligation. Upon evaluation, we have determined that the adoption of FIN 47 did not have a material impact on our financial statements.
In June 2005, FASB ratified the consensus reached in Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights (“EITF 04-5”). EITF 04-5 is effective for all newly formed limited partnerships after the consensus was ratified and as of January 2006 for all pre-existing limited partnership agreements. This consensus applies to limited partnerships or similar entities, such as limited liability companies that have governing provisions that are the functional equivalent of a limited partnership. We have evaluated the ownership structure of our existing investments in unconsolidated companies and determined that we do not exercise control over any unconsolidated ventures as defined by EITF 04-5.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risks
We are exposed to interest rate changes primarily as a result of our line of credit and long-term debt borrowings. Our interest rate risk management objective is to limit the impact of interest rate changes on earnings and cash flows and to lower overall borrowing costs. To achieve our objectives, we borrow primarily at fixed rates and may enter into derivative financial instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps and treasury locks in order to mitigate our interest rate risk on a related financial instrument. We do not enter into derivative or interest rate transactions for speculative purposes.
Our interest rate risk is monitored using a variety of techniques. The table below presents the principal amounts (in thousands) of the expected annual maturities, weighted average interest rates for the average debt outstanding in the specified period, fair values and other terms required to evaluate the expected cash flows and sensitivity to interest rate changes.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fair | | |
| | 2006 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2009 | | 2010 | | Thereafter | | Total | | Value | | |
Fixed rate secured debt | | $ | 21,437 | | $ | 20,388 | | $ | 48,880 | | $ | 4,170 | | $ | 3,462 | | $ | 33,395 | | $ | 131,732 | | $ | 134,987 | |
Weighted average interest rate | | | 7.06% | | | 7.46% | | | 5.08% | | | 7.14% | | | 6.97% | | | 6.04% | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Variable rate secured debt | | $ | 25,666 | | $ | 691 | | $ | 726 | | $ | 756 | | $ | 854 | | $ | 6,830 | | $ | 35,523 | | $ | 35,523 | |
Weighted average interest rate | | | 6.50% | | | 3.90% | | | 3.89% | | | 3.88% | | | 4.02% | | | 3.76% | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed rate unsecured notes | | $ | 100,240 | | $ | 200,156 | | $ | 225,000 | | $ | 275,000 | | $ | 175,000 | | $ | 825,000 | | $ | 1,800,396 | | $ | 1,871,954 | |
Weighted average interest rate | | | 6.72% | | | 5.31% | | | 4.87% | | | 7.39% | | | 5.37% | | | 6.10% | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Variable rate unsecured notes | | $ | 250,000 | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | 250,000 | | $ | 250,000 | |
Weighted average interest rate | | | 4.76% | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Unsecured line of credit | | $ | - | | $ | 383,000 | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | 383,000 | | $ | 383,000 | |
Rate at December 31, 2005 | | | N/A | | | 4.83% | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
As the table incorporates only those exposures that exist as of December 31, 2005, it does not consider those exposures or positions that could arise after that date. As a result, our ultimate realized gain or loss with respect to interest rate fluctuations will depend on the exposures that arise during the period, our hedging strategies at that time, and interest rates.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
The financial statements and supplementary data are included under Item 15 of this Report.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
There was no change or disagreement with our accountants related to our accounting and financial disclosures.
39
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
We conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our “disclosure controls and procedures” as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report. The controls evaluation was done under the supervision and with the participation of management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer.
Attached as exhibits to this Annual Report are certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, which are required in accordance with Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This Controls and Procedures section includes the information concerning the controls evaluation referred to in the certifications and it should be read in conjunction with the certifications for a more complete understanding of the topics presented.
Disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15 and 15d-15f under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) are controls and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act, such as this Annual Report, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures are also designed to ensure that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Based on the disclosure controls and procedures evaluation referenced above, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting and the attestation report of our registered public accounting firm are included in Item 15 of Part IV under the headings “Management’s Report on Internal Control” and “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm,” respectively, and are incorporated herein by reference.
There were no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2005, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information
There was no information required to be disclosed in a report on Form 8-K during the fourth quarter of 2005 for which no Form 8-K was filed.
PART III
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
Information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our 2006 proxy statement (the “2006 Proxy Statement”) for our Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on April 26, 2006. Certain information with respect to our executive officers required by this item is included in the discussion entitled “Executive Officer of the Registrant” after Item 4 of Part I of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition, our Code of Conduct and our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available in the investor information/corporate governance section of our website at www.dukerealty.com. A copy of these documents may also be obtained without charge by writing to Duke Realty Corporation, 600 East 96th Street, Suite 100, Indianapolis, Indiana 46240, Attention: Investor Relations.
40
Item 11. Executive Compensation
The information required by Item 11 of this Annual Report will be included in our Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
The information required by Item 12 of this Report will be included in our Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
The information required to be furnished pursuant to Item 13 of this Report will be included in our Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The information required to be furnished pursuant to Item 14 of this Report will be included in our Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.
Part IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this Annual Report:
1. Consolidated Financial Statements
The following Consolidated Financial Statements, together with the Management’s Report on Internal Control, the Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm-Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedule III and Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm-Management’s Assessment of the Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting and the Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting, are listed below:
Management’s Report on Internal Control |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm-Management’s |
Assessment of the Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial |
Reporting and the Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting |
Firm-Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedule III |
Consolidated Balance Sheets, December 31, 2005 and 2004 |
Consolidated Statements of Operations, Years Ended December 31, |
2005, 2004 and 2003 |
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, Years Ended December 31, 2005, 2004 |
and 2003 |
Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity, Years Ended December 31, |
2005, 2004 and 2003 |
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
2. Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule III – Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
41
3. Exhibits
The following exhibits are filed with this Form 10-K or incorporated herein by reference to the listed document previously filed with the SEC. Previously unfiled documents are noted with an asterisk (*).
Number | | Description |
|
3.1 | | Third Restated Articles of Incorporation of Duke Realty Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the SEC on May 13, 2003, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
3.2 | | Third Amended and Restated Bylaws of Duke Realty Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the SEC on May 13, 2003, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
3.3 | | Amendment to the Third Restated Articles of Incorporation of Duke Realty Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on August 25, 2003, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
3.4 | | Amendment to the Third Restated Articles of Incorporation of Duke Realty Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 26, 2003, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
3.5 | | Amendment to the Third Restated Articles of Incorporation of Duke Realty Corporation (filed as Exhibit 3.1 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on November 29, 2004, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by reference). |
| | |
3.6 | | Amendment to the Third Restated Articles of Incorporation of Duke Realty Corporation (designating Series B Preferred Shares).* |
| | |
4.1 | | Indenture, dated September 19, 1995, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on September 22, 1995, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.2 | | First Supplemental Indenture, dated September 19, 1995, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on September 22, 1995, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.3 | | Second Supplemental Indenture, dated April 29, 1996, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on July 12, 1996, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.4 | | Third Supplemental Indenture, dated May 13, 1997, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on May 20, 1997, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.5 | | Fourth Supplemental Indenture, dated August 21, 1997, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.8 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-4, as filed with the SEC on May 4, 1999, File No. 333-77645, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.6 | | Fifth Supplemental Indenture, dated May 27, 1998, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 1, 1998, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | | | |
42
4.7 | | Sixth Supplemental Indenture, dated February 12, 1999, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 12, 1999, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.8 | | Seventh Supplemental Indenture, dated June 18, 1999, between DRLP and The First National Bank of Chicago, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 29, 1999, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.9 | | Eighth Supplemental Indenture, dated November 16, 1999, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on November 15, 1999, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.10 | | Ninth Supplemental Indenture, dated March 5, 2001, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on March 2, 2001, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.11 | | Tenth Supplemental Indenture, dated June 8, 2001, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on August 13, 2001, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.12 | | Eleventh Supplemental Indenture, dated August 26, 2002, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on August 26, 2002, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.13 | | Twelfth Supplemental Indenture, dated January 16, 2003, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on January 16, 2003, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.14 | | Thirteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated May 22, 2003, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on May 22, 2003, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.15 | | Fourteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated October 24, 2003, between DRLP and Bank One Trust Company, N.A., Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on October 24, 2003, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.16 | | Fifteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated January 7, 2004, between DRLP and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on January 9, 2004, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.17 | | Sixteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated January 16, 2004, between DRLP and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on January 23, 2004, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.18 | | Seventeenth Supplemental Indenture, dated August 16, 2004, between DRLP and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on August 18, 2004, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
4.19 | | Eighteenth Supplemental Indenture, dated December 22, 2004, between DRLP and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4 to the DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on December 23, 2004, File No. 000-20625, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
43
10.1 | | Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP, incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to DRLP’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed July 16, 1999. |
| | |
10.2 | | First Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP, dated February 1, 2001 (filed as Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2001, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.3 | | Second Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP, dated February 1, 2001 (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2001, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.4 | | Third Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP, dated February 1, 2001 (filed as Exhibit 10.4 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2001, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.5 | | Fourth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP, dated February 1, 2001 (filed as Exhibit 10.5 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2001, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.6 | | Fifth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP dated August 25, 2003.* |
| | |
10.7 | | Sixth Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP dated February 13, 2004.* |
| | |
10.8 | | Seventh Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of DRLP dated November 30, 2004.* |
| | |
10.9 | | Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership (the “Services Partnership”), dated as of September 30, 1994 (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1994, as filed with the SEC on February 21, 1996, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.10 | | First Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of the Services Partnership, dated July 23, 1998 (filed as Exhibit 10.7 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2002, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated by this reference). |
| | |
10.11 | | Second Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of the Services Partnership, dated October 26, 1995 (filed as Exhibit 10.8 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2002, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated by this reference). |
| | |
10.12 | | Third Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of the Services Partnership, effective as of January 1, 2002 (filed as Exhibit 10.9 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, as filed with the SEC on March 15, 2002, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated by this reference). |
| | |
10.13 | | Promissory Note of the Services Partnership (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-2, as filed with the SEC on June 8, 1993, File No. 33-64038, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
44
10.14 | | Duke Realty Corporation 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (filed as Appendix A to the Company’s Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A, dated March 16, 2005, as filed with the SEC on March 16, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.15 | | Duke Realty Corporation 2005 Shareholder Value Plan, a subplan of the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (filed as Exhibit 99.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on May 3, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.16 | | Duke Realty Corporation Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan, a subplan of the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (filed as Exhibit 99.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K as filed with the SEC on May 3, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.17 | | Amendment One to the Duke Realty Corporation 2005 Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on October 31, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated by this reference).# |
| | |
10.18 | | Amendment Two to the Duke Realty Corporation 2005 Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on February 7, 2006, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated by this reference).# |
| | |
10.19 | | Form of 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan Stock Option Award Certificate (filed as Exhibit 99.4 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on May 3, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.20 | | Form of 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan Award Certificate for Restricted Stock Units and Shareholder Value Plan Awards (filed as Exhibit 99.5 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on May 3, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.21 | | Form of 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Certificate for Non-Employee Directors (filed as Exhibit 99.6 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on May 3, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.22 | | Duke Realty Corporation 2005 DIU Replacement Plan (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on December 9, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.23 | | Form of Forfeiture Agreement/Performance Unit Award Agreement (filed as Exhibit 99.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on December 9, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference).# |
| | |
10.24 | | Acquisition Option Agreement relating to certain properties not contributed to the Operating Partnership by Duke Associates (the “Excluded Properties”), incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the 1993 Registration Statement. |
| | |
10.25 | | Management Agreement relating to the Excluded Properties, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to the 1993 Registration Statement. |
| | |
10.26 | | Indemnification Agreement, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the 1993 Registration Statement. |
| | |
10.27 | | 1995 Key Employee Stock Option Plan of the Company, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1995.# |
45
10.28 | | Amendment One To The 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.19 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.29 | | Amendment Two to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.20 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.30 | | Amendment Three to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.21 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.31 | | Amendment Four to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.32 | | Amendment Five to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.23 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.33 | | Amendment Six to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.24 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.34 | | Amendment Seven to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc., incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002.# |
| | |
10.35 | | Amendment Nine to the 1995 Key Employees’ Stock Option Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc., incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3 of our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2005.# |
| | |
10.36 | | Amended and Restated Dividend Increase Unit Plan of the Services Partnership incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.25 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.37 | | Amendment One to the Amended and Restated Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Services Partnership incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.26 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.38 | | Amendment Two to the Amended and Restated Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Services Partnership incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.27 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.39 | | Amendment Three to the Amended and Restated Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.40 | | Amendment Four to the Amended and Restated Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.30 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004. # |
| | |
10.41 | | 1995 Shareholder Value Plan of the Services Partnership incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1995.# |
46
10.42 | | Amendment One to the 1995 Shareholder Value Plan of Services Partnership incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.29 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.43 | | Amendment Two to the 1995 Shareholder Value Plan of Services Partnership incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.30 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.44 | | Amendment Three to the 1995 Shareholder Value Plan of Services Partnership incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.31 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.# |
| | |
10.45 | | Amendment Four to the 1995 Shareholder Value Plan of Services Partnership, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002.# |
| | |
10.46 | | Amendment Five to the 1995 Shareholder Value Plan of Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 20, 2005.# |
| | |
10.47 | | 1999 Directors’ Stock Option and Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc., incorporated by reference to Annex F to the Prospectus in the Merger Registration Statement.# |
| | |
10.48 | | Amendment One to the 1999 Directors’ Stock Option and Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc., incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.7 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed May 3, 2005.# |
| | |
10.49 | | 1999 Salary Replacement Stock Option and Dividend Increase Unit Plan is incorporated by reference to Annex G to the Prospectus in the Merger Registration Statement.# |
| | |
10.50 | | Amendment One to the 1999 Salary Replacement Stock Option and Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002.# |
| | |
10.51 | | Amendment Two to the 1999 Salary Replacement Stock Option and Dividend Increase Unit Plan of Duke Realty Investments, Inc. incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002.# |
| | |
10.52 | | 2000 Performance Share Plan of Duke-Weeks Realty Corporation incorporated herein by reference to Proposal 2 of our 2001 Proxy Statement filed March 13, 2001. |
| | |
10.53 | | Amendment One to the 2000 Performance Share Plan of Duke-Weeks Realty Corporation incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002. |
| | |
10.54 | | Amendment Two to the 2000 Performance Share Plan of Duke-Weeks Realty Corporation incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.42 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003. |
| | |
10.55 | | Amendment Three to the 2000 Performance Share Plan of Duke-Weeks Realty Corporation, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.7 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed May 3, 2005.# |
| | |
10.56 | | Fifth Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Agreement dated January 25, 2006, among DRLP, as borrower, Duke Realty Corporation as General Partner and Guarantor, and Bank One as Administrative Agent and Lender incorporated by reference from Exhibit 99.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 31, 2006.* |
47
10.57 | | Term Loan Agreement, Dated May 31, 2005, by and between Duke Realty Limited Partnership, Duke Realty Corporation, J.P. Morgan Securities, Inc., JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. and the several banks, financial institutions and other entities from time to time parties thereto as lenders (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on June 6, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.58 | | Contribution Agreement, dated January 1, 2005, by and between Duke Realty Limited Partnership, Duke Management, Inc., Duke Realty Corporation, and Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership, incorporated by reference from Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 4, 2005. |
| | |
10.59 | | Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated January 1, 2005, by and among Duke Realty Corporation, Duke Management, Inc., John W. Wynne, Thomas L. Hefner, Darell E. Zink, Jr., Daniel C. Staton, Gary A. Burk, David R. Mennel and Michael Coletta (filed as Exhibit 2.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on January 4, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
10.60 | | Agreement for Purchase and Sale, dated September 14, 2005, by and among Duke Realty Limited Partnership, of which Duke Realty Corporation is the sole general partner, Duke Realty Ohio, Edenvale Executive Center, LLC, MV Minneapolis Lunar Pointe I LLC, Dugan Realty, LLC, Weeks Development Partnership, Duke Construction Limited Partnership, and FirstCal Industrial 2 Acquisition LLC (incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on September 15, 2005, File No. 001-09044). (1) |
| | |
10.61 | | Form of Letter Agreement Regarding Executive Severance, dated December 13, 2005, between Duke Realty Corporation, as the General Partner of DRLP, and the following executive officers; Dennis D. Oklak, Robert M. Chapman, Matthew A. Cohoat, James B. Connor, Denise K. Dank, Howard L. Feinsand, Robert D. Fessler, Donald Hunter, Steven R. Kennedy, Paul R. Quinn, and Christopher Seger (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed with the SEC on December 19, 2005, File No. 001-09044, and incorporated herein by this reference). |
| | |
11.1 | | Statement of Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges.* |
| | |
11.2 | | Statement of Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Debt Service.* |
| | |
21.1 | | List of the Company’s Subsidiaries.* |
| | |
23.1 | | Consent of KPMG LLP.* |
| | |
24.1 | | Executed Powers of Attorney of certain directors.* |
| | |
31.1 | | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.* |
| | |
31.2 | | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.* |
| | |
32.1 | | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.* ** |
| | |
32.2 | | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.* ** |
| | |
99.1 | | Selected Quarterly Financial Information.* |
# Represents management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
48
* Filed herewith.
** The certifications attached as Exhibits 32.1 and 32.2 accompany this Annual Report on Form 10-K and are “furnished” to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed “filed” by us for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
(1) Confidential treatment of the Agreement for Purchase and Sale was requested.
We will furnish to any security holder, upon written request, copies of any exhibit incorporated by reference, for a fee of 15 cents per page, to cover the costs of furnishing the exhibits. Written requests should include a representation that the person making the request was the beneficial owner of securities entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
(b) Exhibits
The exhibits required to be filed with this Form 10-K pursuant to Item 601 of Regulation S-K are listed under “Exhibits” in Part IV, Item 14(a)(3) of Form 10-K and are incorporated herein by reference.
(c) Financial Statement Schedule
The Financial Statement Schedule required to be filed with this Form 10-K is listed under “Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules” in Part IV, Item 14(a)(2) of this Form 10-K, and is incorporated herein by reference.
49
Management’s Report on Internal Control
We, as management of Duke Realty Corporation and its subsidiaries (“Duke”), are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). Pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the company’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the company’s board of directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedure that:
• Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of assets of the company;
• Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and
• Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Management has evaluated the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on the control criteria established in a report entitled Internal Control – Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on such evaluation, we have concluded that, as of December 31, 2005, our internal control over financial reporting is effective based on these criteria.
The independent registered public accounting firm of KPMG LLP, as auditors of Duke’s consolidated financial statements, has issued an attestation report on management’s assessment of Duke’s internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ Dennis D. Oklak | | /s/ Matthew A. Cohoat | |
Dennis D. Oklak | | Matthew A. Cohoat |
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | | Executive Vice President and |
(Principal Executive Officer) | | Chief Financial Officer |
| | (Principal Financial Officer) |
50
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Shareholders and Directors of
Duke Realty Corporation:
We have audited management’s assessment, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control that Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries’ management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, evaluating management’s assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, management’s assessment that Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by COSO. Also, in our opinion, Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by COSO.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows and shareholders’ equity for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005 and related financial statement schedule III, and our report dated March 3, 2006, expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements and related financial statement schedule III.
KPMG LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
March 3, 2006
51
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Shareholders and Directors of
Duke Realty Corporation:
We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows and shareholders’ equity for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005. In connection with our audits of the consolidated financial statements, we also have audited the financial statement schedule III. These consolidated financial statements and the financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements and the financial statement schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule III, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated March 3, 2006, expressed an unqualified opinion on management’s assessment of, and the effective operation of, internal control over financial reporting.
KPMG LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
March 3, 2006
52
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Balance Sheets
As of December 31,
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
| | | 2005 | | | | 2004 | | |
ASSETS | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Real estate investments: | | | | | | | |
Land and improvements | | $ | 675,050 | | $ | 710,379 | |
Buildings and tenant improvements | | | 4,156,456 | | | 4,666,715 | |
Construction in progress | | | 227,066 | | | 109,788 | |
Investments in unconsolidated companies | | | 301,322 | | | 287,554 | |
Land held for development | | | 429,270 | | | 393,650 | |
| | | 5,789,164 | | | 6,168,086 | |
Accumulated depreciation | | | (754,742) | | | (788,900) | |
| | | | | | | |
Net real estate investments | | | 5,034,422 | | | 5,379,186 | |
| | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | | | 26,732 | | | 5,589 | |
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $1,093 and $1,238 | | | 31,342 | | | 17,127 | |
Straight-line rent receivable, net of allowance of $1,538 and $1,646 | | | 95,948 | | | 89,497 | |
Receivables on construction contracts, including retentions | | | 50,035 | | | 59,342 | |
Deferred financing costs, net of accumulated amortization of $14,113 and $9,006 | | | 27,118 | | | 31,924 | |
Deferred leasing and other costs, net of accumulated amortization of $112,246 and $88,888 | | | 227,648 | | | 203,882 | |
Escrow deposits and other assets | | | 154,315 | | | 110,096 | |
| | $ | 5,647,560 | | $ | 5,896,643 | |
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Indebtedness: | | | | | | | |
Secured debt | | $ | 167,255 | | $ | 203,081 | |
Unsecured notes | | | 2,050,396 | | | 2,315,623 | |
Unsecured line of credit | | | 383,000 | | | - | |
| | | 2,600,651 | | | 2,518,704 | |
| | | | | | | |
Construction payables and amounts due subcontractors, including retentions | | | 93,137 | | | 67,740 | |
Accounts payable | | | 781 | | | 526 | |
Accrued expenses: | | | | | | | |
Real estate taxes | | | 60,883 | | | 55,748 | |
Interest | | | 33,022 | | | 36,531 | |
Other | | | 54,878 | | | 51,514 | |
Other liabilities | | | 133,920 | | | 105,071 | |
Tenant security deposits and prepaid rents | | | 34,924 | | | 39,827 | |
Total liabilities | | | 3,012,196 | | | 2,875,661 | |
| | | | | | | |
Minority interest | | | 182,566 | | | 195,113 | |
| | | | | | | |
Shareholders’ equity: | | | | | | | |
Preferred shares ($.01 par value); 5,000 shares authorized; | | | | | | | |
2,365 shares issued and outstanding | | | 657,250 | | | 657,250 | |
Common shares ($.01 par value); 250,000 shares authorized; | | | | | | | |
134,697 and 142,894 shares issued and outstanding | | | 1,347 | | | 1,429 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 2,266,204 | | | 2,538,461 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | | | (7,118) | | | (6,547) | |
Distributions in excess of net income | | | (464,885) | | | (364,724) | |
Total shareholders’ equity | | | 2,452,798 | | | 2,825,869 | |
| | | | | | | |
| | $ | 5,647,560 | | $ | 5,896,643 | |
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
53
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Operations
For the Years Ended December 31
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
| | | 2005 | | | 2004 | | | 2003 | |
RENTAL OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Revenues: | | | | | | | | |
Rental income from continuing operations | | $ | 676,634 | | $ | 619,569 | | $ | 560,715 | |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated companies | | | 29,549 | | | 21,586 | | | 23,688 | |
| | | 706,183 | | | 641,155 | | | 584,403 | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | | | | | | |
Rental expenses | | | 158,013 | | | 135,049 | | | 121,436 | |
Real estate taxes | | | 82,751 | | | 70,027 | | | 62,825 | |
Interest expense | | | 120,369 | | | 109,923 | | | 100,664 | |
Depreciation and amortization | | | 226,503 | | | 181,443 | | | 151,000 | |
| | | 587,636 | | | 496,442 | | | 435,925 | |
Earnings from continuing rental operations | | | 118,547 | | | 144,713 | | | 148,478 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
SERVICE OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | | | |
Revenues: | | | | | | | | | | |
General contractor gross revenue | | 380,173 | | 357,133 | | 286,689 | |
General contractor costs | | | (348,263) | | | (329,545) | | | (259,930) | |
Net general contractor revenue | | 31,910 | | 27,588 | | 26,759 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Property management, maintenance and leasing fees | | | 15,925 | | | 15,000 | | | 14,731 | |
Construction management and development activity income | | | 30,479 | | | 25,002 | | | 15,486 | |
Other income | | | 3,627 | | | 3,213 | | | 2,480 | |
Total revenue | | | 81,941 | | | 70,803 | | | 59,456 | |
Operating expenses | | | 40,922 | | | 46,382 | | | 37,635 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Earnings from service operations | | | 41,019 | | | 24,421 | | | 21,821 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
General and administrative expense | | | (27,835) | | | (26,278) | | | (21,980) | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Operating income | | | 131,731 | | | 142,856 | | | 148,319 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE) | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | | 5,844 | | | 5,213 | | | 3,556 | |
Earnings from sale of land, depreciable property and ownership | | | | | | | | | | |
interests in unconsolidated companies, net of impairment adjustments | | | 14,201 | | | 10,202 | | | 15,752 | |
Other expenses | | | (1,207) | | | (567) | | | (734) | |
Other minority interest in earnings of subsidiaries | | | (1,438) | | | (1,253) | | | (586) | |
Minority interest in earnings of common unitholders | | | (9,378) | | | (11,619) | | | (12,429) | |
Minority interest in earnings of preferred unitholders | | | - | | | - | | | (1,904) | |
Income from continuing operations | | | 139,753 | | | 144,832 | | | 151,974 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Discontinued operations: | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income from discontinued operations, net of minority interest | | | 11,616 | | | 19,971 | | | 35,506 | |
Gain on sale of discontinued operations, net of impairment | | | | | | | | | | |
adjustments and minority interest | | | 204,293 | | | 23,898 | | | 11,752 | |
Income from discontinued operations | | | 215,909 | | | 43,869 | | | 47,258 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Net income | | | 355,662 | | | 188,701 | | | 199,232 | |
Dividends on preferred shares | | | (46,479) | | (33,777) | | (37,321) | |
Adjustments for redemption of preferred shares | | | - | | | (3,645) | | | - | |
Net income available for common shareholders | | $ | 309,183 | | $ | 151,279 | | $ | 161,911 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Basic net income per common share: | | | | | | | | | | |
Continuing operations | | $ | .66 | | $ | .76 | | $ | .84 | |
Discontinued operations | | | 1.53 | | | .31 | | | .35 | |
Total | | $ | 2.19 | | $ | 1.07 | | $ | 1.19 | |
Diluted net income per common share: | | | | | | | | | | |
Continuing operations | | $ | .65 | | $ | .75 | | $ | .84 | |
Discontinued operations | | | 1.52 | | | .31 | | | .35 | |
Total | | $ | 2.17 | | $ | 1.06 | | $ | 1.19 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding | | | 141,508 | | | 141,379 | | | 135,595 | |
Weighted average number of common and dilutive potential | | | | | | | | | | |
common shares | | | 155,877 | | | 157,062 | | | 151,141 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
54
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the Years Ended December 31
(in thousands)
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Cash flows from operating activities: | | | | | | | |
Net income | $ | 355,662 | | $188,701 | $199,232 | |
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net | | | | | | | |
cash provided by operating activities: | | | | | | | |
Depreciation of buildings and tenant improvements | | 204,377 | | 189,119 | | 168,959 | |
Amortization of deferred leasing and other costs | | 49,793 | | 39,463 | | 27,275 | |
Amortization of deferred financing costs | | 6,154 | | 4,904 | | 3,626 | |
Minority interest in earnings | | 31,493 | | 17,184 | 20,036 | |
Straight-line rent adjustment | | (22,519) | | (22,436) | | (22,387) | |
Earnings from land and depreciated property sales | | (238,060) | | (36,449) | | (28,776) | |
Build-for-sale operations, net | | (6,295) | | (41) | | (20,899) | |
Construction contracts, net | | 16,196 | | (11,047) | | (3,210) | |
Other accrued revenues and expenses, net | | 10,513 | | (4,306) | | 15,989 | |
Operating distributions received in excess of (less than) | | | | | | | |
equity in earnings from unconsolidated companies | | (3,055) | | | 10,447 | | | 8,783 | |
Net cash provided by operating activities | | 404,259 | | | 375,539 | | | 368,628 | |
| | | | | | | |
Cash flows from investing activities: | | | | | | | |
Development of real estate investments | | (209,990) | | (145,629) | | (129,199) | |
Acquisition of real estate investments | | (285,342) | | (204,361) | | (201,819) | |
Acquisition of land held for development and infrastructure costs | | (135,771) | | (113,433) | | (32,944) | |
Recurring tenant improvements | | (60,633) | | (58,847) | | (35,972) | |
Recurring leasing costs | | (33,175) | | (27,777) | | (20,932) | |
Recurring building improvements | | (15,232) | | (21,029) | | (19,544) | |
Other deferred leasing costs | | (19,425) | | (16,386) | | (17,167) | |
Other deferred costs and other assets | | (15,438) | | (15,055) | | (25,264) | |
Proceeds from land and depreciated property sales, net | | 1,134,667 | | 178,301 | | 167,626 | |
Advances to unconsolidated companies | | (31,599) | | | (3,033) | | | (5,481) | |
Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities | | 328,062 | | (427,249) | | (320,696) | |
| | | | | | | |
Cash flows from financing activities: | | | | | | | |
Payments for repurchases of common shares | | (287,703) | | - | | - | |
Proceeds from issuance of common shares, net | | 3,945 | | 12,259 | | 14,026 | |
Proceeds from issuance of preferred shares, net | | - | | 338,360 | | 96,700 | |
Payments for redemption of preferred shares | | - | | (102,652) | | (20) | |
Redemption of warrants | | - | | (2,881) | | (4,692) | |
Redemption of limited partner units | | (2,129) | | - | | - | |
Proceeds from unsecured debt issuance | | 400,000 | | 690,000 | | 425,000 | |
Payments on unsecured debt | | (665,000) | | (150,000) | | (175,000) | |
Proceeds from debt refinancing | | - | | - | | 38,340 | |
Proceeds from issuance of secured debt | | - | | - | | 40,000 | |
Payments on secured indebtedness including principal amortization | | (46,675) | | (39,430) | | (143,542) | |
Borrowings (payments) on lines of credit, net | | 383,000 | | (351,000) | | 46,105 | |
Payment for redemption of preferred units | | - | | - | | (65,000) | |
Distributions to common shareholders | | (264,980) | | (261,061) | | (248,100) | |
Distributions to common shareholders – special dividends | | (143,836) | | - | | - | |
Distributions to preferred shareholders | | (46,479) | | (31,828) | | (37,321) | |
Distributions to preferred unitholders | | - | | - | | (4,859) | |
Distributions to minority interest | | (26,653) | | (26,941) | | (28,484) | |
Distributions to minority interest – special distributions | | (14,069) | | - | - | |
Deferred financing costs | | (599) | | (30,159) | | (5,867) | |
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities | | (711,178) | | 44,667 | | (52,714) | |
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | | 21,143 | | (7,043) | | (4,782) | |
| | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year | | 5,589 | | 12,632 | | 17,414 | |
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year | $ | 26,732 | $ | 5,589 | $ | 12,632 | |
Other non-cash items: | | | | | | |
Assumption of debt for real estate acquisitions | $ | 11,743 | $ | 29,854 | $ | - | |
Contributions of property to unconsolidated companies | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 5,009 | |
Conversion of Limited Partner units to common shares | $ | 18,085 | $ | 25,376 | $ | 26,546 | |
Conversion of Series D preferred shares to common shares | $ | - | $ | 130,665 | $ | - | |
Issuance of Limited Partner Units for real estate acquisitions | $ | - | $ | 7,575 | $ | 3,187 | |
Common shares repurchased and retired, not settled | $ | 9,357 | $ | - | $ | - | |
Issuance of Limited Partner Units for acquisition of minority interest | $ | 15,000 | $ | - | $ | - | |
Acquisition of partners’ interest in unconsolidated companies | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 20,630 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
55
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity
(in thousands, except per share data)
| | | | | | | | Accumulated | | | | | |
| | | | | | Additional | | Other | | Distributions | | | |
| | Preferred | | Common | | Paid-in | | Comprehensive | | In Excess of | | | |
| | Stock | | Stock | | Capital | | Income | | Net Income | | Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance at December 31, 2002 | | $440,889 | | $1,350 | | $2,345,961 | | $(2,111) | | $(168,753) | | $2,617,336 | |
Comprehensive Income: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income | | - | | - | | - | | - | | 199,232 | | 199,232 | |
Distributions to preferred shareholders | | - | | - | | - | | - | | (37,321) | | (37,321) | |
Gains (losses) on derivative instruments | | - | | - | | - | | 2,111 | | - | | | 2,111 | |
Comprehensive income available for common shareholders | | | | | | | | | | | | 164,022 | |
Issuance of common shares | | - | | 7 | | 14,253 | | - | | - | | 14,260 | |
Issuance of preferred shares | | 100,000 | | - | | (3,300) | | - | | - | | 96,700 | |
Acquisition of minority interest | | - | | 9 | | 26,537 | | - | | - | | 26,546 | |
Repurchase of Series D Preferred shares | | (20) | | - | | - | | - | | - | | (20) | |
Conversion of Series D Preferred shares | | (361) | | - | | 361 | | - | | - | | - | |
Redemption of Warrants | | - | | - | | (4,692) | | - | | - | | (4,692) | |
Tax benefits from employee stock plans | | - | | - | | 542 | | - | | - | | 542 | |
FASB 123 compensation expense | | - | | - | | 155 | | - | | - | | 155 | |
Distributions to common shareholders ($1.83 per share) | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (248,100) | | | (248,100) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance at December 31, 2003 | | $540,508 | | $1,366 | | $2,379,817 | | $ - | | $(254,942) | | $2,666,749 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Comprehensive Income: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income | | - | | - | | - | | - | | 188,701 | | 188,701 | |
Distributions to preferred shareholders | | - | | - | | - | | - | | (33,777) | | (33,777) | |
Adjustment for carrying value of preferred stock redemption | | - | | - | | 3,645 | | - | | (3,645) | | - | |
Gains (losses) on derivative instruments | | - | | - | | - | | (6,547) | | - | | | (6,547) | |
Comprehensive income available for common shareholders | | | | | | | | | | | | | 148,377 | |
Issuance of common shares | | - | | 6 | | 12,361 | | - | | - | | 12,367 | |
Issuance of preferred shares | | 350,000 | | - | | (11,688) | | - | | - | | 338,312 | |
Acquisition of minority interest | | - | | 8 | | 25,368 | | - | | - | | 25,376 | |
Conversion of Series D Preferred Shares | | (130,665) | | 49 | | 130,616 | | - | | - | | - | |
Redemption of Series D Preferred Shares | | (2,593) | | - | | (30) | | - | | - | | (2,623) | |
Redemption of Series E Preferred Shares | | (100,000) | | - | | (29) | | - | | - | | (100,029) | |
Exercise of Warrants | | - | | - | | (2,881) | | - | | - | | (2,881) | |
Tax benefits from employee stock plans | | - | | - | | 770 | | - | | - | | 770 | |
FASB 123 compensation expense | | - | | - | | 512 | | - | | - | | 512 | |
Distributions to common shareholders ($1.85 per share) | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (261,061) | | | (261,061) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance at December 31, 2004 | | $657,250 | | $1,429 | | $2,538,461 | | $(6,547) | | $(364,724) | | $2,825,869 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Comprehensive Income: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income | | - | | - | | - | | - | | 355,662 | | 355,662 | |
Distributions to preferred shareholders | | - | | - | | - | | - | | (46,479) | | (46,479) | |
Gains (losses) on derivative instruments | | - | | - | | - | | (571) | | - | | | (571) | |
Comprehensive income available for common shareholders | | | | | | | | | | | | | 308,612 | |
Issuance of common shares | | - | | 2 | | 4,141 | | - | | - | | 4,143 | |
Acquisition of minority interest | | - | | 6 | | 18,079 | | - | | - | | 18,085 | |
Tax benefits from employee stock plans | | - | | - | | 245 | | - | | - | | 245 | |
FASB 123 compensation expense | | - | | - | | 2,032 | | - | | - | | 2,032 | |
Dividends on long-term compensation plans | | - | | - | | 216 | | - | | (216) | | - | |
Retirement of common shares | | - | | (90) | | (296,970) | | - | | - | | (297,060) | |
Distributions to common shareholders ($1.87 per share) | | - | | - | | - | | - | | (265,076) | | (265,076) | |
Distributions to common shareholders - Special ($1.05 per share) | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (144,052) | | | (144,052) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance at December 31, 2005 | | $ | 657,250 | | $ | 1,347 | | $ | 2,266,204 | | $ | (7,118) | | $ | (464,885) | | $ | 2,452,798 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
56
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(1) The Company
Our rental operations are conducted through Duke Realty Limited Partnership (“DRLP”). We owned approximately 91.0% of the common partnership interests of DRLP (“Units”) at December 31, 2005. The remaining Units in DRLP are redeemable for shares of our common stock. We conduct Service Operations through Duke Realty Services LLC (“DRS”) and Duke Realty Services Limited Partnership (“DRSLP”), of which we are the sole general partner and of which DRLP is the sole limited partner. We also conduct Service Operations through Duke Construction Limited Partnership (“DCLP”), which is effectively 100% owned by DRLP. The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and our majority-owned or controlled subsidiaries.
(2) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and our controlled subsidiaries. The equity interests in these controlled subsidiaries not owned by us are reflected as minority interests in the consolidated financial statements. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in the consolidated financial statements. Investments in entities that we do not control through majority voting interest or where the other owner has substantial participating rights are not consolidated and are reflected as investments in unconsolidated companies under the equity method of reporting.
Reclassifications
Certain 2004 and 2003 balances have been reclassified to conform to the 2005 presentation.
Real Estate Investments
Rental real property, including land, land improvements, buildings and building improvements, are included in real estate investments and are generally stated at cost. Buildings and land improvements are depreciated on the straight-line method over their estimated life not to exceed 40 and 15 years, respectively, and tenant improvement costs are depreciated using the straight-line method over the term of the related lease.
Direct and certain indirect costs clearly associated with and incremental to the development, construction, leasing or expansion of real estate investments are capitalized as a cost of the property. In addition, all leasing commissions paid to third parties for new leases or lease renewals are capitalized. We capitalize a portion of our indirect costs associated with our construction/development and leasing efforts. In assessing the amount of direct and indirect costs to be capitalized, allocations are made based on estimates of the actual amount of time spent in each activity. We do not capitalize any costs attributable to downtime or to unsuccessful projects of leasing activities.
Within our Rental Operations, direct and indirect costs are capitalized under the guidelines of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) No. 67, Accounting for Costs and Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Projects (“SFAS 67”), and interest costs are capitalized under the guidelines of SFAS No. 34, Capitalization of Interest Cost (“SFAS 34”). The Company capitalizes these project costs associated with the initial construction of a property up to the time the property is substantially complete and ready for its intended use. In addition, the Company capitalizes costs, including real estate taxes, insurance, and utilities, that have been allocated to vacant space based on the square footage of the portion of the building not held available for immediate occupancy during the extended lease-up periods after construction of the building shell has been completed if costs are being incurred to ready the vacant space for its intended use. If costs and activities incurred to ready the vacant space cease, then cost capitalization is also discontinued until such activities are resumed. Once necessary work has been completed on a vacant space, project costs are no longer capitalized.
57
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
We cease capitalization of all project costs on extended lease-up periods after the shorter of a one-year period after the completion of the building shell or when the property attains 90% occupancy. Tenant improvement costs are generally not incurred on vacant space until a lease is signed and specific improvements are identified in the lease.
Construction in process and land held for development are included in real estate investments and are stated at cost. Real estate investments also include our equity interests in unconsolidated joint ventures that own and operate rental properties and hold land for development. We analyze our investments in joint ventures under Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, to determine if the joint venture is considered a variable interest entity and would require consolidation. The equity method of accounting is used for these investments in which we have the ability to exercise significant influence, but not control, over operating and financial policies. Any difference between the carrying amount of these investments and the underlying equity in net assets is amortized to equity in earnings of unconsolidated companies over the depreciable life of the property, generally 40 years. Distributions received from unconsolidated joint ventures are generated from the operations of the properties in the joint venture and are reflected as an operating activity in our Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long Lived Assets (“SFAS 144”), properties held for rental are individually evaluated for impairment when conditions exist which may indicate that it is probable that the sum of expected future cash flows (on an undiscounted basis) from a rental property over its anticipated holding period is less than its historical net cost basis. Upon determination that a permanent impairment has occurred, a loss is recorded to reduce the net book value of that property to its fair market value. Real properties to be disposed of are reported at the lower of net historical cost basis or the estimated fair market value, less the estimated costs to sell. Once a property is designated as held for disposal, no further depreciation expense is recorded.
In accordance with SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations (“SFAS 141”), we allocate the purchase price of acquired properties to net tangible and identified intangible assets based on their respective fair values. The allocation to tangible assets (buildings, tenant improvements and land) is based upon management’s determination of the value of the property as if it were vacant using discounted cash flow models similar to those used by independent appraisers. Factors considered by management include an estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods considering current market conditions, and costs to execute similar leases. The remaining purchase price is allocated among three categories of intangible assets consisting of the above or below market component of in–place leases, the value of in-place leases and the value of customer relationships.
The value allocable to the above or below market component of an acquired in-place lease is determined based upon the present value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated with the acquired leases) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the lease over its remaining term and (ii) management’s estimate of the amounts that would be paid using fair market rates over the remaining term of the lease. The amounts allocated to above market leases are included in deferred leasing and other costs in the balance sheet and below market leases are included in other liabilities in the balance sheet; both are amortized to rental income over the remaining terms of the respective leases.
The total amount of intangible assets is further allocated to in-place lease values and to customer relationship values based upon management’s assessment of their respective values. These intangible assets are included in deferred leasing and other costs in the balance sheet and are depreciated over the remaining term of the existing lease, or the anticipated life of the customer relationship, as applicable.
58
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Cash Equivalents
Investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased are classified as cash equivalents.
Valuation of Receivables
We reserve the entire receivable balance, including straight-line rent, of any tenant with an amount outstanding over 90 days. Straight-line rent receivables for any tenant with long-term risk, regardless of the status of rent receivables, are reviewed and reserved as necessary.
Deferred Costs
Costs incurred in connection with obtaining financing are amortized to interest expense on the straight-line method, which approximates a constant spread over the term of the related loan. All direct and indirect costs, including estimated internal costs, associated with the leasing of real estate investments owned by us are capitalized and amortized over the term of the related lease. We account for lease incentive costs, which are payments made to or on behalf of a tenant, as an incentive to sign the lease, in accordance with FASB Technical Bulletin (“FTB”) 88-1, Issues Relating to Accounting for Leases. These costs are capitalized in deferred leasing costs and amortized on a straight-line basis over the respective lease terms as a reduction of rental revenues. We include as lease incentives amounts funded to construct tenant improvements owned by the tenant. Unamortized costs are charged to expense upon the early termination of the lease or upon early payment of the financing.
Revenues
Rental Operations
The timing of revenue recognition under an operating lease is determined based upon ownership of the tenant improvements. If we are the owner of the tenant improvements, revenue recognition commences after the improvements are completed and the tenant takes possession or control of the space. In contrast, if we determine that the tenant allowances we are funding are lease incentives, then we commence revenue recognition when possession or control of the space is turned over to the tenant. Rental income from leases with scheduled rental increases during their terms is recognized on a straight-line basis.
Service Operations
Management fees are based on a percentage of rental receipts of properties managed and are recognized as the rental receipts are collected. Maintenance fees are based upon established hourly rates and are recognized as the services are performed. Construction management and development fees represent fee based third party contracts and are recognized as earned based on the terms of the contract, which approximates the percentage of completion method.
We recognize income on construction contracts where we serve as a general contractor on the percentage of completion method. Using this method, profits are recorded based on our estimates of the percentage of completion of individual contracts, commencing when the work performed under the contracts reach a point where the final costs can be estimated with reasonable accuracy. The percentage of completion estimates are based on a comparison of the contract expenditures incurred to the estimated final costs. Changes in job performance, job conditions and estimated profitability may result in revisions to costs and income and are recognized in the period in which the revisions are determined.
59
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Property Sales
Gains from sales of depreciated property are recognized in accordance with SFAS No. 66, Accounting for Sales of Real Estate (“SFAS 66”), and are included in earnings from sales of land and depreciable property dispositions, net of any impairment adjustments, in the Consolidated Statements of Operations if identified as held-for-sale prior to adoption of SFAS 144 and in discontinued operations if identified as held-for-sale after adoption of SFAS 144. The proceeds from the sale of these held-for-rental properties are classified in the investing activities section of the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
Gains or losses from our sale of properties that were developed with the intent to sell and not for long-term rental are recognized in accordance with SFAS 66 and are included in construction management and development activity income in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. All activities and proceeds received from the development and sale of these merchant buildings are classified in the operating activities section of the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
Net Income Per Common Share
Basic net income per common share is computed by dividing net income available for common shares by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted net income per common share is computed by dividing the sum of net income available for common shareholders and the minority interest in earnings allocable to Units not owned by us, by the sum of the weighted average number of common shares outstanding, minority Units outstanding and any dilutive potential common shares for the period.
The following table reconciles the components of basic and diluted net income per common share (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Basic net income available for common shareholders | | $309,183 | | $151,279 | | $161,911 | |
Minority interest in earnings of common unitholders | | | 29,649 | | | 14,966 | | | 17,546 | |
Diluted net income available for common shareholders | | $ | 338,832 | | $ | 166,245 | | $ | 179,457 | |
| | | | | | | |
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding | | 141,508 | | 141,379 | | 135,595 | |
Weighted average partnership units outstanding | | 13,551 | | 13,902 | | 14,685 | |
Weighted average conversion of Series D preferred shares (1) | | - | | 877 | | - | |
Dilutive shares for stock-based compensation plans | | | 818 | | | 904 | | | 861 | |
Weighted average number of common shares and dilutive potential | | | | | | | |
common shares | | | 155,877 | | | 157,062 | | | 151,141 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(1) We called for the redemption of the Series D preferred shares as of March 16, 2004. Prior to the redemption date, nearly 5.3 million Series D preferred shares were converted to 4.9 million common shares. These shares represent the weighted effect, assuming the Series D preferred shares had been converted on January 1, 2004.
The Series D Convertible Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares were anti-dilutive for the year ended December 31, 2003; therefore, no conversion to common shares was included in weighted average dilutive potential common shares.
A joint venture partner in one of our unconsolidated companies has the option to convert a portion of its ownership to our common shares. The effect of this option on earnings per share was anti-dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003.
Federal Income Taxes
We have elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under the Internal Revenue Code. To qualify as a REIT, we must meet a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a
60
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
requirement to distribute at least 90% of our adjusted taxable income to our stockholders. Management intends to continue to adhere to these requirements and to maintain our REIT status. As a REIT, we are entitled to a tax deduction for some or all of the dividends we pay to shareholders. Accordingly, we generally will not be subject to federal income taxes as long as we distribute an amount equal to or in excess of our taxable income currently to shareholders. A REIT generally is subject to federal income taxes on any taxable income that is not currently distributed to its shareholders. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we will be subject to federal income taxes and may not be able to qualify as a REIT for four subsequent taxable years.
REIT qualification reduces, but does not eliminate, the amount of state and local taxes we pay. In addition, our financial statements include the operations of taxable corporate subsidiaries that are not entitled to a dividends paid deduction and are subject to corporate federal, state and local income taxes. As a REIT, we may also be subject to certain federal excise taxes if we engage in certain types of transactions.
The following table reconciles our net income to taxable income before the dividends paid deduction for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Net income | | $ 355,662 | | $ 188,701 | | $ 199,232 | |
Book/tax differences | | | 116,152 | | | 53,817 | | | 35,082 | |
Taxable income before adjustments | | 471,814 | | 242,518 | | 234,314 | |
Less: capital gains | | | (270,854) | | | (38,655) | | | (32,009) | |
Adjusted taxable income subject to 90% | | | | | | | |
dividend requirement | | $ | 200,960 | | | $ | 203,863 | | | $ | 202,305 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Our dividends paid deduction is summarized below (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Cash dividends paid | | $455,606 | | $292,889 | | $284,868 | |
Cash dividends declared and paid in subsequent | | | | | | | |
year that apply to current year | | 16,208 | | - | | - | |
Less: Capital gains distribution | | (270,854) | | (38,655) | | (32,009) | |
Less: Return of capital | | | - | | | (46,694) | | | (46,637) | |
Total dividends paid deduction attributable to | | | | | | | |
adjusted taxable income | | $ | 200,960 | | $ | 207,540 | | $ | 206,222 | |
A summary of the tax characterization of the dividends paid for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 follows:
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Common Shares | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | 44.2 | % | 69.3 | % | 69.7 | % |
Return of capital | | | - | 17.5 | % | 19.1 | % |
Capital gains | | | 55.8 | % | | 13.2 | % | | 11.2 | % |
| | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % |
Preferred Shares | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | 44.2 | % | 86.8 | % | 88.8 | % |
Capital gains | | | 55.8 | % | | 13.2 | % | | 11.2 | % |
| | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % |
We recorded federal and state income taxes of $5.6 million, $5.2 million and $4.0 million for 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, which were primarily attributable to the earnings of our taxable REIT subsidiaries. We paid federal and state income taxes of $8.7 million, $6.2 million and $5.5 million for 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The taxable REIT subsidiaries have no significant deferred income tax items.
61
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Stock Based Compensation
For all issuances of stock-based awards prior to 2002, we apply the recognition and measurement provisions of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations in accounting, for our stock-based compensation.
Accordingly, for stock options granted prior to 2002, no compensation expense is reflected in net income as all options granted had an exercise price equal to the market value of the underlying common shares on the date of the grant.
Effective January 1, 2002, we prospectively adopted the fair value recognition provisions of FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (“SFAS 123”), and applied SFAS 123 to all awards granted after January 1, 2002.
Stock option awards granted under our stock based employee and non-employee compensation plans generally vest over five years at 20% per year. Therefore, the expense related to these plans is less than that which would have been recognized if the fair value method had been applied to all awards since the original effective date of SFAS 123. The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if the fair value method had been applied to all outstanding and unvested stock option awards in each period (in thousands, except per share data).
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Net income available for common shareholders, | | | | | | | |
as reported | | $309,183 | | $151,279 | | $161,911 | |
Add: Stock based compensation | | | | | | | |
expense for stock options included in net income determined | | | | | |
under fair value method | | 1,116 | | 455 | | 155 | |
Deduct: Total stock based compensation | | | | | | | |
expense determined under fair value | | | | | | | |
method for all stock option awards | | | (1,285) | | | (923) | | | (778) | |
Proforma net income available for common | | | | | | | |
shareholders | | | $ | 309,014 | | $ | 150,811 | | $ | 161,288 | |
| | | | | | | |
Basic net income per common share | | | | | | | |
As reported | | $ | 2.19 | | | $ | 1.07 | | | $ | 1.19 | | |
Pro forma | | $ | 2.18 | | | $ | 1.07 | | | $ | 1.19 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Diluted net income per common share | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
As reported | | $ | 2.17 | | | $ | 1.06 | | | $ | 1.19 | | |
Pro forma | | $ | 2.17 | | | $ | 1.06 | | | $ | 1.18 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Financial Instruments
We periodically enter into certain interest rate protection agreements to effectively convert or cap floating rate debt to a fixed rate, and to hedge anticipated future financing transactions, both of which qualify for cash flow hedge accounting treatment under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended (“SFAS 133”). Net amounts paid or received under these agreements are recognized as an adjustment to the interest expense of the corresponding debt. We do not utilize derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes.
SFAS 133 requires that all derivative instruments be recorded on the balance sheet as assets or liabilities at their fair value. Derivatives that are not hedges must be adjusted to fair value through the recording of income or expense. If a derivative qualifies as a cash flow hedge, the change in fair value of the derivative is recognized in other comprehensive income to the extent the hedge is effective, while the ineffective portion
62
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
of the derivative’s change in fair value is recognized in earnings. We estimate the fair value of derivative instruments using standard market conventions and techniques such as discounted cash flow analysis, option pricing models and termination cost at each balance sheet date. For all hedging relationships, we formally document the hedging relationship and its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge, the hedging instrument, the hedged item, the nature of the risk being hedged, how the hedging instrument’s effectiveness in offsetting the hedged risk will be assessed prospectively and retrospectively, and a description of the method of measuring ineffectiveness.
Use Of Estimates
The preparation of the financial statements requires management to make a number of estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
(3) Industrial Portfolio Sale
On September 29, 2005, we completed the sale of a portfolio of 212 real estate properties, consisting of approximately 14.1 million square feet of primarily light distribution and service center properties and approximately 50 acres of undeveloped land (the “Industrial Portfolio Sale”). The purchase price totaled $983 million, of which we received net proceeds of $955 million after the settlement of certain liabilities and transaction costs. Portions of the proceeds were used to pay down $423 million of outstanding debt on our $500 million unsecured line of credit and the entire outstanding balance on our $400 million term loan. The operations for 2005, 2004 and 2003 and the gain for 2005 associated with the properties in the Industrial Portfolio Sale have been reclassified to discontinued operations. For further discussion, see Note 6. As a result of the taxable income generated by the sale, a one-time special cash dividend of $1.05 per share was paid to our common shareholders in the fourth quarter of 2005.
(4) Related Party Transactions
We provide property management, leasing, construction and other tenant related services to unconsolidated companies in which we have equity interests. For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, we received from these unconsolidated companies management fees of $4.8 million, $4.9 million and $4.9 million, leasing fees of $4.3 million, $2.6 million and $2.3 million and construction and development fees of $2.0 million, $1.5 million and $1.4 million. We recorded these fees at market rates and eliminated our ownership percentages of these fees in the consolidated financial statements.
(5) Investments in Unconsolidated Companies
We analyze our investments in joint ventures under FASB Interpretation No. 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (“FIN 46(R)”), to determine if the joint venture is a variable interest entity and would require consolidation. To the extent that our joint ventures do not qualify as variable interest entities, we further assess under the guidelines of Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights (“EITF 04-5”), Statement of Position 78-9, Accounting for Investments in Real Estate Ventures; Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, Consolidated Financial Statements, and FASB No. 94, Consolidation of All Majority-Owned Subsidiaries, to determine if the venture should be consolidated.
63
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
In 2004, we announced a 50/50 joint venture agreement with a medical office developer to develop healthcare facilities. Under the terms of the agreement, we provide the project financing and construction services while our partner provides the business development, leasing and property management of the co-developed properties. We evaluated this partnership under FIN 46(R) and determined that this joint venture qualifies as a variable interest entity subject to consolidation. We are the primary beneficiary as determined under FIN 46(R) and fully consolidate the joint venture.
At December 31, 2005, there were six properties under development with the joint venture. These properties total nearly 470,000 square feet and have an aggregate construction in-process balance of approximately $14.9 million that is consolidated into our balance sheet.
We have equity interests ranging from 10%–64% in unconsolidated joint ventures that own and operate rental properties and hold land for development.
Combined summarized financial information for the unconsolidated companies as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, are as follows (in thousands):
| | | 2005 | | 2004 | | | 2003 | |
Rental revenue | | $ | 163,447 | $ | 167,803 | | $ | 170,227 | |
Net income | | $ | 57,561 | $ | 40,138 | | $ | 41,065 | |
Cash distributions received | | $ | 25,446 | $ | 30,309 | | $ | 30,844 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Land, buildings and tenant improvements, net | | $ | 1,121,254 | $ | 1,158,068 | | | | |
Land held for development | | | 47,936 | | 50,173 | | | | |
Other assets | | | 73,084 | | 62,190 | | | | |
| | $ | 1,242,274 | $ | 1,270,431 | | | | |
Property indebtedness | | $ | 515,192 | $ | 570,941 | | | | |
Other liabilities | | | 58,225 | | 51,377 | | | | |
| | | 573,417 | | 622,318 | | | | |
Owners’ equity | | | 668,857 | | 648,113 | | | | |
| | $ | 1,242,274 | $ | 1,270,431 | | | | |
Our share of the scheduled payments of long term debt for the unconsolidated joint ventures for each of the next five years and thereafter as of December 31, 2005, are as follows (in thousands):
Year | | Future Repayments |
2006 | | $ | 13,740 | |
2007 | | | 46,417 | |
2008 | | | 21,588 | |
2009 | | | 70,491 | |
2010 | | | 100,289 | |
Thereafter | | | 4,411 | |
| | $ | 256,936 | |
The following significant transactions involving the unconsolidated companies have occurred over the past three years:
During 2003, we purchased our partners’ interests in three separate joint ventures. We had a 50% interest in each of these ventures prior to their acquisition. We also sold our 50% interest in two separate joint ventures to our partners. In addition, we contributed cash and undeveloped land to a joint venture that owns undeveloped land and an office building in return for a 50% interest.
64
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(6) Real Estate Investments
We have classified operations of 320 buildings as discontinued operations as of December 31, 2005. These 320 buildings consist of 292 industrial, 23 office and five retail properties. Of these properties, 234 were sold during 2005, 41 properties were sold during 2004, 42 properties were sold during 2003 and three operating properties are classified as held-for-sale at December 31, 2005.
The following table illustrates the major classes of operations affected by the 320 buildings identified as discontinued operations for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Revenues | | $91,663 | | $136,412 | | $158,502 | |
Expenses: | | | | | | | |
Operating | | 28,242 | | 39,499 | | 42,946 | |
Interest | | 22,901 | | 27,686 | | 30,842 | |
Depreciation and Amortization | | 27,667 | | 47,139 | | 45,234 | |
General and Administrative | | | 125 | | | 154 | | | 188 | |
Operating Income | | 12,728 | | 21,934 | | 39,292 | |
Other Income | | - | | - | | 59 | |
Minority interest expense - operating and | | | | | | | |
other income | �� | | (1,112) | | | (1,963) | | | (3,845) | |
Net income from discontinued operations, | | | | | | | |
net of minority interest | | 11,616 | | 19,971 | | 35,506 | |
Gain (loss) on sale of property, net of | | | | | | | |
impairment adjustment | | 223,858 | | 26,247 | | 13,024 | |
Minority interest expense – gain on sales | | | (19,565) | | | (2,349) | | | (1,272) | |
Gain on sale of discontinued operations, | | | | | | | |
net of impairment adjustments and | | | | | | | |
minority interest | | | 204,293 | | | 23,898 | | | 11,752 | |
Income from discontinued operations | | | $215,909 | | | $43,869 | | | $47,258 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
The following table illustrates the balance sheet of the three buildings identified as held-for-sale at December 31, 2005 (in thousands):
Real estate investments, net | | $ | 12,699 |
Other Assets | | | 433 |
Total Assets | | $ | 13,132 |
Accrued Expenses | | $ | 20 |
Other Liabilities | | | 66 |
Equity and minority interest | | | 13,046 |
Total Liabilities and Equity | | $ | 13,132 |
We allocate interest expense to discontinued operations as permitted under EITF 87-24, “Allocation of Interest to Discontinued Operations,” and have included such interest expense in computing net income from discontinued operations. Interest expense allocable to discontinued operations includes interest on the debt for the secured properties and an allocable share of our consolidated unsecured interest expense for unencumbered properties. The allocation of unsecured interest expense to discontinued operations was based upon the Gross Book Value of the discontinued operations unencumbered population as it related to our entire unencumbered population.
At December 31, 2005, we had classified as held-for-sale three industrial properties comprising approximately 366,000 square feet. While we have entered into agreements for the sale of these properties, there can be no assurances that such properties actually will be sold.
In 2005, we recorded $3.7 million of impairment adjustments for two industrial buildings and four office buildings and $259,000 of impairment adjustments for seven land parcels. These adjustments reflect the write-down of the carrying value of the properties to their projected sales prices, less selling expenses, once it became probable that the properties would be sold. One of the industrial buildings is projected to sell in the first quarter of 2006, while the other five buildings and seven land parcels were sold in 2005.
65
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
In 2004, we recorded $424,000 of impairment adjustments for three land parcels. We also recorded a $180,000 impairment adjustment for the industrial building classified as held-for-sale at December 31, 2004. The industrial building was sold in the first quarter of 2005. Each of the land parcel properties was sold in 2004.
In 2003, we recorded $1.1 million of impairment adjustments for one industrial building and three land parcels that were sold in 2003.
(7) Indebtedness
Indebtedness at December 31 consists of the following (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | |
Fixed rate secured debt, weighted average interest rate of 6.13% at December 31, 2005, and 6.51% at December 31, 2004, maturity dates ranging from 2006 to 2017 | | $ | 131,732 | | $ | 163,607 | |
| | | | | |
Variable rate secured debt, weighted average interest rate of 5.75% at December 31, 2005, and 3.43% at December 31, 2004, maturity dates ranging from 2006 to 2025 | | 35,523 | | 39,474 | |
| | | | | |
Fixed rate unsecured notes, weighted average interest rate of 6.02% at December 31, 2005, and 6.02% at December 31, 2004, maturity dates ranging from 2006 to 2028 | | 1,800,396 | | 2,065,623 | |
| | | | | |
Unsecured line of credit, interest rate of 4.83% at December 31, 2005, facility unused at December 31, 2004, maturity date 2007 | | 383,000 | | - | |
| | | | | |
Variable rate unsecured note, interest rate of 4.76% at December 31, 2005, and 2.78% at December 31, 2004, maturity date of 2006 | | | 250,000 | | | 250,000 | |
| | | | | |
| | $2,600,651 | | $ | 2,518,704 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
The fair value of our indebtedness as of December 31, 2005, was $2.7 billion. This fair value amount was calculated using current market rates and spreads available to us on debt instruments with similar terms and maturities.
As of December 31, 2005, the $167.3 million of secured debt was collateralized by rental properties with a carrying value of $346.5 million and by letters of credit in the amount of $10.1 million.
We had one unsecured line of credit available at December 31, 2005, summarized as follows (in thousands):
Description | | Borrowing Capacity | | Maturity Date | | Interest Rate | | | Outstanding at December 31, 2005 | |
Unsecured Line of Credit | | $500,000 | | | January 2007 | | LIBOR + .60% | | $ | 383,000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
The line of credit provides us with an option to obtain borrowings from financial institutions that participate in the line, at rates lower than the stated interest rate, subject to certain restrictions.
In January 2006, we renewed our unsecured revolving credit facility. The new facility provides borrowing capacity up to $1 billion and, subject to certain conditions, may be increased to $1.3 billion. Under the new facility, which replaces the previous unsecured line of credit agreement, we reduced the interest rate by 7.5 basis points to LIBOR plus 52.5 basis points, increased the borrowing capacity by $500 million and extended the maturity date to January 25, 2010.
The line of credit contains various financial covenants that require us to meet defined levels of performance, including variable interest indebtedness, consolidated net worth and debt-to-market capitalization. As of December 31, 2005, we were in compliance with all financial covenants under our line of credit.
66
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
We took the following actions during the year ended December 31, 2005, relevant to our indebtedness:
• In January 2005, we retired our $65.0 million variable-rate term loan.
• In March 2005, we retired $100.0 million of 6.875% senior unsecured debt that matured.
• In May 2005, we obtained a $400.0 million unsecured term loan, which was priced at LIBOR + .30%. This unsecured term loan was paid off in full on September 29, 2005 with proceeds from the Industrial Portfolio Sale.
• In September 2005, we retired $100.0 million of 7.375% senior unsecured debt that matured.
• In September 2005, we paid down the outstanding balance of $423.0 million on our $500.0 million unsecured line of credit with proceeds from the Industrial Portfolio Sale.
At December 31, 2005, the scheduled amortization and maturities of all indebtedness for the next five years and thereafter were as follows (in thousands):
Year | | Amount | |
2006 | | $ | 397,343 | |
2007 | | 604,235 | |
2008 | | 274,607 | |
2009 | | 279,926 | |
2010 | | 179,316 | |
Thereafter | | | 865,224 | |
| | $ | 2,600,651 | |
The amount of interest paid in 2005, 2004 and 2003 was $151.3 million, $136.2 million and $130.1 million, respectively. The amount of interest capitalized in 2005, 2004 and 2003 was $9.5 million, $6.0 million and $6.7 million, respectively.
(8) Segment Reporting
We are engaged in three operating segments, the first two of which consist of the ownership and rental of office and industrial real estate investments (collectively, “Rental Operations”). The third segment consists of our build-to-suit for sale operations and the providing of various real estate services that we provide such as property management, maintenance, leasing, development and construction management to third-party property owners and joint ventures (“Service Operations”). Our reportable segments offer different products or services and are managed separately because each requires different operating strategies and management expertise. During 2005, 2004 and 2003, there were no material intersegment sales or transfers.
Non-segment revenue consists mainly of equity in earnings of unconsolidated companies. Segment FFO (defined below) information is calculated by subtracting operating expenses attributable to the applicable segment from segment revenues. Non-segment assets consist of corporate assets including cash, deferred financing costs and investments in unconsolidated companies. Interest expense and other non-property specific revenues and expenses are not allocated to individual segments in determining our performance measure.
We assess and measure segment operating results based upon an industry performance measure referred to as Funds From Operations (“FFO”), which management believes is a useful indicator of our operating performance. FFO is used by industry analysts and investors as a supplemental operating performance measure of an equity real estate investment trust (“REIT”).
FFO is calculated in accordance with the definition that was adopted by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). FFO, as defined by NAREIT, represents net income (loss) determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
67
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(“GAAP”), excluding extraordinary items as defined under GAAP and gains or losses from sales of previously depreciated operating real estate assets, plus certain non-cash items such as real estate asset depreciation and amortization, and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
The revenues and FFO for each of the reportable segments for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and the assets of each reportable segment as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, are summarized as follows (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Revenues | | | | | | | |
Rental Operations: | | | | | | | |
Office | | $491,895 | | | $448,682 | | | $409,071 | | |
Industrial | | 174,963 | | | 160,709 | | | 142,087 | | |
Service Operations | | | 81,941 | | | | 70,803 | | | | 59,456 | | |
Total Segment Revenues | | | 748,799 | | | | 680,194 | | | | 610,614 | | |
Non-Segment Revenue | | | 39,325 | | | | 31,764 | | | | 33,245 | | |
Consolidated Revenue from continuing operations | | | 788,124 | | | | 711,958 | | | | 643,859 | | |
Discontinued Operations | | | 91,663 | | | | 136,412 | | | | | 158,502 | | |
Consolidated Revenue | | $ | 879,787 | | | $ | 848,370 | | | $ | 802,361 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Funds From Operations | | | | | | | | | | |
Rental Operations: | | | | | | | | | | |
Office | | $301,692 | | | $287,374 | | | $266,641 | | |
Industrial | | 131,063 | | | 123,018 | | | 107,000 | | |
Services Operations | | | 41,019 | | | | 24,421 | | | | 21,821 | | |
Total Segment FFO | | 473,774 | | | 434,813 | | | 395,462 | | |
Non-Segment FFO: | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense | | (120,369) | | | (109,923) | | | (100,664) | | |
Interest income | | 5,844 | | | 5,213 | | | 3,556 | | |
General and administrative expense | | (27,835) | | | (26,278) | | | (21,980) | | |
Gain on land sales, net of impairment | | 14,201 | | | 10,119 | | | 7,135 | | |
Impairment charges on depreciable property | | (3,656) | | | (180) | | | (500) | | |
Other income (expense) on non-segment FFO | | 1,908 | | | 3,533 | | | 2,080 | | |
Minority interest in earnings of subsidiaries | | (1,438) | | | (1,253) | | | (586) | | |
Minority interest in earnings of common unitholders | | (9,378) | | | (11,619) | | | (12,429) | | |
Minority interest in earnings of preferred unitholders | | - | | | - | | | (1,904) | | |
Minority interest share of FFO adjustments | | (3,065) | | | (19,783) | | | (18,854) | | |
Joint venture FFO | | 37,964 | | | 40,488 | | | 42,526 | | |
Dividends on preferred shares | | (46,479) | | | (33,777) | | | (37,321) | | |
Adjustment for redemption of preferred stock | | - | | | (3,645) | | | - | | |
Discontinued operations, net of minority interest | | | 19,718 | | | | 64,761 | | | | 79,468 | | |
Consolidated FFO | | 341,189 | | | 352,469 | | | 335,989 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Depreciation and amortization on continuing operations | | (226,503) | | | (181,443) | | | (151,000) | | |
Depreciation and amortization on discontinued operations | | (27,667) | | | (47,139) | | | (45,234) | | |
Company’s share of joint venture adjustments | | (19,510) | | | (18,901) | | | (18,839) | | |
Earnings from the sale of ownership interest in unconsolidated | | | | | | | | | | |
companies on continuing operations | | - | | | 83 | | | 8,617 | | |
Earnings from depreciated property sales on discontinued operations | | 227,513 | | | 26,427 | | | 13,524 | | |
Earnings from depreciated property sales - share of joint venture | | 11,096 | | | - | | | - | | |
Minority interest share of FFO adjustments | | | 3,065 | | | | 19,783 | | | | 18,854 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income available for common shareholders | | $ | 309,183 | | | $ | 151,279 | | | $ | 161,911 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, 2005 | | December 31, 2004 | |
Assets | | | | | |
Rental Operations | | | | | |
Office | | $ | 3,396,985 | | $ | 3,128,387 | |
Industrial | | 1,577,631 | | 2,211,509 | |
Service Operations | | | 177,463 | | | 131,218 | |
Total Segment Assets | | 5,152,079 | | 5,471,114 | |
Non-Segment Assets | | | 495,481 | | | 425,529 | |
Consolidated Assets | | $ | 5,647,560 | | $ | 5,896,643 | |
In addition to revenues and FFO, we also review our recurring capital expenditures in measuring the performance of our individual Rental Operations segments. These recurring capital expenditures consist of
68
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
tenant improvements, leasing commissions and building improvements. We review these expenditures to determine the costs associated with re-leasing vacant space and maintaining the condition of our properties. Our recurring capital expenditures by segment are summarized as follows for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively (in thousands):
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Recurring Capital Expenditures | | | | | | | |
Office | | $ | 66,890 | | $ | 68,535 | | $ | 44,602 | |
Industrial | | 42,083 | | 39,096 | | 31,711 | |
Non-segment | | | 67 | | | 22 | | | 135 | |
Total | | $ | 109,040 | | $ | 107,653 | | $ | 76,448 | |
(9) Leasing Activity
Future minimum rents due to us under non-cancelable operating leases at December 31, 2005, are as follows (in thousands):
Year | | Amount | |
2006 | | | $558,556 | |
2007 | | | 544,758 | |
2008 | | | 484,239 | |
2009 | | | 413,840 | |
2010 | | | 344,446 | |
Thereafter | | | | 1,105,601 | |
| | $ | 3,451,440 | |
In addition to minimum rents, certain leases require reimbursements of specified operating expenses that amounted to $151.4 million, $137.9 million, and $130.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
(10) Employee Benefit Plans
We maintain a 401(k) plan for full-time employees. We make matching contributions up to an amount equal to three percent of the employee’s salary and may also make annual discretionary contributions. The total expense recognized for this plan was $2.3 million, $1.9 million and $1.6 million for the years ended 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
We make contributions to a contributory health and welfare plan as necessary to fund claims not covered by employee contributions. The total expense we recognized related to this plan was $8.1 million, $7.2 million and $6.4 million for 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. These expense amounts include estimates based upon the historical experience of claims incurred but not reported as of year-end.
(11) Shareholders’ Equity
We periodically access the public equity markets to fund the development and acquisition of additional rental properties or to pay down debt. The proceeds of these offerings are contributed to DRLP in exchange for an additional interest in DRLP.
The following series of preferred stock were outstanding as of December 31, 2005 (in thousands, except percentage data):
| | Shares | | Dividend | | Redemption | | Liquidation | | | |
Description | | Outstanding | | Rate | | Date | | Preference | | Convertible | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Series B Preferred | | 265 | | 7.990 | % | | September 30, 2007 | | $132,250 | | | No | |
Series I Preferred | | 300 | | 8.450 | % | | February 6, 2006 | | 75,000 | | | No | |
Series J Preferred | | 400 | | 6.625 | % | | August 29, 2008 | | 100,000 | | | No | |
Series K Preferred | | 600 | | 6.500 | % | | February 13, 2009 | | 150,000 | | | No | |
Series L Preferred | | 800 | | 6.600 | % | | November 30, 2009 | | 200,000 | | | No | |
69
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
The dividend rate on the Series B preferred shares increases to 9.99% after September 12, 2012.
All series of preferred shares require cumulative distributions and have no stated maturity date (although we may redeem them on or following their optional redemption dates).
At our option, we may redeem, in whole or in part, the Series B, Series I, Series J, Series K and Series L preferred shares described in this section.
Pursuant to the $750 million share repurchase plan that was approved by our board of directors, we paid approximately $297.1 million for 8,995,775 of our common shares at an average price of $33.02 per share during the year ended December 31, 2005. From time to time, management may repurchase additional common shares pursuant to our share repurchase plan. The timing and amount of future share repurchases will depend on business and market conditions, as well as legal and regulatory considerations.
In January 2006, we issued $184 million of 6.95% Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, which replaced our $75 million 8.45% Series I Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock that we redeemed in February 2006.
(12) Stock Based Compensation
Our stock based employee and non-employee compensation plans are described more fully below. We are authorized to issue up to 11,320,552 shares of our common stock under these compensation plans.
Fixed Stock Option Plans
We had options outstanding under six fixed stock option plans as of December 31, 2005. Additional grants may be made under one of those plans.
A summary of the status of our fixed stock option plans as of December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 and changes during the years ended on those dates follows:
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
| | Shares | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | Shares | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | Shares | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | |
Outstanding, beginning of year | | 3,352,469 | | $24.51 | | | 3,586,360 | | $ | 22.65 | | 3,920,198 | | $ | 22.09 | |
Granted | | 812,684 | | 32.27 | | | 506,688 | | 32.49 | | 609,390 | | 25.48 | |
Granted for modification of awards (1) | | 110,351 | | 26.09 | | | - | | - | | - | | - | |
Exercised | | (303,099) | | 21.78 | | | (728,250) | | 20.85 | | (773,625) | | 21.87 | |
Forfeited | | | (144,248) | | 28.58 | | | | (12,329) | | 27.20 | | | (169,603) | | 23.63 | |
Outstanding, end of year | | | 3,828,157 | | 25.50 | | | | 3,352,469 | | 24.51 | | | 3,586,360 | | 22.65 | |
Options exercisable, | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
end of year | | | 2,116,951 | | | | | 1,844,256 | | | | | 2,014,875 | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Weighted-average fair value of options granted during the year (1) | | $ | 2.55 | | | | $ | 2.84 | | | | $ | 1.81 | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(1) The 110,351 options granted for modification of awards represent options granted as a result of modification of the options outstanding at November 9, 2005. The purpose of the modification was to equalize the value of the options before and after the one-time special dividend of $1.05 per share. This special dividend was paid in December 2005 in order to maintain our compliance with the minimum distribution requirements of a REIT as a result of the significant gain realized on the Industrial Portfolio Sale discussed in Note 3. The weighted-average fair value of options granted during the year, excluding the options granted as a result of the modification, is $3.04.
The fair values of the options were determined using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions:
70
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
| | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | |
Dividend yield | | 6.25 | % | | 6.50 | % | | | 7.25% | |
Volatility | | 20.0 | % | | 20.0 | % | | | 20.0% | |
Risk-free interest rate | | 3.8 | % | | 3.6 | % | | | 3.2% | |
Expected life | | 6 years | | | 6 years | | | | 6 years | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
The options outstanding at December 31, 2005, under the fixed stock option plans have a range of exercise prices from $18.30 to $33.16 with a weighted average exercise price of $25.50 and a weighted average remaining contractual life of 6.09 years. The options exercisable at December 31, 2005 have a weighted average exercise price of $22.65.
Each option’s maximum term is ten years. With limited exceptions, options vest at 20% per year, or, if earlier, upon the death, retirement or disability of the optionee or a change in control of the Company.
Performance Based Stock Plans
Performance shares are granted under the 2000 Performance Share Plan, with each performance share economically equivalent to one share of our common stock. The performance shares vest over a five-year period with the vesting percentage for a year dependent upon our attainment of certain predefined levels of earnings growth for such year. The value of vested performance shares are payable in cash upon the retirement or termination of employment of the participant. At December 31, 2005, plan participants had the right to receive up to 183,467 performance shares, of which 84,466 were vested and 99,001 were contingent upon future earnings achievement. Under our 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan approved in April 2005, additional performance shares may be granted on such terms and conditions as may be selected by our compensation committee, including whether payment will be made in cash, shares of our common stock, DRLP units or other property. There were no such grants made in 2005.
The amount of compensation cost was based upon the intrinsic value of the vested performance shares at the end of each applicable reporting period. The compensation cost that was charged against income for this plan was $1.3 million, $1.7 million and $529,000 for 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
In October 2002, we amended our 1995 Shareholder Value Plan (“SVP Plan”) and 1995 Dividend Increase Unit Plans (“DIU Plans”) by requiring that all payouts under these two plans to be in cash only. Payments made under this SVP Plan are based upon our cumulative shareholder return for a three-year period as compared to the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 and the NAREIT Equity REIT Total Return indices. Payments under the DIU Plans are based upon increases in our dividend per common share. The total compensation cost that was charged against income for these two plans was $1.4 million, $2.3 million and $1.6 million for 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
Our 2005 Shareholder Value Plan, a sub-plan of our 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan, was approved by our shareholders in April 2005. Upon vesting, payout of the 2005 Shareholder Value Plan awards will be made in shares of our common stock. Under this plan, shareholder value awards fully vest three years after the date of grant. The number of common shares to be issued will be based upon our total shareholder return for such three-year period as compared to the S & P 500 Index and the NAREIT Real Estate 50 Index. Each index is weighted at 50%. The fair value of awards granted under our 2005 Shareholder Value Plan is $1.3 million, which was determined using a Monte Carlo simulation. The valuation model was developed to accommodate the unique features of the plan. The total compensation cost that was charged against income for the 2005 Shareholder Value Plan award was $438,000 for 2005.
71
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Restricted Stock Units
Under our 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan and our 2005 Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan approved by our shareholders in April 2005, restricted stock units (“RSUs”) were granted to non-employee directors, executive officers and selected management employees in 2005. An RSU is economically equivalent to one share of our common stock. RSUs vest 20% per year over five years and are payable in shares of our common stock. We recognize the value of the granted RSUs over this vesting period as expense. We granted 177,613 RSUs during 2005, of which 4,702 were forfeited as a result of participant terminations and 816 were issued as a result of participant retirement. The remaining 172,095 unvested RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2005 had a total value of $5.5 million. Of the total value of the RSUs outstanding, we have recognized $408,000 as compensation expense for executive officers and selected management employees, and $71,000 as general and administrative expense for non-employee directors through December 31, 2005.
In addition, all RSUs earn dividend equivalents that are deemed to be reinvested in additional RSUs. Dividend equivalents vest immediately and will be paid in shares of our common stock when the corresponding portion of the original RSU award vests or upon termination of the participant. Dividend equivalents of 6,474 RSUs were earned in 2005 on the RSU awards granted during the year, of which 6,391 were outstanding at December 31, 2005. A charge to retained earnings of $216,000 was recorded for the value of these dividend equivalents in 2005.
Directors Stock Payment Plan
Our 2005 Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan was approved by our shareholders in April 2005 and supercedes our 1996 Directors’ Stock Payment Plan and our 1999 Directors’ Stock Option and Dividend Increase Unit Plan. Under our 2005 Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan, non-employee members of our board of directors were entitled to 1,600 shares of our common stock per year as partial compensation for services as a board member. The shares are fully vested when issued and we record the value of the shares as an expense. The amount of that expense was $585,000, $525,000 and $415,000 for 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. On October 26, 2005, our Board of Directors amended our 2005 Non-Employee Directors Compensation Plan to, among other items, determine the number of shares of common stock granted to each non-employee director as this partial compensation by reference to a fixed dollar amount of $15,000 per quarter, as opposed to a fixed number of shares.
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
Under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan, employees are entitled to purchase our common stock at a 15% discount through payroll deductions. Under SFAS 123, we are required to record the amount of the discount as compensation expense. The amount of that expense for 2005, 2004 and 2003 was $305,000, $255,000 and $219,000, respectively.
(13) Financial Instruments
We are exposed to capital market risk, such as changes in interest rates. In order to manage the volatility relating to interest rate risk, we may enter into interest rate hedging arrangements from time to time. We do not utilize derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes. We account for derivative instruments under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (“SFAS 133”), as amended by SFAS No. 138, Accounting for Certain Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activities (“SFAS 138”).
72
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
In March 2005, we entered into $300.0 million of cash flow hedges through forward-starting interest rate swaps to hedge interest rates on $300.0 million of estimated debt offerings in 2006. The swaps qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS 133, as amended by SFAS 138, with any changes in fair value recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“OCI”). The market value of these interest rate swaps is dependent upon existing market interest rates, which change over time. At December 31, 2005, the estimated fair value of the swaps was a liability of approximately $6.6 million. The effective rates of the swaps were higher than interest rates at December 31, 2005.
In August 2005, we entered into $300.0 million of cash flow hedges through forward-starting interest rate swaps to hedge interest rates on $300.0 million of estimated debt offerings in 2007. The swaps qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS 133, as amended by SFAS 138, with any changes in fair value recorded in OCI. At December 31, 2005, the fair value of these swaps was an asset of $5.3 million. The effective rates of the swaps were lower than interest rates at December 31, 2005.
In June 2004, we simultaneously entered into three forward-starting interest rate swaps aggregating $144.3 million, which effectively fixed the rate on financing expected in 2004 at 5.346%, plus our credit spread over the swap rate. The swaps qualified for hedge accounting under SFAS 133; therefore, changes in the fair value were recorded in OCI. In August 2004, we settled these three swaps when we issued $250.0 million of unsecured notes with an effective interest rate of 6.33%, due in 2014. We paid $6.85 million to unwind the swaps, which is amortized from OCI into interest expense over the life of the new 6.33% notes.
In December 2002, we simultaneously entered into two $50 million forward-starting interest rate swaps as a hedge to effectively fix the rate on unsecured debt financings expected in 2003. Then again in February 2003, we simultaneously entered into two additional $25 million forward-starting interest rate swaps as a hedge to effectively fix the rate on unsecured debt financings expected in 2003. All four swaps qualified for hedge accounting under SFAS 133; therefore, changes in fair value were recorded in OCI. In July 2003, we terminated the swaps for a net gain of $643,000, which is included in other revenue in the Statements of Operations. The swaps were terminated because our capital needs were met through the issuance of the Series J Preferred Stock in lieu of the previously contemplated issuance of debt.
In May 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity (“SFAS 150”). SFAS 150 establishes standards for classifying and measuring as liabilities certain financial instruments that embody obligations of the issuer and have characteristics of both liabilities and equity. SFAS 150 was effective for all financial instruments created or modified after May 31, 2003, and otherwise was effective July 1, 2003. We consolidated the operations of one joint venture in our consolidated financial statements at December 31, 2005. This joint venture is partially owned by unaffiliated parties that have noncontrolling interests. SFAS 150 requires the disclosure of the estimated settlement value of these noncontrolling interests. As of December 31, 2005, the estimated settlement value of the noncontrolling interest in this consolidated joint venture was approximately $1.1 million, as compared to the $24,000 receivable reported in our financial statements for this joint venture.
(14) Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2004, FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (R), Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock Based Compensation. In April 2005, the SEC delayed the effective date on SFAS No. 123 (R) from July 2005 to January 2006. We have completed our preliminary evaluation of the impact of SFAS No. 123 (R) and have determined that the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle will be insignificant to our results of operations. We have selected the modified-prospective method for the adoption of SFAS No. 123 (R).
73
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
In March 2005, FASB Interpretation No. 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations (“FIN 47”), was issued for all fiscal years ending after December 15, 2005. This is an interpretation of SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligation. Upon evaluation, we have determined that the adoption of FIN 47 did not have a material impact on our financial statements.
In June 2005, FASB ratified the consensus reached in Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights (“EITF 04-5”). EITF 04-5 is effective for all newly formed limited partnerships after the consensus was ratified and as of January 2006 for all preexisting limited partnership agreements. This consensus applies to limited partnerships or similar entities, such as limited liability companies that have governing provisions that are the functional equivalent of a limited partnership. We have evaluated the ownership structure of our existing investments in unconsolidated companies and determined that we do not exercise control over any unconsolidated ventures as defined by EITF 04-5.
(15) Commitments and Contingencies
In October 2000, we sold or contributed industrial properties and undeveloped land with a fair value of $487 million to a joint venture (Dugan Realty LLC) in which we have a 50% interest and recognized a net gain of $35.2 million. This transaction expanded an existing joint venture with an institutional real estate investor. As a result of the total transactions, we received $363.9 million of proceeds. The joint venture partially financed this transaction with $350 million of secured mortgage debt, the repayment of which we directly or indirectly guaranteed. The guarantee associated with $260 million of such debt expired in December 2003 without us being required to satisfy the guarantee. The remaining $90 million of such debt is still guaranteed by us. In connection with this transaction, the joint venture partners were given an option to put up to a $50 million interest in the joint venture to us in exchange for our common stock or cash (at our option), subject to certain timing and other restrictions. As a result of this put option, we deferred $10.2 million of gain on sale of depreciated property and recorded a $50 million liability.
We have guaranteed the repayment of $12.3 million of economic development bonds issued by various municipalities in connection with certain commercial developments. We will be required to make payments under our guarantees to the extent that incremental taxes from specified developments are not sufficient to pay the bond debt service. Management does not believe that it is probable that we will be required to make any significant payments in satisfaction of these guarantees.
We also have guaranteed the repayment of a $2 million mortgage loan encumbering the real estate of one of our unconsolidated joint ventures. At December 31, 2005, the outstanding balance on this loan was approximately $1.2 million. Management believes that the value of the real estate exceeds the loan balance and that we will not be required to satisfy this guarantee.
We evaluated all applicable guarantees under FASB Interpretation 45 (“FIN 45”) in order to determine whether there is a need to recognize a liability for the obligations under the guarantees. Based upon our review, no liability was recorded at December 31, 2005.
We have entered into agreements, subject to the completion of due diligence requirements, resolution of certain contingencies and completion of customary closing conditions, for the future acquisition of land totaling $65.0 million. We also have entered into an agreement to acquire an 18 building portfolio for approximately $194.1 million, which is expected to close in 2006.
74
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
We renewed all of our major insurance policies in 2005. These policies include coverage for acts of terrorism for our properties. We believe that this insurance provides adequate coverage against normal insurance risks and that any loss experienced would not have a significant impact on our liquidity, financial position, or results of operations.
We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect our consolidated financial statements or results of operations.
(16) Subsequent Events
In January 2006, we announced the acquisition of approximately 5.1 million square feet of bulk industrial properties located at the Port of Savannah for a total purchase price of approximately $194.1 million. The portfolio consists of 18 buildings and is located near one of the fastest growing ports in the country. The properties are 100% leased with a weighted average lease term of 7.5 years. This transaction makes us the largest industrial property owner in the Savannah area and complements our industrial holdings across the Southeast. In addition, we have the option to acquire future completed development projects on 400 acres of land in the same market.
In January 2006, we issued $184 million of 6.95% Series M Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, which replaced our $75 million 8.45% Series I Preferred Stock that we redeemed in February 2006.
In January 2006, we renewed our unsecured revolving credit facility. The new facility provides borrowing capacity up to $1 billion and, subject to certain conditions, may be increased to $1.3 billion. Under the new facility, which replaces the previous unsecured line of credit agreement, the interest rate has been reduced to LIBOR plus 52.5 basis points, the borrowing capacity has been increased by $500 million and the maturity date has been extended to January 25, 2010.
In February 2006, we issued $125.0 million of 5.5% senior notes due 2016.
In February 2006, we acquired 27 suburban office and light industrial buildings, encompassing more than 2.3 million square feet from the Mark Winkler Company for $619.0 million. The 27 buildings are part of a 32 building portfolio located in three primary submarkets in Northern Virginia. We will close on the remaining five buildings in the portfolio throughout the first and second quarters of 2006. In addition to the 27 buildings we also closed on approximately 166 acres of undeveloped land located in major business parks that can support the future development of approximately 3.7 million square feet of office and industrial buildings. In connection with the acquisition, we obtained a $700 million secured term loan priced at LIBOR plus 52.5 basis points with a scheduled maturity date of September 2006. Subject to Lender’s approval, the maturity date may be extended to March 2007.
75
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION | | Schedule 3 |
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION | | |
DECEMBER 31, 2005 | | |
(in thousands) | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ALPHARETTA, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Brookside Office Park | | Radiant I | | Office | | - | | 1,269 | | 14,705 | | 53 | | 1,269 | | 14,757 | | 16,026 | | 2,407 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Brookside Office Park | | Brookside I | | Office | | - | | 1,625 | | 9,060 | | 3,637 | | 1,625 | | 12,698 | | 14,323 | | 2,186 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Brookside Office Park | | Radiant II | | Office | | - | | 831 | | 7,265 | | 177 | | 831 | | 7,442 | | 8,273 | | 900 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Brookside Office Park | | Brookside II | | Office | | - | | 1,381 | | 12,146 | | 1,422 | | 1,381 | | 13,569 | | 14,950 | | 2,422 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Hembree Crest | | 11415 Old Roswell Road | | Industrial | | - | | 648 | | 2,454 | | 1,055 | | 648 | | 3,509 | | 4,157 | | 973 | | 1991 | | 1999 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds VII | | Office | | - | | 2,271 | | 20,017 | | 1,193 | | 2,304 | | 21,177 | | 23,481 | | 3,604 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds I | | Office | | - | | 1,879 | | 15,933 | | - | | 1,879 | | 15,933 | | 17,812 | | 1,296 | | 1997 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds II | | Office | | - | | 1,796 | | 16,533 | | - | | 1,796 | | 16,533 | | 18,329 | | 1,489 | | 1997 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds III | | Office | | 16,976 | | 1,868 | | 16,128 | | - | | 1,868 | | 16,128 | | 17,996 | | 1,329 | | 1998 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds IV | | Office | | 16,157 | | 1,844 | | 16,089 | | - | | 1,844 | | 16,089 | | 17,933 | | 1,302 | | 1999 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds V | | Office | | - | | 2,215 | | 15,522 | | - | | 2,215 | | 15,522 | | 17,736 | | 1,285 | | 1999 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds VI | | Office | | - | | 2,662 | | 15,600 | | - | | 2,662 | | 15,600 | | 18,262 | | 1,317 | | 2000 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds Village | | Retail | | - | | 704 | | 4,453 | | - | | 704 | | 4,453 | | 5,157 | | 229 | | 2000 | | 2004 | |
Northwinds Pointe | | Northwinds Restaurant | | Retail | | - | | 202 | | 329 | | - | | 202 | | 329 | | 531 | | 21 | | 1998 | | 2004 | |
10745 Westside Parkway | | 10745 Westside Parkway | | Office | | - | | 925 | | 5,810 | | 292 | | 925 | | 6,102 | | 7,027 | | 1,171 | | 1995 | | 1999 | |
Ridgeland | | 1320 Ridgeland Parkway | | Industrial | | - | | 998 | | 5,874 | | 52 | | 998 | | 5,927 | | 6,924 | | 953 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Ridgeland | | Ridgeland Business Dist I | | Industrial | | - | | 488 | | 2,186 | | 796 | | 488 | | 2,981 | | 3,469 | | 365 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Ridgeland | | Ridgeland Business Dist. II | | Industrial | | - | | 579 | | 2,529 | | 246 | | 579 | | 2,775 | | 3,354 | | 786 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Preston Ridge | | Preston Ridge IV | | Office | | - | | 2,777 | | 13,300 | | - | | 2,777 | | 13,299.61 | | 16,076 | | 1,430 | | 2000 | | 2004 | |
Windward | | 800 North Point Parkway | | Office | | - | | 1,250 | | 18,443 | | - | | 1,250 | | 18,443 | | 19,693 | | 1,360 | | 1991 | | 2003 | |
Windward | | 900 North Point Parkway | | Office | | - | | 1,250 | | 13,945 | | - | | 1,250 | | 13,945 | | 15,195 | | 1,039 | | 1991 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ANTIOCH, TENNESSEE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jackson Business Center | | Owen Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 157 | | 1,298 | | 117 | | 157 | | 1,415 | | 1,571 | | 357 | | 1985 | | 1995 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Arlington Business Park | | Atrium II | | Office | | - | | 776 | | 6,921 | | 1,433 | | 776 | | 8,354 | | 9,130 | | 1,718 | | 1986 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ATLANTA, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Druid Chase | | 6 West Druid Hills Drive | | Office | | - | | 473 | | 6,758 | | 2,444 | | 473 | | 9,202 | | 9,675 | | 1,625 | | 1968 | | 1999 | |
Druid Chase | | 2801 Buford Highway | | Office | | - | | 794 | | 9,625 | | 1,872 | | 794 | | 11,498 | | 12,292 | | 2,023 | | 1977 | | 1999 | |
Druid Chase | | 1190 West Druid Hills Drive | | Office | | - | | 689 | | 6,631 | | 1,141 | | 689 | | 7,772 | | 8,461 | | 1,313 | | 1980 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AURORA, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 535 Exchange | | Industrial | | - | | 386 | | 920 | | 99 | | 386 | | 1,019 | | 1,405 | | 206 | | 1984 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 525 North Enterprise Street | | Industrial | | - | | 342 | | 1,678 | | 110 | | 342 | | 1,788 | | 2,131 | | 352 | | 1984 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 615 North Enterprise Street | | Industrial | | - | | 468 | | 2,824 | | 649 | | 468 | | 3,473 | | 3,941 | | 685 | | 1984 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 3615 Exchange | | Industrial | | - | | 410 | | 1,603 | | 92 | | 410 | | 1,695 | | 2,105 | | 350 | | 1986 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 4000 Sussex Avenue | | Industrial | | - | | 417 | | 1,940 | | 292 | | 417 | | 2,232 | | 2,650 | | 550 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 3737 East Exchange | | Industrial | | - | | 598 | | 2,543 | | 166 | | 598 | | 2,709 | | 3,307 | | 532 | | 1985 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 444 North Commerce Street | | Industrial | | - | | 722 | | 5,411 | | 596 | | 722 | | 6,007 | | 6,730 | | 1,222 | | 1985 | | 1999 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 880 North Enterprise Street | | Industrial | | - | | 1,150 | | 5,845 | | 385 | | 1,150 | | 6,231 | | 7,381 | | 1,124 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | Meridian Office Service Center | | Industrial | | - | | 567 | | 1,283 | | 1,701 | | 567 | | 2,984 | | 3,551 | | 300 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Meridian Business Campus | | Genera Corporation | | Industrial | | - | | 1,957 | | 3,827 | | - | | 1,957 | | 3,827 | | 5,784 | | 228 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BEACHWOOD, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
One Corporate Exchange | | One Corporate Exchange | | Office | | 3,850 | | 1,287 | | 8,621 | | 1,395 | | 1,287 | | 10,016 | | 11,303 | | 2,556 | | 1989 | | 1996 | |
Corporate Place | | Corporate Place | | Office | | - | | 1,161 | | 7,735 | | 898 | | 1,163 | | 8,631 | | 9,794 | | 2,209 | | 1988 | | 1996 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BERRY HILL, TN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Four-Forty Business Center | | Four-Forty Business Center I | | Industrial | | - | | 938 | | 6,462 | | 40 | | 938 | | 6,501 | | 7,440 | | 1,048 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Four-Forty Business Center | | Four-Forty Business Center III | | Industrial | | - | | 1,812 | | 7,579 | | 238 | | 1,812 | | 7,817 | | 9,629 | | 1,343 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Four-Forty Business Center | | Four-Forty Business Center IV | | Industrial | | - | | 1,522 | | 5,750 | | 277 | | 1,522 | | 6,027 | | 7,549 | | 1,128 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Four-Forty Business Center | | Four-Forty Business Center V | | Industrial | | - | | 471 | | 3,321 | | 527 | | 471 | | 3,847 | | 4,319 | | 1,044 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Alpha Business Center | | Alpha Business Ctr I&II | | Office | | - | | 280 | | 1,579 | | 329 | | 280 | | 1,908 | | 2,188 | | 429 | | 1980 | | 1999 | |
76
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Alpha Business Center | | Alpha Business Ctr III&IV | | Industrial | | - | | 341 | | 1,911 | | 355 | | 341 | | 2,265 | | 2,607 | | 463 | | 1980 | | 1999 | |
Alpha Business Center | | Alpha Business Ctr V | | Industrial | | - | | 537 | | 3,021 | | 323 | | 538 | | 3,343 | | 3,881 | | 608 | | 1980 | | 1999 | |
Hampshire Dist. Center | | Hampshire Dist Center North | | Industrial | | 1,674 | | 779 | | 4,500 | | 262 | | 779 | | 4,763 | | 5,541 | | 963 | | 1979 | | 1997 | |
Hampshire Dist. Center | | Hampshire Dist Center South | | Industrial | | 1,957 | | 901 | | 5,229 | | 314 | | 901 | | 5,542 | | 6,443 | | 1,236 | | 1979 | | 1997 | |
Norman Pointe Business Center | | Norman Pointe I | | Office | | - | | 3,650 | | 28,211 | | 2,031 | | 3,650 | | 30,242 | | 33,892 | | 4,799 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BLUE ASH, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Alliance Woods | | McAuley Place | | Office | | - | | 2,331 | | 18,596 | | 1,399 | | 2,331 | | 19,995 | | 22,325 | | 2,976 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Huntington Bank Building | | Huntington Bank Building | | Office | | - | | 175 | | 241 | | - | | 175 | | 241 | | 416 | | 57 | | 1986 | | 1996 | |
Lake Forest/Westlake | | Lake Forest Place | | Office | | - | | 1,953 | | 20,060 | | 2,603 | | 1,953 | | 22,662 | | 24,615 | | 6,079 | | 1985 | | 1996 | |
Northmark Office Park | | Northmark Building 1 | | Office | | - | | 1,452 | | 5,272 | | - | | 1,452 | | 5,272 | | 6,723 | | 782 | | 1987 | | 2004 | |
Northmark Office Park | | Northmark Building 2 | | Office | | - | | 1,386 | | 5,136 | | - | | 1,386 | | 5,136 | | 6,522 | | 477 | | 1984 | | 2004 | |
Lake Forest/Westlake | | Westlake Center | | Office | | - | | 2,459 | | 16,702 | | 2,902 | | 2,459 | | 19,604 | | 22,063 | | 4,986 | | 1981 | | 1996 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BOLINGBROOK, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Joliet Road Business Park | | 555 Joliet Road, Bolingbrook | | Industrial | | - | | 2,184 | | 9,284 | | 345 | | 2,332 | | 9,481 | | 11,813 | | 944 | | 1967 | | 2002 | |
Joliet Road Business Park | | Dawes Transportation | | Industrial | | - | | 3,050 | | 4,308 | | - | | 3,050 | | 4,308 | | 7,357 | | 121 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BRANDON, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Regency Park North | | Regency I | | Office | | - | | 1,048 | | 4,230 | | 896 | | 1,048 | | 5,127 | | 6,175 | | 1,765 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Regency Park North | | Regency II BTS-Coca-Cola | | Office | | - | | 1,411 | | 3,722 | | - | | 1,411 | | 3,722 | | 5,133 | | 1,000 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BRASELTON, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Braselton Business Park | | Braselton II | | Industrial | | - | | 1,365 | | 9,505 | | 1,536 | | 1,884 | | 10,522 | | 12,407 | | 1,274 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Park 85 at Braselton | | Park 85 @ Braselton Bldg 625 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,331 | | 12,646 | | - | | 2,331 | | 12,646 | | 14,977 | | 109 | | 2004 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BRENTOOD, TENNESSEE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Business Center IV | | Industrial | | - | | 492 | | 2,416 | | 23 | | 492 | | 2,439 | | 2,931 | | 277 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Brentwood South Bus. Center | | Brentwood South Bus Ctr I | | Industrial | | - | | 1,065 | | 5,985 | | 727 | | 1,065 | | 6,712 | | 7,778 | | 1,251 | | 1987 | | 1999 | |
Brentwood South Bus. Center | | Brentwood South Bus Ctr II | | Industrial | | - | | 1,065 | | 2,832 | | 957 | | 1,065 | | 3,789 | | 4,854 | | 660 | | 1987 | | 1999 | |
Brentwood South Bus. Center | | Brentwood South Bus Ctr III | | Industrial | | - | | 848 | | 4,130 | | 561 | | 848 | | 4,690 | | 5,538 | | 885 | | 1989 | | 1999 | |
Creekside Crossing | | Creekside Crossing I | | Office | | - | | 1,900 | | 8,006 | | 261 | | 1,901 | | 8,266 | | 10,167 | | 1,931 | | 1997 | | 1998 | |
Creekside Crossing | | Creekside Crossing II | | Office | | - | | 2,087 | | 8,692 | | 1,046 | | 2,087 | | 9,738 | | 11,824 | | 2,435 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BROOKLYN PARK, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
7300 Northland Drive | | 7300 Northland Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 700 | | 6,607 | | 3 | | 703 | | 6,608 | | 7,311 | | 1,205 | | 1980 | | 1998 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 835 | | 5,459 | | 1,113 | | 1,286 | | 6,121 | | 7,407 | | 1,401 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 2 | | Industrial | | - | | 449 | | 2,837 | | 670 | | 599 | | 3,357 | | 3,956 | | 589 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 3 | | Industrial | | - | | 758 | | 2,207 | | 234 | | 837 | | 2,362 | | 3,199 | | 596 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 4 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,079 | | 7,862 | | 1,184 | | 2,397 | | 8,727 | | 11,125 | | 2,281 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 5 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,079 | | 5,595 | | 420 | | 1,354 | | 5,740 | | 7,094 | | 1,547 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 6 | | Industrial | | - | | 788 | | 3,651 | | 1,815 | | 1,031 | | 5,223 | | 6,254 | | 1,411 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 10 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,757 | | 4,642 | | - | | 2,757 | | 4,642 | | 7,399 | | 173 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. | | Crosstown North Bus. Ctr. 12 | | Industrial | | - | | 4,564 | | 7,624 | | - | | 4,564 | | 7,624 | | 12,188 | | 47 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CARMEL, INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hamilton Crossing | | Hamilton Crossing I | | Industrial | | - | | 835 | | 4,874 | | 2,469 | | 847 | | 7,331 | | 8,178 | | 2,410 | | 1989 | | 1993 | |
Hamilton Crossing | | Hamilton Crossing II | | Office | | - | | 313 | | 1,410 | | 1,136 | | 384 | | 2,475 | | 2,859 | | 850 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Hamilton Crossing | | Hamilton Crossing III | | Office | | - | | 890 | | 9,899 | | 1,501 | | 890 | | 11,400 | | 12,290 | | 2,464 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Hamilton Crossing | | Hamilton Crossing IV | | Office | | - | | 515 | | 5,386 | | 98 | | 598 | | 5,401 | | 5,999 | | 1,079 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Hamilton Crossing | | Hamilton Crossing VI | | Office | | - | | 1,044 | | 13,743 | | 835 | | 1,065 | | 14,557 | | 15,622 | | 1,071 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Meridian Technology Center | | Meridian Tech Center | | Office | | - | | 376 | | 2,695 | | 1,031 | | 376 | | 3,726 | | 4,103 | | 428 | | 1986 | | 2002 | |
West Carmel Marketplace | | West Carmel Mktplc (Marshalls) | | Retail | | - | | 1,427 | | 2,228 | | - | | 1,427 | | 2,228 | | 3,656 | | - | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CAROL STREAM, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Carol Stream Business Park | | Carol Stream IV | | Industrial | | - | | 3,204 | | 14,986 | | - | | 3,204 | | 14,986 | | 18,190 | | 920 | | 1994 | | 2003 | |
Carol Stream Business Park | | Carol Stream V | | Industrial | | - | | 4,553 | | 7,605 | | - | | 4,553 | | 7,605 | | 12,158 | | 512 | | 1986 | | 2003 | |
77
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Regency Forest | | 200 Regency Forest Dr. | | Office | | - | | 1,230 | | 13,495 | | 1,651 | | 1,230 | | 15,146 | | 16,376 | | 2,513 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Regency Forest | | 100 Regency Forest Dr. | | Office | | - | | 1,538 | | 10,756 | | 1,709 | | 1,618 | | 12,384 | | 14,002 | | 2,819 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Weston Parkway | | 6501 Weston Parkway | | Office | | - | | 1,775 | | 10,668 | | 807 | | 1,775 | | 11,475 | | 13,250 | | 1,907 | | 1996 | | 1999 | |
78
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
CELEBRATION, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Celebration Business Center | | Celebration Business Center I | | Office | | - | | 1,102 | | 4,831 | | 303 | | 1,308 | | 4,928 | | 6,236 | | 864 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Celebration Business Center | | Celebration Business Center II | | Office | | - | | 771 | | 3,587 | | 152 | | 961 | | 3,550 | | 4,510 | | 627 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Celebration Office Center | | Celebration Office Center I | | Office | | - | | 1,382 | | 7,673 | | 303 | | 1,382 | | 7,976 | | 9,358 | | 2,148 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Celebration Office Center | | Celebration Office Center II | | Office | | - | | 1,382 | | 6,254 | | 1,419 | | 1,382 | | 7,672 | | 9,055 | | 1,279 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CINCINNATI, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
311 Elm | | 311 Elm | | Office | | - | | 339 | | 5,820 | | 934 | | 346 | | 6,747 | | 7,093 | | 3,337 | | 1986 | | 1993 | |
312 Elm | | 312 Elm | | Office | | 36,132 | | 4,750 | | 47,139 | | 4,354 | | 5,428 | | 50,814 | | 56,242 | | 15,672 | | 1992 | | 1993 | |
312 Plum | | 312 Plum | | Office | | - | | 2,539 | | 24,385 | | 2,746 | | 2,590 | | 27,081 | | 29,670 | | 8,445 | | 1987 | | 1993 | |
One Ashview Place | | One Ashview Place | | Office | | - | | 1,204 | | 12,659 | | 2,813 | | 1,204 | | 15,472 | | 16,676 | | 3,737 | | 1989 | | 1997 | |
Blue Ash Office Center | | Blue Ash Office Center VI | | Office | | - | | 518 | | 2,828 | | 429 | | 518 | | 3,257 | | 3,775 | | 735 | | 1989 | | 1997 | |
Towers of Kenwood | | Towers of Kenwood | | Office | | - | | 4,891 | | 42,506 | | - | | 4,891 | | 42,506 | | 47,398 | | 2,873 | | 1989 | | 2003 | |
Governors Hill | | 8790 Governor’s Hill | | Office | | - | | 400 | | 4,765 | | 846 | | 408 | | 5,603 | | 6,011 | | 1,772 | | 1985 | | 1993 | |
Governors Hill | | 8800 Governor’s Hill | | Office | | - | | 225 | | 2,298 | | 485 | | 231 | | 2,777 | | 3,008 | | 1,156 | | 1985 | | 1986 | |
Governors Hill | | 8600/8650 Governor’s Hill Dr. | | Office | | - | | 1,220 | | 18,381 | | 4,851 | | 1,245 | | 23,208 | | 24,453 | | 6,512 | | 1986 | | 1993 | |
Kenwood Executive Center | | Kenwood Executive Center | | Office | | - | | 606 | | 4,017 | | 814 | | 664 | | 4,773 | | 5,437 | | 1,001 | | 1981 | | 1997 | |
Kenwood Commons | | 8230 Kenwood Commons | | Office | | 3,757 | | 638 | | 3,070 | | 601 | | 638 | | 3,671 | | 4,308 | | 2,165 | | 1986 | | 1986 | |
Kenwood Commons | | 8280 Kenwood Commons | | Office | | 2,343 | | 638 | | 1,833 | | 236 | | 638 | | 2,069 | | 2,706 | | 1,103 | | 1986 | | 1986 | |
Kenwood Medical Office Bldg. | | Kenwood Medical Office Bldg. | | Office | | - | | - | | 7,798 | | 100 | | - | | 7,899 | | 7,899 | | 1,359 | | 1994 | | 1999 | |
Pfeiffer Place | | Pfeiffer Place | | Office | | - | | 3,608 | | 14,746 | | 1,162 | | 3,608 | | 15,907 | | 19,516 | | 2,878 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Pfeiffer Woods | | Pfeiffer Woods | | Office | | - | | 1,450 | | 12,322 | | 766 | | 1,450 | | 13,088 | | 14,538 | | 2,103 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Remington Office Park | | Remington Park Building A | | Office | | - | | 560 | | 1,469 | | 549 | | 560 | | 2,019 | | 2,579 | | 394 | | 1982 | | 1997 | |
Remington Office Park | | Remington Park Building B | | Office | | - | | 560 | | 1,543 | | 508 | | 560 | | 2,051 | | 2,611 | | 589 | | 1982 | | 1997 | |
Triangle Office Park | | Triangle Office Park | | Office | | 4,135 | | 1,018 | | 11,332 | | 752 | | 1,018 | | 12,084 | | 13,103 | | 5,693 | | 1965 | | 1986 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CLAYTON, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interco Corporate Tower | | Interco Corporate Tower | | Office | | - | | 6,150 | | 43,305 | | 108 | | 6,150 | | 43,413 | | 49,563 | | 4,125 | | 1986 | | 2002 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
COLUMBUS, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Easton | | One Easton Oval | | Office | | - | | 2,789 | | 11,268 | | 296 | | 2,789 | | 11,563 | | 14,352 | | 2,789 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Easton | | Two Easton Oval | | Office | | - | | 2,489 | | 16,828 | | 1,316 | | 2,489 | | 18,144 | | 20,633 | | 3,642 | | 1996 | | 1998 | |
Easton | | Easton Way One | | Office | | - | | 1,874 | | 10,338 | | 550 | | 1,874 | | 10,888 | | 12,762 | | 2,806 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Easton | | Easton Way Two | | Office | | - | | 2,005 | | 10,287 | | 792 | | 2,005 | | 11,078 | | 13,083 | | 2,397 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Easton | | Easton Way Three | | Office | | - | | 2,768 | | 11,530 | | - | | 2,768 | | 11,530 | | 14,297 | | 1,242 | | 2002 | | 2003 | |
Westerville-Polaris | | 1000 Polaris Parkway | | Office | | - | | 1,200 | | 6,636 | | 1,502 | | 1,293 | | 8,045 | | 9,338 | | 1,917 | | 1992 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
COPPELL, TEXAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Freeport North | | Freeport X | | Industrial | | - | | 8,198 | | 18,865 | | 2,792 | | 8,198 | | 21,657 | | 29,855 | | 2,230 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CREVE COUER, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Twin Oaks Office Ctr | | Twin Oaks | | Office | | - | | 566 | | 8,176 | | 1,416 | | 566 | | 9,593 | | 10,159 | | 2,087 | | 1995 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
DAVENPORT, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Park 27 Distribution Center | | Park 27 Distribution Center I | | Industrial | | - | | 2,449 | | 6,107 | | 8 | | 2,449 | | 6,116 | | 8,564 | | 772 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
DES PLAINES, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
2180 South Wolf Road | | 2180 South Wolf Road | | Industrial | | - | | 179 | | 1,632 | | 399 | | 179 | | 2,031 | | 2,211 | | 426 | | 1966 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
DOWNERS GROVE, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Executive Towers | | Executive Towers I | | Office | | - | | 2,652 | | 23,987 | | 5,594 | | 2,652 | | 29,581 | | 32,233 | | 6,074 | | 1983 | | 1997 | |
Executive Towers | | Executive Towers II | | Office | | - | | 3,386 | | 31,860 | | 8,117 | | 3,386 | | 39,977 | | 43,363 | | 10,769 | | 1984 | | 1997 | |
Executive Towers | | Executive Towers III | | Office | | - | | 3,512 | | 32,822 | | 6,450 | | 3,512 | | 39,272 | | 42,784 | | 8,570 | | 1987 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
DUBLIN, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Metrocenter III | | Office | | - | | 887 | | 3,012 | | 809 | | 887 | | 3,821 | | 4,707 | | 902 | | 1983 | | 1996 | |
Scioto Corporate Center | | Scioto Corporate Center | | Office | | - | | 1,100 | | 3,266 | | 1,012 | | 1,100 | | 4,278 | | 5,378 | | 1,235 | | 1987 | | 1996 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Qwest | | Office | | - | | 2,618 | | 18,641 | | 1,726 | | 2,670 | | 20,315 | | 22,985 | | 5,981 | | 1990 | | 1993 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 4600 Lakehurst | | Office | | - | | 1,494 | | 12,858 | | 552 | | 1,524 | | 13,380 | | 14,904 | | 4,078 | | 1990 | | 1993 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 4700 Lakehurst Court | | Office | | - | | 717 | | 2,460 | | 381 | | 717 | | 2,841 | | 3,559 | | 770 | | 1994 | | 1994 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 4675 Lakehurst | | Office | | - | | 605 | | 5,873 | | 152 | | 605 | | 6,024 | | 6,629 | | 1,625 | | 1995 | | 1995 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 5500 Glendon Court | | Office | | - | | 1,066 | | 7,683 | | 1,069 | | 1,066 | | 8,753 | | 9,819 | | 2,351 | | 1995 | | 1995 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 5555 Glendon Court | | Office | | - | | 1,600 | | 7,201 | | 1,151 | | 1,767 | | 8,185 | | 9,952 | | 2,218 | | 1995 | | 1995 | |
79
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Britton Central | | 6060 Britton Parkway | | Office | | - | | 1,601 | | 8,725 | | 162 | | 1,601 | | 8,887 | | 10,487 | | 3,370 | | 1996 | | 1996 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Compmanagement | | Office | | - | | 867 | | 4,408 | | 621 | | 867 | | 5,029 | | 5,896 | | 1,377 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 4725 Lakehurst | | Office | | - | | 483 | | 9,349 | | 998 | | 483 | | 10,348 | | 10,831 | | 2,768 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 5515 Parkcenter Circle | | Office | | - | | 1,283 | | 6,739 | | - | | 1,283 | | 6,739 | | 8,022 | | 58 | | 1996 | | 2005 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | 5555 Parkcenter Circle | | Office | | - | | 1,580 | | 9,096 | | 720 | | 1,580 | | 9,816 | | 11,396 | | 2,881 | | 1992 | | 1994 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Parkwood Place | | Office | | - | | 1,690 | | 11,570 | | 1,039 | | 1,690 | | 12,609 | | 14,298 | | 3,787 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Nationwide | | Office | | - | | 4,815 | | 19,199 | | 734 | | 4,815 | | 19,933 | | 24,748 | | 7,347 | | 1996 | | 1996 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Emerald II | | Office | | - | | 495 | | 2,863 | | 31 | | 495 | | 2,894 | | 3,389 | | 564 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Atrium II, Phase I | | Office | | - | | 1,649 | | 10,143 | | 395 | | 1,649 | | 10,538 | | 12,187 | | 2,658 | | 1997 | | 1998 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Atrium II, Phase II | | Office | | - | | 1,597 | | 7,993 | | 1,109 | | 1,597 | | 9,102 | | 10,699 | | 1,786 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Blazer I | | Office | | - | | 904 | | 4,517 | | 549 | | 904 | | 5,066 | | 5,970 | | 1,071 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Parkwood II | | Office | | - | | 1,848 | | 14,030 | | 192 | | 1,848 | | 14,223 | | 16,071 | | 3,515 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Blazer II | | Office | | - | | 1,016 | | 6,880 | | 422 | | 1,016 | | 7,301 | | 8,317 | | 1,749 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Tuttle Crossing | | Emerald III | | Office | | - | | 1,685 | | 9,862 | | 669 | | 1,694 | | 10,522 | | 12,216 | | 2,000 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
DULUTH, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Crestwood Pointe | | 3805 Crestwood Parkway | | Office | | - | | 877 | | 15,141 | | 1,364 | | 877 | | 16,506 | | 17,382 | | 2,984 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Crestwood Pointe | | 3885 Crestwood Parkway | | Office | | - | | 878 | | 14,104 | | 796 | | 878 | | 14,900 | | 15,778 | | 2,506 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Hampton Green | | Hampton Green Office I | | Office | | - | | 1,388 | | 12,188 | | 635 | | 1,388 | | 12,823 | | 14,210 | | 2,223 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Breckinridge | | 2885 Breckinridge Blvd | | Industrial | | - | | 487 | | 6,471 | | 553 | | 959 | | 6,552 | | 7,511 | | 1,141 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
River Green | | 3450 River Green Court | | Industrial | | - | | 194 | | 2,191 | | 274 | | 194 | | 2,465 | | 2,659 | | 549 | | 1989 | | 1999 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | 2775 Premiere Parkway | | Industrial | | - | | 560 | | 4,695 | | 35 | | 560 | | 4,730 | | 5,290 | | 770 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | 3079 Premiere Parkway | | Industrial | | - | | 776 | | 6,505 | | 1,648 | | 776 | | 8,154 | | 8,929 | | 1,395 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | Sugarloaf Office I | | Industrial | | - | | 1,042 | | 8,685 | | 694 | | 1,042 | | 9,379 | | 10,421 | | 1,672 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | 2850 Premiere Parkway | | Industrial | | - | | 621 | | 4,631 | | - | | 621 | | 4,631 | | 5,252 | | 372 | | 1997 | | 2002 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | Sugarloaf Office II (3039) | | Industrial | | - | | 972 | | 3,834 | | 328 | | 1,006 | | 4,129 | | 5,135 | | 366 | | 1999 | | 2002 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | Sugarloaf Office III (2810) | | Industrial | | - | | 696 | | 3,896 | | 393 | | 696 | | 4,289 | | 4,984 | | 366 | | 1999 | | 2002 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | 2855 Premiere Parkway | | Industrial | | - | | 765 | | 3,799 | | 234 | | 765 | | 4,033 | | 4,798 | | 784 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | 6655 Sugarloaf | | Industrial | | - | | 1,651 | | 6,449 | | 60 | | 1,651 | | 6,509 | | 8,160 | | 665 | | 1998 | | 2001 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | Sugarloaf Office IV | | Industrial | | - | | 623 | | 3,529 | | 9 | | 623 | | 3,538 | | 4,161 | | 926 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | Sugarloaf Office V | | Industrial | | - | | 744 | | 3,958 | | 454 | | 744 | | 4,412 | | 5,156 | | 1,423 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Business Park At Sugarloaf | | Sugarloaf VI | | Office | | - | | 1,659 | | 6,094 | | - | | 1,659 | | 6,094 | | 7,752 | | 133 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
EAGAN, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Apollo Industrial Center | | Apollo Industrial Ctr I | | Industrial | | - | | 866 | | 4,976 | | 1,472 | | 882 | | 6,432 | | 7,314 | | 1,520 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Apollo Industrial Center | | Apollo Industrial Ctr II | | Industrial | | - | | 474 | | 3,142 | | 23 | | 474 | | 3,165 | | 3,638 | | 984 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Apollo Industrial Center | | Apollo Industrial Ctr III | | Industrial | | - | | 1,432 | | 6,905 | | 50 | | 1,432 | | 6,956 | | 8,387 | | 1,167 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Silverbell Commons | | Silverbell Commons | | Industrial | | - | | 1,807 | | 6,657 | | 1,473 | | 1,807 | | 8,131 | | 9,937 | | 1,604 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Trapp Road Commerce Center | | Trapp Road Commerce Center I | | Industrial | | - | | 671 | | 3,893 | | 312 | | 700 | | 4,176 | | 4,875 | | 811 | | 1996 | | 1998 | |
Trapp Road Commerce Center | | Trapp Road Commerce Center II | | Industrial | | - | | 1,250 | | 7,022 | | 1,083 | | 1,266 | | 8,089 | | 9,355 | | 1,647 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
EARTH CITY, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Earth City | | 3322 Rider Trail | | Office | | 5,427 | | 2,615 | | 10,877 | | 1,150 | | 2,615 | | 12,027 | | 14,643 | | 2,576 | | 1987 | | 1997 | |
Earth City | | 3300 Pointe 70 | | Office | | 4,247 | | 1,186 | | 7,515 | | 2,485 | | 1,186 | | 9,999 | | 11,185 | | 2,149 | | 1989 | | 1997 | |
Earth City | | Corporate Center, Earth City | | Industrial | | - | | 783 | | 4,517 | | 1,350 | | 783 | | 5,868 | | 6,650 | | 1,870 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
EAST POINTE, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Camp Creek | | Camp Creek Bldg 1400 | | Industrial | | - | | 561 | | 3,375 | | 751 | | 561 | | 4,126 | | 4,687 | | 729 | | 1988 | | 2001 | |
Camp Creek | | Camp Creek Bldg 1800 | | Industrial | | - | | 462 | | 3,022 | | 65 | | 462 | | 3,088 | | 3,549 | | 644 | | 1989 | | 2001 | |
Camp Creek | | Camp Creek Bldg 2000 | | Industrial | | - | | 395 | | 2,292 | | 35 | | 395 | | 2,328 | | 2,723 | | 296 | | 1989 | | 2001 | |
Camp Creek | | Camp Creek Bldg 2400 | | Industrial | | - | | 296 | | 1,816 | | 129 | | 296 | | 1,945 | | 2,241 | | 342 | | 1988 | | 2001 | |
Camp Creek | | Camp Creek Bldg 2600 | | Industrial | | - | | 364 | | 2,346 | | 134 | | 364 | | 2,481 | | 2,844 | | 458 | | 1990 | | 2001 | |
Camp Creek | | Clorox Company | | Industrial | | - | | 4,406 | | 9,512 | | 154 | | 4,406 | | 9,665 | | 14,072 | | 636 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Camp Creek | | Camp Creek Bldg 7 | | Office | | - | | 1,334 | | 2,673 | | - | | 1,334 | | 2,673 | | 4,007 | | 117 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
Camp Creek | | Moore Wallace | | Industrial | | - | | 1,045 | | 2,974 | | - | | 1,045 | | 2,974 | | 4,018 | | 79 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FAIRFIELD, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Thunderbird Building 1 | | Thunderbird Building 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 248 | | 1,760 | | 156 | | 248 | | 1,916 | | 2,164 | | 573 | | 1991 | | 1995 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FENTON, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fenton Interstate Buildings | | Fenton Interstate Building C | | Industrial | | - | | 519 | | 1,978 | | 322 | | 519 | | 2,300 | | 2,819 | | 470 | | 1986 | | 1999 | |
Fenton Interstate Buildings | | Fenton Interstate Building D | | Industrial | | - | | 1,286 | | 5,148 | | 488 | | 1,286 | | 5,636 | | 6,921 | | 1,014 | | 1987 | | 1999 | |
Fenton Interstate Buildings | | Fenton Interstate Building A | | Industrial | | - | | 603 | | 2,622 | | 40 | | 603 | | 2,662 | | 3,264 | | 479 | | 1987 | | 2000 | |
80
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Fenton Interstate Buildings | | Fenton Interstate Building B | | Industrial | | - | | 702 | | 2,343 | | 134 | | 702 | | 2,477 | | 3,179 | | 414 | | 1986 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FISHERS, INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exit 5 | | Exit 5 Building 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 822 | | 2,695 | | 135 | | 822 | | 2,829 | | 3,651 | | 600 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Exit 5 | | Exit 5 Building 2 | | Industrial | | - | | 749 | | 4,611 | | 223 | | 749 | | 4,835 | | 5,583 | | 1,533 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Business Ctr I | | Industrial | | - | | 936 | | 6,527 | | 2,571 | | 936 | | 9,097 | | 10,034 | | 1,585 | | 1996 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Business Ctr II | | Industrial | | - | | 1,151 | | 6,521 | | 495 | | 1,151 | | 7,016 | | 8,167 | | 1,177 | | 1996 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Business Ctr III | | Industrial | | - | | 970 | | 6,167 | | 63 | | 970 | | 6,231 | | 7,200 | | 1,409 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Business Ctr V | | Industrial | | - | | 943 | | 5,238 | | 790 | | 943 | | 6,028 | | 6,971 | | 1,184 | | 1996 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Flex Center II | | Industrial | | - | | 240 | | 1,364 | | 281 | | 240 | | 1,644 | | 1,885 | | 125 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Office Center I | | Office | | - | | 950 | | 6,789 | | 2,054 | | 950 | | 8,843 | | 9,793 | | 1,786 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Flex Center I | | Industrial | | - | | 301 | | 1,233 | | 630 | | 301 | | 1,862 | | 2,164 | | 289 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Flex Center III | | Industrial | | - | | 327 | | 2,027 | | 843 | | 327 | | 2,870 | | 3,197 | | 495 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Grove Flex Center IV | | Industrial | | - | | 205 | | 1,528 | | 165 | | 205 | | 1,693 | | 1,898 | | 552 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Aspen Grove Business Center | | Aspen Corporate Center 100 | | Office | | - | | 723 | | 3,451 | | - | | 723 | | 3,451 | | 4,174 | | 194 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
Brentwood South Bus. Center | | Brentwood South Bus Ctr IV | | Industrial | | - | | 569 | | 2,435 | | 363 | | 569 | | 2,797 | | 3,367 | | 431 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
Brentwood South Bus. Center | | Brentwood South Bus Ctr V | | Industrial | | - | | 445 | | 1,932 | | 72 | | 445 | | 2,003 | | 2,449 | | 320 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
Brentwood South Bus. Center | | Brentwood South Bus Ctr VI | | Industrial | | - | | 489 | | 1,243 | | 505 | | 489 | | 1,749 | | 2,237 | | 277 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FT. LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Weston Pointe | | Weston Pointe I | | Office | | - | | 2,580 | | 10,020 | | 316 | | 2,580 | | 10,336 | | 12,916 | | 741 | | 1999 | | 2003 | |
Weston Pointe | | Weston Pointe II | | Office | | - | | 2,183 | | 10,791 | | - | | 2,183 | | 10,791 | | 12,973 | | 935 | | 2000 | | 2003 | |
Weston Pointe | | Weston Pointe III | | Office | | - | | 2,183 | | 11,531 | | 536 | | 2,183 | | 12,067 | | 14,249 | | 780 | | 2001 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
GLENWILLOW, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Emerald Valley Business Park | | Emerald Valley Bldg #201 | | Industrial | | - | | 555 | | 6,398 | | 238 | | 556 | | 6,635 | | 7,191 | | 1,069 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Emerald Valley Business Park | | Emerald Valley Bldg #144 | | Industrial | | - | | 519 | | 5,052 | | 772 | | 519 | | 5,823 | | 6,342 | | 655 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
Emerald Valley Business Park | | Emerald Valley Bldg #144 West | | Industrial | | - | | 1,593 | | 3,252 | | 767 | | 1,593 | | 4,019 | | 5,612 | | 288 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Emerald Valley Business Park | | Emerald Valley Bldg #120 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,357 | | 3,332 | | 289 | | 1,357 | | 3,620 | | 4,977 | | 191 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
Emerald Valley Business Park | | Emerald Valley Bldg #261 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,544 | | 6,382 | | - | | 2,544 | | 6,382 | | 8,926 | | 73 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
GREENWOOD, INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
South Park-Indiana | | Brylane Parking Lot | | Grounds | | - | | 54 | | - | | 3 | | 57 | | - | | 57 | | 35 | | | | 1994 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
GROVEPORT, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
6600 Port Road | | 6600 Port Road | | Industrial | | - | | 2,725 | | 23,298 | | 1,307 | | 2,850 | | 24,480 | | 27,330 | | 5,241 | | 1995 | | 1997 | |
Groveport Commerce Center | | Groveport Commerce Center #437 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,049 | | 7,610 | | 1,244 | | 1,065 | | 8,838 | | 9,903 | | 1,927 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Groveport Commerce Center | | Groveport Commerce Center #168 | | Industrial | | - | | 510 | | 3,886 | | 945 | | 510 | | 4,831 | | 5,341 | | 979 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Groveport Commerce Center | | Groveport Commerce Center #345 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,045 | | 7,349 | | 740 | | 1,045 | | 8,089 | | 9,134 | | 1,550 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Groveport Commerce Center | | Groveport Commerce Center #667 | | Industrial | | - | | 4,420 | | 14,230 | | - | | 4,420 | | 14,230 | | 18,650 | | 604 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HEBRON, KENTUCKY | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Southpark, KY | | Southpark Building 4 | | Industrial | | - | | 779 | | 3,372 | | 80 | | 779 | | 3,452 | | 4,231 | | 1,008 | | 1994 | | 1994 | |
Southpark, KY | | CR Services | | Industrial | | - | | 1,085 | | 4,214 | | 1,345 | | 1,085 | | 5,558 | | 6,643 | | 1,563 | | 1994 | | 1994 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HIGHLAND HILLS, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Harvard Crossing Bus. Campus | | One Harvard Crossing | | Office | | - | | 660 | | 7,685 | | - | | 660 | | 7,685 | | 8,344 | | 323 | | 1999 | | 2004 | |
Metropolitan Plaza | | Metropolitan Plaza | | Office | | - | | 2,310 | | 14,271 | | 77 | | 2,310 | | 14,348 | | 16,658 | | 927 | | 2000 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cornerstone Business Center | | Cornerstone Business Center | | Industrial | | 5,186 | | 1,469 | | 8,455 | | 491 | | 1,543 | | 8,872 | | 10,415 | | 1,881 | | 1996 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
INDEPENDENCE, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Corporate Plaza | | Corporate Plaza I | | Office | | 5,931 | | 2,116 | | 14,136 | | 1,465 | | 2,116 | | 15,602 | | 17,717 | | 3,732 | | 1989 | | 1996 | |
Corporate Plaza | | Corporate Plaza II | | Office | | 5,072 | | 1,841 | | 12,057 | | 1,472 | | 1,841 | | 13,529 | | 15,369 | | 3,301 | | 1991 | | 1996 | |
Freedom Square | | Freedom Square I | | Office | | - | | 595 | | 3,964 | | 619 | | 600 | | 4,578 | | 5,178 | | 1,089 | | 1980 | | 1996 | |
Freedom Square | | Freedom Square II | | Office | | 4,904 | | 1,746 | | 11,757 | | 1,152 | | 1,746 | | 12,908 | | 14,655 | | 3,236 | | 1987 | | 1996 | |
Freedom Square | | Freedom Square III | | Office | | - | | 701 | | 6,306 | | 39 | | 701 | | 6,344 | | 7,046 | | 1,658 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Oak Tree Place | | Oak Tree Place | | Office | | - | | 703 | | 4,640 | | 579 | | 703 | | 5,219 | | 5,922 | | 1,086 | | 1979 | | 1997 | |
Park Center Plaza | | Park Center Plaza I | | Office | | - | | 2,193 | | 13,199 | | 267 | | 2,193 | | 13,466 | | 15,659 | | 3,421 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Park Center Plaza | | Park Center Plaza II | | Office | | - | | 2,190 | | 13,353 | | 53 | | 2,190 | | 13,406 | | 15,596 | | 3,282 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
81
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Park Center Plaza | | Park Center Plaza III | | Office | | - | | 2,190 | | 11,975 | | 2,570 | | 2,190 | | 14,544 | | 16,735 | | 2,681 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Park 100 | | Park 465 | | Industrial | | - | | 124 | | 750 | | - | | 124 | | 750 | | 874 | | 12 | | 1983 | | 2005 | |
Franklin Road Business Park | | Franklin Road Business Center | | Industrial | | - | | 594 | | 10,743 | | 1,307 | | 594 | | 12,050 | | 12,644 | | 3,732 | | 1962 | | 1995 | |
6061 Guion Road | | 6061 Guion Rd | | Industrial | | - | | 274 | | 1,798 | | 194 | | 274 | | 1,992 | | 2,266 | | 523 | | 1974 | | 1995 | |
Hillsdale | | Hillsdale Technecenter 4 | | Industrial | | - | | 366 | | 5,090 | | 785 | | 366 | | 5,875 | | 6,241 | | 1,797 | | 1987 | | 1993 | |
Hillsdale | | Hillsdale Technecenter 5 | | Industrial | | - | | 251 | | 3,208 | | 739 | | 251 | | 3,948 | | 4,199 | | 1,286 | | 1987 | | 1993 | |
Hillsdale | | Hillsdale Technecenter 6 | | Industrial | | - | | 315 | | 4,334 | | 1,743 | | 315 | | 6,078 | | 6,393 | | 2,070 | | 1987 | | 1993 | |
KATC - South | | 8465 Keystone Crossing | | Office | | - | | 89 | | 1,296 | | 417 | | 89 | | 1,713 | | 1,802 | | 441 | | 1983 | | 1995 | |
Keystone Crossing | | 8555 N. River Road | | Office | | - | | - | | 6,038 | | 684 | | - | | 6,722 | | 6,722 | | 1,494 | | 1985 | | 1997 | |
One North Capitol | | One North Capitol | | Office | | - | | 1,439 | | 9,625 | | 433 | | 1,439 | | 10,058 | | 11,497 | | 2,095 | | 1980 | | 1998 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Bldg 31 | | Industrial | | - | | 64 | | 364 | | - | | 64 | | 364 | | 429 | | 5 | | 1978 | | 2005 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 96 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,414 | | 13,835 | | 113 | | 1,667 | | 13,695 | | 15,362 | | 3,644 | | 1994 | | 1995 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 98 | | Industrial | | - | | 273 | | 8,281 | | 2,025 | | 273 | | 10,305 | | 10,579 | | 2,858 | | 1968 | | 1994 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 100 | | Industrial | | - | | 103 | | 2,097 | | 595 | | 103 | | 2,691 | | 2,794 | | 703 | | 1995 | | 1995 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 102 | | Office | | - | | 182 | | 1,098 | | - | | 182 | | 1,098 | | 1,280 | | 18 | | 1982 | | 2005 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 107 | | Industrial | | - | | 99 | | 1,698 | | 310 | | 99 | | 2,008 | | 2,107 | | 491 | | 1984 | | 1995 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 109 | | Industrial | | - | | 240 | | 1,845 | | 350 | | 246 | | 2,189 | | 2,435 | | 907 | | 1985 | | 1986 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 116 | | Office | | - | | 341 | | 3,214 | | 271 | | 348 | | 3,478 | | 3,826 | | 1,440 | | 1988 | | 1988 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 118 | | Office | | - | | 226 | | 2,427 | | 595 | | 230 | | 3,017 | | 3,248 | | 937 | | 1988 | | 1993 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 119 | | Office | | - | | 388 | | 3,719 | | 1,364 | | 500 | | 4,971 | | 5,471 | | 1,762 | | 1989 | | 1993 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 122 | | Industrial | | - | | 284 | | 3,695 | | 823 | | 290 | | 4,513 | | 4,802 | | 1,257 | | 1990 | | 1993 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 124 | | Office | | - | | 227 | | 2,771 | | 8 | | 227 | | 2,779 | | 3,006 | | 407 | | 1992 | | 2002 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 127 | | Industrial | | - | | 96 | | 1,658 | | 438 | | 96 | | 2,095 | | 2,191 | | 509 | | 1995 | | 1995 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Building 141 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,120 | | 2,807 | | - | | 1,120 | | 2,807 | | 3,928 | | 43 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
Park 100 | | UPS Parking | | Grounds | | - | | 270 | | - | | - | | 270 | | - | | 270 | | 72 | | | | 1997 | |
Park 100 | | Norgate Ground Lease | | Grounds | | - | | 51 | | - | | - | | 51 | | - | | 51 | | - | | | | 1995 | |
Park 100 | | Zollman Ground Lease | | Grounds | | - | | 115 | | - | | - | | 115 | | - | | 115 | | - | | | | 1994 | |
Park 100 | | Bldg 111 Parking Lot | | Grounds | | - | | 196 | | - | | - | | 196 | | - | | 196 | | 22 | | | | 1994 | |
Park 100 | | Becton Dickinson Lot | | Grounds | | - | | - | | - | | 13 | | 13 | | - | | 13 | | 8 | | | | 1993 | |
Park 100 | | 3.58 acres on Allison Avenue | | Grounds | | - | | 242 | | - | | - | | 242 | | - | | 242 | | 11 | | | | 2000 | |
Park 100 | | Hewlett-Packard Land Lease | | Grounds | | - | | 252 | | - | | - | | 252 | | - | | 252 | | 9 | | | | 2003 | |
Park 100 | | Park 100 Bldg 121 Land Lease | | Grounds | | - | | 5 | | - | | - | | 5 | | - | | 5 | | 0 | | | | 2003 | |
Park 100 | | Hewlett Packard Land Lse-62 | | Grounds | | - | | 45 | | - | | - | | 45 | | - | | 45 | | 2 | | | | 2003 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | One Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 1,018 | | 10,169 | | 732 | | 1,028 | | 10,891 | | 11,919 | | 2,869 | | 1989 | | 1995 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Two Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 861 | | 6,586 | | 939 | | 871 | | 7,516 | | 8,387 | | 1,802 | | 1996 | | 1996 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Three Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 1,377 | | 9,656 | | 543 | | 1,387 | | 10,189 | | 11,575 | | 2,994 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Four Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 1,489 | | 11,714 | | 296 | | 1,537 | | 11,961 | | 13,498 | | 2,443 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Five Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 1,485 | | 12,572 | | 538 | | 1,528 | | 13,067 | | 14,594 | | 2,742 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Six Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 1,960 | | 15,496 | | 747 | | 1,960 | | 16,243 | | 18,203 | | 3,339 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Eight Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 6,435 | | 16,419 | | - | | 6,435 | | 16,419 | | 22,854 | | 1,716 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Parkwood Crossing | | Nine Parkwood Crossing | | Office | | - | | 6,046 | | 12,262 | | - | | 6,046 | | 12,262 | | 18,308 | | - | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
River Road - Indianapolis | | River Road Building I | | Office | | - | | 856 | | 7,727 | | 1,703 | | 856 | | 9,429 | | 10,285 | | 2,513 | | 1997 | | 1998 | |
Woodfield | | Two Woodfield Crossing | | Office | | - | | 719 | | 9,409 | | 1,837 | | 733 | | 11,232 | | 11,965 | | 3,507 | | 1987 | | 1993 | |
Woodfield | | Three Woodfield Crossing | | Office | | - | | 3,767 | | 20,844 | | 4,202 | | 3,843 | | 24,970 | | 28,813 | | 7,930 | | 1989 | | 1993 | |
Woodland Corporate Park | | Woodland Corporate Park I | | Office | | - | | 290 | | 4,597 | | 708 | | 320 | | 5,274 | | 5,594 | | 1,723 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Woodland Corporate Park | | Woodland Corporate Park II | | Office | | - | | 271 | | 3,583 | | 846 | | 297 | | 4,403 | | 4,700 | | 1,006 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Woodland Corporate Park | | Woodland Corporate Park III | | Office | | - | | 1,227 | | 4,255 | | 121 | | 1,227 | | 4,376 | | 5,602 | | 951 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Woodland Corporate Park | | Woodland Corporate Park IV | | Office | | - | | 715 | | 7,245 | | 540 | | 715 | | 7,784 | | 8,500 | | 1,654 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Woodland Corporate Park | | Woodland Corporate Park V | | Office | | - | | 768 | | 10,031 | | 5 | | 768 | | 10,036 | | 10,804 | | 1,038 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LAKE FOREST, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bradley Business Center | | 28188 North Ballard Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 186 | | 1,751 | | 346 | | 186 | | 2,098 | | 2,284 | | 421 | | 1985 | | 1998 | |
Bradley Business Center | | 13777 West Laurel Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 98 | | 913 | | 53 | | 98 | | 965 | | 1,064 | | 191 | | 1981 | | 1998 | |
Bradley Business Center | | 13825 West Laurel Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 750 | | 1,874 | | 906 | | 750 | | 2,780 | | 3,530 | | 764 | | 1978 | | 1999 | |
Conway Park | | One Conway Park | | Office | | - | | 1,901 | | 17,875 | | 1,971 | | 1,901 | | 19,846 | | 21,747 | | 4,012 | | 1989 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LAKE MARY, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Northpoint | | Northpoint Center I | | Office | | - | | 1,087 | | 11,573 | | 514 | | 1,087 | | 12,087 | | 13,174 | | 1,636 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Northpoint | | Northpoint Center II | | Office | | - | | 1,202 | | 10,224 | | 141 | | 1,202 | | 10,365 | | 11,567 | | 1,880 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Northpoint | | Northpoint III | | Office | | - | | 1,552 | | 10,987 | | 128 | | 1,552 | | 11,115 | | 12,667 | | 1,896 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Northpoint | | Northpoint IV | | Office | | - | | 1,605 | | 8,583 | | 2,296 | | 1,605 | | 10,878 | | 12,483 | | 793 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
82
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LAWRENCEVILLE, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hillside at Huntcrest | | Huntcrest I | | Office | | - | | 1,193 | | 11,061 | | 28 | | 1,193 | | 11,088 | | 12,281 | | 1,784 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Hillside at Huntcrest | | Huntcrest II | | Office | | - | | 927 | | 11,619 | | 16 | | 927 | | 11,635 | | 12,562 | | 2,404 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Hillside at Huntcrest | | Huntcrest III | | Office | | - | | 1,358 | | 12,987 | | 238 | | 1,358 | | 13,226 | | 14,583 | | 1,692 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
Hillside at Huntcrest | | Huntcrest IV | | Office | | - | | 1,295 | | 5,742 | | 300 | | 1,306 | | 6,031 | | 7,337 | | 338 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Other Northeast I85 Properties | | Weyerhaeuser BTS | | Industrial | | - | | 3,974 | | 3,101 | | - | | 3,974 | | 3,101 | | 7,075 | | 273 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LEBANON, INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Lebanon Business Park | | Lebanon Building 4 | | Industrial | | - | | 305 | | 9,672 | | 184 | | 305 | | 9,856 | | 10,162 | | 2,261 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Lebanon Business Park | | Lebanon Building 9 | | Industrial | | - | | 554 | | 6,891 | | 749 | | 554 | | 7,641 | | 8,195 | | 1,340 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Lebanon Business Park | | Lebanon Building 11 | | Industrial | | - | | 480 | | 5,202 | | 6 | | 1,286 | | 4,402 | | 5,688 | | 470 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Lebanon Business Park | | Lebanon Building 12 | | Industrial | | - | | 5,163 | | 13,207 | | 393 | | 5,163 | | 13,600 | | 18,763 | | 1,354 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Lebanon Business Park | | Lebanon Building 13 | | Industrial | | - | | 561 | | 6,579 | | 83 | | 1,901 | | 5,322 | | 7,223 | | 637 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Lebanon Business Park | | Lebanon Building 14 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,813 | | 12,196 | | - | | 2,813 | | 12,196 | | 15,008 | | 436 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LISLE, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Corporate Lakes Business Park | | 2275 Cabot Drive | | Office | | - | | 3,355 | | 7,008 | | - | | 3,355 | | 7,008 | | 10,363 | | 365 | | 1996 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MARYLAND HEIGHTS, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Riverport Business Park | | Riverport Tower | | Office | | - | | 3,549 | | 30,135 | | 8,183 | | 3,954 | | 37,913 | | 41,866 | | 8,157 | | 1991 | | 1997 | |
Riverport Business Park | | Riverport Distribution | | Industrial | | - | | 242 | | 2,244 | | 288 | | 242 | | 2,532 | | 2,773 | | 520 | | 1990 | | 1997 | |
Riverport Business Park | | Express Scripts Service Center | | Industrial | | - | | 1,197 | | 8,755 | | 427 | | 1,197 | | 9,182 | | 10,379 | | 1,967 | | 1992 | | 1997 | |
Riverport Business Park | | Express Scripts HQ | | Office | | - | | 2,285 | | 12,424 | | 295 | | 2,285 | | 12,719 | | 15,004 | | 4,657 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Riverport Business Park | | Riverport 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 900 | | 3,803 | | 191 | | 900 | | 3,994 | | 4,894 | | 1,500 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Riverport Business Park | | Riverport 2 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,238 | | 4,644 | | 79 | | 1,238 | | 4,724 | | 5,962 | | 826 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Riverport Business Park | | Riverport 3 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,269 | | 4,514 | | 2,040 | | 1,269 | | 6,554 | | 7,823 | | 1,554 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MASON, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deerfield Crossing | | Deerfield Crossing Building 1 | | Office | | - | | 1,493 | | 13,772 | | 461 | | 1,493 | | 14,233 | | 15,726 | | 3,837 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Deerfield Crossing | | Deerfield Crossing Building 2 | | Office | | - | | 1,069 | | 14,119 | | 399 | | 1,069 | | 14,518 | | 15,587 | | 3,384 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Governor’s Pointe | | Governor’s Pointe 4770 | | Office | | - | | 586 | | 7,914 | | 394 | | 596 | | 8,297 | | 8,893 | | 3,362 | | 1986 | | 1988 | |
Governor’s Pointe | | Governor’s Pointe 4705 | | Office | | - | | 719 | | 7,313 | | 3,520 | | 987 | | 10,565 | | 11,551 | | 3,355 | | 1988 | | 1993 | |
Governor’s Pointe | | Governor’s Pointe 4605 | | Office | | - | | 630 | | 17,668 | | 1,738 | | 909 | | 19,126 | | 20,036 | | 5,656 | | 1990 | | 1993 | |
Governor’s Pointe | | Governor’s Pointe 4660 | | Office | | - | | 385 | | 4,776 | | 154 | | 529 | | 4,786 | | 5,315 | | 1,390 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Governor’s Pointe | | Governor’s Pointe 4680 | | Office | | - | | 1,115 | | 8,356 | | 817 | | 1,115 | | 9,173 | | 10,288 | | 2,489 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Governors Pointe Retail | | Bigg’s Supercenter | | Retail | | - | | 2,107 | | 9,927 | | 137 | | 4,227 | | 7,943 | | 12,170 | | 2,734 | | 1996 | | 1996 | |
Governors Pointe Retail | | Lowes | | Retail | | - | | 3,750 | | 6,507 | | 304 | | 3,750 | | 6,811 | | 10,561 | | 2,479 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MAYFIELD HEIGHTS, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Landerbrook Corporate Center | | Landerbrook Corp. Center One | | Office | | - | | 1,807 | | 10,828 | | 72 | | 1,808 | | 10,899 | | 12,707 | | 2,714 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Landerbrook Corporate Center | | Landerbrook Corp. Center Two | | Office | | - | | 1,382 | | 9,870 | | 1,932 | | 1,382 | | 11,801 | | 13,184 | | 3,218 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
Landerbrook Corporate Center | | Landerbrook Corp. Center Three | | Office | | - | | 1,528 | | 8,505 | | 4,717 | | 1,684 | | 13,066 | | 14,750 | | 2,060 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MCDONOUGH, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liberty Distribution Center | | 120 Declaration Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 615 | | 8,561 | | 137 | | 615 | | 8,698 | | 9,313 | | 1,419 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Liberty Distribution Center | | Liberty III | | Industrial | | - | | 2,273 | | 14,500 | | 730 | | 2,290 | | 15,214 | | 17,503 | | 2,620 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Enterprise Industrial Center | | Enterprise Industrial Center | | Industrial | | 1,579 | | 864 | | 5,039 | | 578 | | 864 | | 5,617 | | 6,481 | | 1,128 | | 1979 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
10801 Red Circle Drive | | 10801 Red Circle Dr. | | Office | | - | | 527 | | 2,459 | | 701 | | 527 | | 3,160 | | 3,687 | | 650 | | 1977 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MONROE, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Monroe Business Center | | Monroe Business Center Bldg. 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 660 | | 5,435 | | 354 | | 660 | | 5,789 | | 6,449 | | 1,168 | | 1992 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
MORRISVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Perimeter Park | | 507 Airport Blvd (Entpr I) | | Industrial | | - | | 1,327 | | 8,442 | | 1,133 | | 1,351 | | 9,551 | | 10,902 | | 1,733 | | 1993 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 5151 McCrimmon Pkwy (Entpr II) | | Industrial | | - | | 1,318 | | 7,832 | | 632 | | 1,342 | | 8,440 | | 9,782 | | 1,341 | | 1995 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2600 Perimeter Park Dr | | Industrial | | - | | 975 | | 5,392 | | 384 | | 991 | | 5,760 | | 6,751 | | 1,025 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 5150 McCrimmon Pkwy (Entpr IV) | | Industrial | | - | | 1,739 | | 12,249 | | 204 | | 1,773 | | 12,419 | | 14,192 | | 2,027 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2400 Perimeter Park Dr. | | Office | | - | | 760 | | 6,305 | | 1,155 | | 778 | | 7,441 | | 8,219 | | 1,594 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
83
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Perimeter Park | | 3000 Perimeter Park Dr (Met 1) | | Industrial | | 2,336 | | 482 | | 2,891 | | 1,136 | | 491 | | 4,018 | | 4,509 | | 636 | | 1989 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2900 Perimeter Park Dr (Met 2) | | Industrial | | 1,743 | | 235 | | 2,340 | | 769 | | 264 | | 3,080 | | 3,344 | | 767 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2800 Perimeter Park Dr (Met 3) | | Industrial | | 3,243 | | 777 | | 4,927 | | 504 | | 811 | | 5,397 | | 6,207 | | 939 | | 1992 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 1100 Perimeter Park Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 777 | | 6,037 | | 683 | | 794 | | 6,703 | | 7,497 | | 1,224 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 1400 Perimeter Park Drive | | Office | | - | | 666 | | 4,600 | | 1,207 | | 900 | | 5,573 | | 6,473 | | 1,030 | | 1991 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 1500 Perimeter Park Drive | | Office | | - | | 1,148 | | 10,397 | | 395 | | 1,177 | | 10,763 | | 11,940 | | 1,842 | | 1996 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 1600 Perimeter Park Drive | | Office | | - | | 1,463 | | 10,134 | | 1,975 | | 1,513 | | 12,058 | | 13,571 | | 1,978 | | 1994 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 1800 Perimeter Park Drive | | Office | | - | | 907 | | 5,745 | | 897 | | 993 | | 6,555 | | 7,549 | | 1,113 | | 1994 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2000 Perimeter Park Drive | | Office | | - | | 788 | | 5,860 | | 861 | | 842 | | 6,667 | | 7,509 | | 1,477 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 1700 Perimeter Center West | | Office | | - | | 1,230 | | 10,780 | | 2,591 | | 1,260 | | 13,341 | | 14,601 | | 1,949 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 3900 N. Paramount Parkway | | Office | | - | | 540 | | 13,296 | | 193 | | 574 | | 13,454 | | 14,029 | | 2,224 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 3900 S.Paramount Pkwy | | Office | | - | | 1,575 | | 12,244 | | 1,271 | | 1,612 | | 13,478 | | 15,090 | | 2,898 | | 2000 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 5200 East Paramount | | Office | | - | | 1,748 | | 17,388 | | 973 | | 1,797 | | 18,312 | | 20,109 | | 4,209 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Perimeter Park | | 3500 Paramount Pkwy | | Office | | - | | 755 | | 12,948 | | 137 | | 755 | | 13,085 | | 13,840 | | 3,075 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2700 Perimeter Park | | Industrial | | - | | 662 | | 3,209 | | 1,541 | | 662 | | 4,750 | | 5,412 | | 830 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Perimeter Park | | 5200 West Paramount | | Office | | - | | 1,831 | | 13,288 | | 441 | | 1,831 | | 13,730 | | 15,560 | | 1,888 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Perimeter Park | | 2450 Perimeter Park | | Office | | - | | 669 | | 4,003 | | 25 | | 669 | | 4,028 | | 4,697 | | 1,168 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Woodlake Center | | 100 Innovation Avenue (Woodlk) | | Industrial | | - | | 633 | | 4,003 | | 282 | | 633 | | 4,285 | | 4,918 | | 860 | | 1994 | | 1999 | |
Woodlake Center | | 101 Innovation Ave(Woodlk III) | | Industrial | | - | | 615 | | 4,095 | | 135 | | 615 | | 4,230 | | 4,845 | | 718 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Woodlake Center | | 200 Innovation Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 357 | | 4,494 | | 28 | | 357 | | 4,522 | | 4,878 | | 873 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Woodlake Center | | 501 Innovation Ave. | | Industrial | | - | | 640 | | 5,632 | | 158 | | 640 | | 5,790 | | 6,430 | | 830 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Woodlake Center | | 1000 Innovation (Woodlk 6) | | Industrial | | - | | 514 | | 2,927 | | 59 | | 514 | | 2,987 | | 3,501 | | 284 | | 1996 | | 2002 | |
Woodlake Center | | 1200 Innovation (Woodlk 7) | | Industrial | | - | | 740 | | 5,936 | | 59 | | 740 | | 5,995 | | 6,735 | | 1,101 | | 1996 | | 2002 | |
Woodlake Center | | Woodlake VIII | | Industrial | | - | | 908 | | 1,517 | | 340 | | 908 | | 1,856 | | 2,765 | | 186 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Meridian Business Campus | | 1835 Jefferson | | Industrial | | - | | 3,180 | | 7,959 | | - | | 3,180 | | 7,959 | | 11,140 | | 398 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Airpark East | | Airpark East-800 Commerce Dr. | | Industrial | | - | | 1,564 | | 3,341 | | 699 | | 1,564 | | 4,040 | | 5,604 | | 592 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
Haywood Oaks | | Haywood Oaks Building 8 | | Industrial | | - | | 617 | | 3,514 | | 230 | | 751 | | 3,610 | | 4,360 | | 1,277 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
Lakeview Place | | Three Lakeview | | Office | | - | | 2,126 | | 13,523 | | 1,943 | | 2,126 | | 15,466 | | 17,592 | | 3,539 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Lakeview Place | | One Lakeview Place | | Office | | - | | 2,046 | | 11,632 | | 1,359 | | 2,123 | | 12,914 | | 15,037 | | 2,617 | | 1986 | | 1998 | |
Lakeview Place | | Two Lakeview Place | | Office | | - | | 2,046 | | 11,856 | | 1,611 | | 2,046 | | 13,467 | | 15,513 | | 2,306 | | 1988 | | 1998 | |
Riverview Business Center | | Riverview Office Building | | Office | | - | | 847 | | 6,304 | | 1,059 | | 847 | | 7,363 | | 8,210 | | 1,446 | | 1983 | | 1999 | |
Nashville Business Center | | Nashville Business Center I | | Industrial | | - | | 936 | | 6,142 | | 110 | | 936 | | 6,251 | | 7,187 | | 1,136 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Nashville Business Center | | Nashville Business Center II | | Industrial | | - | | 5,659 | | 7,949 | | - | | 5,659 | | 7,949 | | 13,608 | | 92 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
Not Applicable | | Powertel Pk Lot at Grassmere | | Grounds | | - | | 1,050 | | - | | 39 | | 1,089 | | - | | 1,089 | | 151 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NEW ALBANY, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
New Albany | | 6525 West Campus Oval | | Office | | - | | 842 | | 3,700 | | 2,026 | | 881 | | 5,688 | | 6,568 | | 638 | | 1993 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NILES, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Niles Distribution Center | | Niles Distribution Center | | Industrial | | - | | 4,920 | | 3,669 | | 8 | | 4,920 | | 3,677 | | 8,597 | | 201 | | 1950 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NORCROSS, GEORGIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gwinnett Park | | 4258 Communications Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 29 | | 2,388 | | 130 | | 29 | | 2,518 | | 2,547 | | 415 | | 1981 | | 1999 | |
Gwinnett Park | | 4245 International Boulevard | | Industrial | | - | | 192 | | 6,545 | | - | | 192 | | 6,545 | | 6,737 | | 1,621 | | 1985 | | 1999 | |
Gwinnett Park | | 4355 International Boulevard | | Industrial | | - | | 233 | | 2,969 | | 648 | | 233 | | 3,618 | | 3,851 | | 554 | | 1983 | | 1999 | |
Gwinnett Park | | 4436 Park Drive | | Industrial | | - | | 18 | | 1,536 | | 36 | | 26 | | 1,563 | | 1,590 | | 347 | | 1968 | | 1999 | |
Gwinnett Park | | 1835 Shackleford Court | | Office | | - | | 29 | | 6,277 | | 999 | | 29 | | 7,277 | | 7,305 | | 1,346 | | 1990 | | 1999 | |
Gwinnett Park | | 1854 Shackleford Court | | Office | | - | | 52 | | 9,871 | | 1,322 | | 52 | | 11,193 | | 11,245 | | 1,876 | | 1985 | | 1999 | |
Gwinnett Park | | 4275 Shackleford Road | | Office | | 288 | | 8 | | 2,111 | | 545 | | 12 | | 2,653 | | 2,665 | | 518 | | 1985 | | 1999 | |
84
NORTHLAKE, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Northlake | | Northlake I | | Industrial | | - | | 5,721 | | 10,859 | | - | | 5,721 | | 10,859 | | 16,580 | | 1,227 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Northlake | | Northlake II | | Industrial | | - | | 3,004 | | 6,097 | | - | | 3,004 | | 6,097 | | 9,101 | | 241 | | 1970 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NORTH OLMSTED, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great Northern Corporate Ctr. | | Great Northern Corp Center I | | Office | | - | | 1,048 | | 7,072 | | 1,350 | | 1,040 | | 8,430 | | 9,469 | | 2,057 | | 1985 | | 1996 | |
Great Northern Corporate Ctr. | | Great Northern Corp Center II | | Office | | - | | 1,048 | | 7,206 | | 1,148 | | 1,048 | | 8,354 | | 9,402 | | 2,086 | | 1987 | | 1996 | |
Great Northern Corporate Ctr. | | Great Northern Corp Center III | | Office | | - | | 604 | | 5,660 | | 430 | | 604 | | 6,091 | | 6,694 | | 1,534 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
85
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
2000 York Road | | 2000 York Road | | Office | | 11,472 | | 2,625 | | 15,828 | | - | | 2,625 | | 15,828 | | 18,453 | | 1,222 | | 1960 | | 2005 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
OLIVETTE, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Warson Commerce Center | | Warson Commerce Center | | Industrial | | - | | 749 | | 5,371 | | 665 | | 749 | | 6,036 | | 6,785 | | 1,258 | | 1987 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ORLANDO, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liberty Park at Southcenter | | Southcenter I-Brede/Allied BTS | | Industrial | | - | | 3,094 | | 3,867 | | - | | 3,094 | | 3,867 | | 6,961 | | 491 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth Dist. Ctr-Bldg B | | Industrial | | - | | 565 | | 4,893 | | 431 | | 570 | | 5,319 | | 5,889 | | 893 | | 1996 | | 1999 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth Dist. Ctr-Bldg A | | Industrial | | - | | 493 | | 4,545 | | 198 | | 498 | | 4,738 | | 5,236 | | 775 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth Dist. Ctr-Bldg D | | Industrial | | - | | 593 | | 4,131 | | 66 | | 597 | | 4,193 | | 4,790 | | 689 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth Dist. Ctr-Bldg E | | Industrial | | - | | 649 | | 4,654 | | 331 | | 653 | | 4,981 | | 5,634 | | 844 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth Dist. Ctr-Bldg F | | Industrial | | - | | 1,030 | | 5,378 | | 995 | | 1,035 | | 6,368 | | 7,403 | | 1,308 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth Dist. Ctr-Bldg H | | Industrial | | - | | 725 | | 3,950 | | 37 | | 730 | | 3,981 | | 4,711 | | 796 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Chase BTS-Orlando | | Industrial | | - | | 598 | | 2,032 | | 1,274 | | 674 | | 3,229 | | 3,904 | | 327 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Parksouth Distribution Center | | Parksouth-Benjamin Moore BTS | | Industrial | | - | | 708 | | 2,070 | | 9 | | 1,115 | | 1,673 | | 2,787 | | 194 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PARK RIDGE, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
O’Hare Corporate Centre | | O’Hare Corporate Centre | | Office | | - | | 1,476 | | 8,819 | | 436 | | 1,476 | | 9,255 | | 10,731 | | 584 | | 1985 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PEPPER PIKE, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Corporate Circle | | Corporate Circle | | Office | | - | | 1,696 | | 11,380 | | 2,778 | | 1,698 | | 14,157 | | 15,854 | | 3,442 | | 1983 | | 1996 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PLAINFIELD, INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Plainfield Business Park | | Plainfield Building 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,104 | | 11,151 | | 94 | | 1,104 | | 11,245 | | 12,349 | | 1,695 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Plainfield Business Park | | Plainfield Building 2 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,387 | | 9,437 | | 267 | | 1,519 | | 9,572 | | 11,091 | | 1,521 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Plainfield Business Park | | Plainfield Building 3 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,016 | | 10,491 | | 2,250 | | 2,016 | | 12,741 | | 14,757 | | 1,600 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Plainfield Business Park | | Plainfield Building 5 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,726 | | 7,284 | | - | | 2,726 | | 7,284 | | 10,010 | | 333 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PLANO, TEXAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Legacy Business Park | | Metasolv Building Phase I | | Office | | - | | 1,527 | | 5,831 | | 724 | | 1,527 | | 6,555 | | 8,082 | | 1,222 | | 1997 | | 1999 | |
Legacy Business Park | | Metasolv Building Phase II | | Office | | - | | 1,181 | | 11,154 | | 206 | | 1,181 | | 11,359 | | 12,540 | | 2,308 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Medicine Lake Indust Ctr | | Medicine Lake Indus. Center | | Industrial | | 2,713 | | 1,145 | | 6,676 | | 861 | | 1,145 | | 7,537 | | 8,682 | | 1,922 | | 1970 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Brook Forest | | Brook Forest I | | Office | | - | | 1,242 | | 6,162 | | 522 | | 1,242 | | 6,684 | | 7,926 | | 1,607 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Centerview | | Centerview 5540 | | Office | | - | | 773 | | 6,307 | | 1,213 | | 773 | | 7,520 | | 8,293 | | 489 | | 1986 | | 2003 | |
Centerview | | Centerview 5565 | | Office | | - | | 513 | | 4,831 | | 245 | | 513 | | 5,076 | | 5,588 | | 312 | | 1999 | | 2003 | |
Centerview | | Centerview 5580 | | Office | | - | | 768 | | 5,675 | | 305 | | 768 | | 5,981 | | 6,748 | | 358 | | 1987 | | 2003 | |
Crabtree Overlook | | Crabtree Overlook | | Office | | - | | 2,164 | | 21,050 | | 135 | | 2,164 | | 21,185 | | 23,349 | | 3,863 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Interchange Plaza | | 801 Jones Franklin Rd | | Office | | 4,562 | | 1,351 | | 7,772 | | 617 | | 1,351 | | 8,389 | | 9,740 | | 1,411 | | 1995 | | 1999 | |
Interchange Plaza | | 5520 Capital Ctr Dr (Intrch I) | | Office | | - | | 842 | | 4,395 | | 530 | | 842 | | 4,926 | | 5,767 | | 1,002 | | 1993 | | 1999 | |
Walnut Creek | | Walnut Creek Business Park #1 | | Industrial | | - | | 419 | | 3,100 | | 528 | | 419 | | 3,628 | | 4,047 | | 841 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Walnut Creek | | Walnut Creek Business Park #2 | | Industrial | | - | | 456 | | 3,774 | | 256 | | 456 | | 4,030 | | 4,486 | | 711 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Walnut Creek | | Walnut Creek Business Park #3 | | Industrial | | - | | 679 | | 4,345 | | 1,210 | | 679 | | 5,556 | | 6,235 | | 821 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Walnut Creek | | Walnut Creek IV | | Industrial | | - | | 2,038 | | 2,977 | | - | | 2,038 | | 2,977 | | 5,015 | | 235 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ROMEOVILLE, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Crossroads Business Park | | Chapco Carton Company | | Industrial | | - | | 917 | | 5,217 | | 49 | | 917 | | 5,266 | | 6,183 | | 523 | | 1999 | | 2002 | |
Park 55 | | Park 55, Building 1 | | Industrial | | - | | 6,433 | | 9,058 | | - | | 6,433 | | 9,058 | | 15,490 | | 352 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
86
ROSEMONT, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
O’Hare International Ctr | | O’Hare International Ctr I | | Office | | - | | 7,700 | | 31,740 | | - | | 7,700 | | 31,740 | | 39,441 | | 1,351 | | 1984 | | 2005 | |
O’Hare International Ctr | | O’Hare International Ctr II | | Office | | - | | 8,103 | | 31,168 | | - | | 8,103 | | 31,168 | | 39,271 | | 1,154 | | 1987 | | 2005 | |
Riverway | | Riverway East | | Office | | - | | 13,684 | | 31,771 | | - | | 13,664 | | 31,771 | | 45,434 | | 1,478 | | 1987 | | 2005 | |
Riverway | | Riverway West | | Office | | - | | 3,294 | | 38,025 | | - | | 3,294 | | 38,025 | | 41,319 | | 1,101 | | 1989 | | 2005 | |
Riverway | | Riverway Central | | Office | | - | | 4,229 | | 68,105 | | - | | 4,229 | | 68,105 | | 72,334 | | 1,513 | | 1989 | | 2005 | |
Riverway | | Riverway Retail | | Retail | | - | | 189 | | - | | - | | 189 | | - | | 189 | | 52 | | 1987 | | 2005 | |
SEVEN HILLS, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Rock Run Business Campus | | Rock Run North | | Office | | 2,323 | | 837 | | 5,545 | | 625 | | 960 | | 6,046 | | 7,006 | | 1,608 | | 1984 | | 1996 | |
87
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Rock Run Business Campus | | Rock Run Center | | Office | | 2,921 | | 1,046 | | 6,989 | | 696 | | 1,169 | | 7,562 | | 8,731 | | 2,069 | | 1985 | | 1996 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SHARONVILLE, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Mosteller Distribution Center | | Mosteller Distribution Ctr. I | | Industrial | | - | | 1,275 | | 6,316 | | 3,298 | | 1,275 | | 9,614 | | 10,889 | | 2,536 | | 1957 | | 1996 | |
Mosteller Distribution Center | | Mosteller Distribution Ctr. II | | Industrial | | - | | 828 | | 4,744 | | 1,324 | | 828 | | 6,068 | | 6,896 | | 1,812 | | 1997 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SOLON, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Solon | | 28600 Fountain Parkway-Bldg 2 | | Industrial | | - | | 1,138 | | 8,725 | | 166 | | 1,138 | | 8,892 | | 10,029 | | 1,684 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Solon | | 30600 Carter | | Industrial | | - | | 819 | | 3,363 | | 580 | | 821 | | 3,941 | | 4,762 | | 803 | | 1971 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Minneapolis-West | | 1600 Tower | | Office | | - | | 2,321 | | 31,377 | | 4,516 | | 2,321 | | 35,894 | | 38,215 | | 7,300 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Minneapolis-West | | North Plaza | | Office | | - | | 347 | | 1,413 | | 200 | | 347 | | 1,613 | | 1,960 | | 1,138 | | 1966 | | 1998 | |
Minneapolis-West | | South Plaza | | Office | | - | | 397 | | 1,406 | | 216 | | 397 | | 1,622 | | 2,018 | | 1,101 | | 1966 | | 1998 | |
Minneapolis-West | | MoneyGram Tower | | Office | | - | | 3,039 | | 35,961 | | 2,078 | | 3,091 | | 37,987 | | 41,078 | | 6,615 | | 1987 | | 1999 | |
Novartis | | Novartis Warehouse | | Industrial | | - | | 2,005 | | 10,948 | | 459 | | 2,005 | | 11,407 | | 13,411 | | 2,188 | | 1960 | | 1998 | |
Minneapolis-West | | 5219 Building | | Office | | - | | 99 | | 561 | | 16 | | 102 | | 574 | | 676 | | 391 | | 1965 | | 1998 | |
Minneapolis | | Chilles Ground Lease | | Grounds | | - | | 921 | | - | | 69 | | 990 | | - | | 990 | | 4 | | | | 1998 | |
Minneapolis | | Olive Garden Ground Lease | | Grounds | | - | | 921 | | - | | - | | 921 | | - | | 921 | | - | | | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Craig Park Center | | Craig Park Center | | Industrial | | - | | 254 | | 2,262 | | 467 | | 254 | | 2,729 | | 2,983 | | 553 | | 1984 | | 1998 | |
Hawthorn Office | | Hawthorn Office#1 (Savvis) | | Office | | - | | 2,600 | | 15,239 | | 241 | | 2,600 | | 15,480 | | 18,080 | | 1,636 | | 1997 | | 2002 | |
Lakeside Crossing | | Lakeside Crossing Buliding I | | Industrial | | - | | 574 | | 2,272 | | 611 | | 574 | | 2,883 | | 3,457 | | 361 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
Lakeside Crossing | | Lakeside Crossing Building II | | Industrial | | - | | 1,118 | | 2,227 | | - | | 1,118 | | 2,228 | | 3,345 | | 536 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Lakeside Crossing | | Lakeside Crossing Building III | | Industrial | | - | | 1,851 | | 4,881 | | 651 | | 1,851 | | 5,532 | | 7,383 | | 760 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
Lakeside Crossing | | Lakeside Crossing V | | Office | | - | | 883 | | 1,928 | | - | | 883 | | 1,928 | | 2,811 | | 338 | | 2003 | | 2003 | |
Lakeside Crossing | | Lakeside Crossing Building VI | | Industrial | | - | | 1,074 | | 2,125 | | 1,427 | | 1,507 | | 3,119 | | 4,626 | | 374 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
Laumeier Office Park | | Laumeier I | | Office | | - | | 1,384 | | 10,063 | | 1,983 | | 1,384 | | 12,047 | | 13,430 | | 3,871 | | 1987 | | 1995 | |
Laumeier Office Park | | Laumeier II | | Office | | - | | 1,421 | | 9,998 | | 1,486 | | 1,421 | | 11,483 | | 12,904 | | 3,331 | | 1988 | | 1995 | |
Laumeier Office Park | | Laumeier IV | | Office | | - | | 1,029 | | 7,393 | | 1,076 | | 1,029 | | 8,469 | | 9,498 | | 2,094 | | 1987 | | 1998 | |
Maryville Center | | 500-510 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 3,402 | | 24,779 | | 2,992 | | 3,402 | | 27,771 | | 31,173 | | 5,618 | | 1984 | | 1997 | |
Maryville Center | | 530 Maryville Centre | | Office | | 6,063 | | 2,219 | | 15,325 | | 2,023 | | 2,219 | | 17,349 | | 19,568 | | 3,707 | | 1990 | | 1997 | |
Maryville Center | | 550 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 1,996 | | 12,532 | | 185 | | 1,996 | | 12,718 | | 14,714 | | 2,635 | | 1988 | | 1997 | |
Maryville Center | | 635-645 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 3,048 | | 18,359 | | 839 | | 3,048 | | 19,198 | | 22,246 | | 4,148 | | 1987 | | 1997 | |
Maryville Center | | 655 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 1,860 | | 13,258 | | 275 | | 1,860 | | 13,534 | | 15,394 | | 2,813 | | 1994 | | 1997 | |
Maryville Center | | 540 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 2,219 | | 14,821 | | 1,010 | | 2,219 | | 15,832 | | 18,050 | | 3,621 | | 1990 | | 1997 | |
Maryville Center | | 520 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 2,404 | | 14,560 | | 976 | | 2,404 | | 15,536 | | 17,940 | | 2,660 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Maryville Center | | 700 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 4,556 | | 28,599 | | 360 | | 4,556 | | 28,960 | | 33,515 | | 5,625 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Maryville Center | | 533 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 3,230 | | 17,921 | | 275 | | 3,230 | | 18,196 | | 21,426 | | 3,148 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Maryville Center | | 555 Maryville Centre | | Office | | - | | 3,226 | | 15,799 | | 1,648 | | 3,226 | | 17,447 | | 20,672 | | 2,412 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Maryville Center | | 625 Maryville Centre | | Office | | 4,196 | | 2,509 | | 11,229 | | 262 | | 2,509 | | 11,490 | | 13,999 | | 1,529 | | 1996 | | 2002 | |
St. Louis Business Center | | St. Louis Business Center A | | Industrial | | - | | 194 | | 1,768 | | 508 | | 194 | | 2,276 | | 2,470 | | 534 | | 1987 | | 1998 | |
St. Louis Business Center | | St. Louis Business Center B | | Industrial | | - | | 250 | | 2,147 | | 1,112 | | 250 | | 3,259 | | 3,508 | | 608 | | 1986 | | 1998 | |
St. Louis Business Center | | St. Louis Business Center C | | Industrial | | - | | 166 | | 1,502 | | 409 | | 166 | | 1,912 | | 2,078 | | 495 | | 1986 | | 1998 | |
St. Louis Business Center | | St. Louis Business Center D | | Industrial | | - | | 168 | | 1,455 | | 314 | | 168 | | 1,769 | | 1,937 | | 312 | | 1987 | | 1998 | |
Southridge | | Southridge Business Center | | Industrial | | - | | 1,158 | | 4,234 | | 1,723 | | 1,158 | | 5,957 | | 7,115 | | 558 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
West Port Place | | Westport Center I | | Industrial | | - | | 1,707 | | 5,456 | | 658 | | 1,707 | | 6,115 | | 7,821 | | 1,368 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
West Port Place | | Westport Center II | | Industrial | | - | | 914 | | 2,226 | | 257 | | 914 | | 2,483 | | 3,397 | | 792 | | 1998 | | 1998 | |
West Port Place | | Westport Center III | | Industrial | | - | | 1,206 | | 2,976 | | 524 | | 1,206 | | 3,500 | | 4,706 | | 992 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
West Port Place | | Westport Center IV | | Industrial | | - | | 1,440 | | 4,860 | | 58 | | 1,440 | | 4,918 | | 6,358 | | 838 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
West Port Place | | Westport Center V | | Industrial | | - | | 493 | | 1,591 | | 23 | | 493 | | 1,614 | | 2,107 | | 478 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
West Port Place | | Westport Place | | Office | | - | | 1,990 | | 6,340 | | 670 | | 1,990 | | 7,010 | | 9,000 | | 1,393 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Westmark | | Westmark | | Office | | - | | 1,497 | | 10,436 | | 2,181 | | 1,684 | | 12,430 | | 14,114 | | 3,565 | | 1987 | | 1995 | |
Westview Place | | Westview Place | | Office | | - | | 669 | | 9,055 | | 2,342 | | 669 | | 11,396 | | 12,065 | | 3,299 | | 1988 | | 1995 | |
Woodsmill Commons | | Woodsmill Commons II (400) | | Office | | - | | 1,718 | | 7,896 | | - | | 1,718 | | 7,896 | | 9,614 | | 513 | | 1985 | | 2003 | |
Woodsmill Commons | | Woodsmill Commons I (424) | | Office | | - | | 1,836 | | 7,783 | | - | | 1,836 | | 7,783 | | 9,619 | | 523 | | 1985 | | 2003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
88
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
ST. PETERS, MISSOURI | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Horizon Business Ctr | | Horizon Business Center | | Industrial | | - | | 344 | | 2,483 | | 276 | | 344 | | 2,759 | | 3,103 | | 553 | | 1985 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
STRONGSVILLE, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Strongsville Business Park | | Strongsville Ind Park Bdg #142 | | Industrial | | - | | 594 | | 3,754 | | 1,047 | | 594 | | 4,801 | | 5,395 | | 620 | | 2002 | | 2002 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
89
| | | | | | | | | | | | Cost Capitalized | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Subsequent to | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Building | | | | Initial Cost | | Development | | Gross Book Value 12/31/05 | | Accumulated | | Year | | Year | |
Development | | Name | | Type | | Encumbrances | | Land | | Buildings | | or Acquisition | | Land/Land Imp | | Bldgs/TI | | Total | | Depreciation (1) | | Constructed | | Acquired | |
Dyment | | Dyment | | Industrial | | - | | 816 | | 5,368 | | 111 | | 816 | | 5,478 | | 6,294 | | 1,181 | | 1988 | | 1997 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SUNRISE, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Sawgrass | | Sawgrass - Building B | | Office | | - | | 1,211 | | 6,424 | | 1,188 | | 1,211 | | 7,612 | | 8,823 | | 1,401 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
Sawgrass | | Sawgrass - Building A | | Office | | - | | 1,147 | | 4,530 | | 37 | | 1,147 | | 4,568 | | 5,715 | | 705 | | 2000 | | 2001 | |
Sawgrass | | Sawgrass Pointe | | Office | | - | | 3,484 | | 21,827 | | 4,713 | | 3,484 | | 26,540 | | 30,024 | | 3,022 | | 2001 | | 2002 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
TAMPA, FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr I | | Industrial | | - | | 483 | | 2,658 | | 40 | | 487 | | 2,694 | | 3,181 | | 450 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr II | | Industrial | | - | | 530 | | 4,901 | | 17 | | 534 | | 4,914 | | 5,448 | | 801 | | 1998 | | 1999 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr III | | Industrial | | - | | 334 | | 2,771 | | 47 | | 338 | | 2,814 | | 3,151 | | 459 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr IV | | Industrial | | - | | 600 | | 2,162 | | 1,003 | | 604 | | 3,161 | | 3,765 | | 683 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr V | | Industrial | | - | | 488 | | 3,538 | | 108 | | 488 | | 3,646 | | 4,134 | | 848 | | 2000 | | 2000 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr VI | | Industrial | | - | | 555 | | 4,517 | | 487 | | 555 | | 5,004 | | 5,559 | | 792 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield Distribution Ctr VII | | Industrial | | - | | 394 | | 4,027 | | 779 | | 394 | | 4,806 | | 5,199 | | 1,438 | | 2001 | | 2001 | |
Fairfield Distribution Center | | Fairfield VIII | | Industrial | | - | | 1,082 | | 3,326 | | - | | 1,082 | | 3,326 | | 4,408 | | 327 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
Highland Oaks | | Highland Oaks I | | Office | | - | | 1,525 | | 13,505 | | 657 | | 1,525 | | 14,161 | | 15,686 | | 2,785 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
Highland Oaks | | Highland Oaks II | | Office | | - | | 1,605 | | 11,542 | | 2,910 | | 1,605 | | 14,452 | | 16,057 | | 2,572 | | 1999 | | 2000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
WEST CHESTER, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Centre Pointe Office Park | | Centre Pointe I | | Office | | - | | 2,501 | | 9,574 | | - | | 2,501 | | 9,574 | | 12,075 | | 824 | | 2000 | | 2004 | |
Centre Pointe Office Park | | Centre Pointe II | | Office | | - | | 2,056 | | 10,063 | | - | | 2,056 | | 10,063 | | 12,119 | | 839 | | 2001 | | 2004 | |
Centre Pointe Office Park | | Centre Pointe III | | Office | | - | | 2,048 | | 10,309 | | - | | 2,048 | | 10,309 | | 12,357 | | 857 | | 2002 | | 2004 | |
Centre Pointe Office Park | | Centre Pointe IV | | Office | | - | | 2,013 | | 8,697 | | - | | 2,932 | | 7,778 | | 10,710 | | 40 | | 2005 | | 2005 | |
World Park at Union Centre | | World Park at Union Centre 11 | | Industrial | | - | | 2,592 | | 6,936 | | - | | 2,592 | | 6,936 | | 9,528 | | 497 | | 2004 | | 2004 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
WESTERVILLE, OHIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Westerville-Polaris | | Liebert | | Office | | - | | 755 | | 3,611 | | 877 | | 755 | | 4,489 | | 5,244 | | 1,070 | | 1999 | | 1999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
WESTMONT, ILLINOIS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Oakmont Corporate Center | | Oakmont Tech Center | | Industrial | | - | | 1,501 | | 8,712 | | 2,382 | | 1,703 | | 10,892 | | 12,595 | | 1,819 | | 1989 | | 1998 | |
Oakmont Corporate Center | | Oakmont Circle Office | | Office | | - | | 3,177 | | 13,942 | | 2,062 | | 3,528 | | 15,654 | | 19,181 | | 2,964 | | 1990 | | 1998 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Eliminations | | | | | | | | | | (27,617 | ) | (241 | ) | (27,376 | ) | (27,617 | ) | (15,254 | ) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | 161,187 | | 659,990 | | 3,847,795 | | 323,721 | | 675,050 | | 4,156,456 | | 4,831,506 | | 754,742 | | | | | |
(1) Depreciation of real estate is computed using the straight-line method over 40 years for buildings, 15 years for land improvements and shorter periods based on lease terms (generally 3 to 10 years) for tenant improvements.
| | Real Estate Assets | | Accumulated Depreciation | | |
| | 2005 | | | 2004 | | | 2003 | | | 2005 | | | 2004 | | | 2003 | | |
Balance at beginning of year | | $ | 5,377,094 | | | $ | 5,094,168 | | | $ | 4,846,355 | | | $ | 788,900 | | | $ | 677,357 | | | $ | 555,858 | | |
Acquisitions | | 272,141 | | | 213,500 | | | 233,248 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | |
Construction costs and tenant improvements | | 321,786 | | | 291,850 | | | 188,449 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | |
Depreciation expense | | | | | - | | | - | | | 200,102 | | | 185,091 | | | 168,959 | | |
Acquisition of minority interest | | - | | | 11,408 | | | 9,984 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | |
| | 5,971,021 | | | 5,610,926 | | | 5,278,036 | | | 989,002 | | | 862,448 | | | 724,817 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deductions during year: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cost of real estate sold or contributed | | (1,081,447 | ) | | (180,982 | ) | | (150,874 | ) | | (179,848 | ) | | (20,878 | ) | | (14,966 | ) | |
Impairment Allowance | | (3,656 | ) | | (180 | ) | | (500 | ) | | | | | | | | | | |
Write-off of fully amortized assets | | (54,412 | ) | | (52,670 | ) | | (32,494 | ) | | (54,412 | ) | | (52,670 | ) | | (32,494 | ) | |
Balance at end of year | | $ | 4,831,506 | | | $ | 5,377,094 | | | $ | 5,094,168 | | | $ | 754,742 | | | $ | 788,900 | | | $ | 677,357 | | |
90
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
| DUKE REALTY CORPORATION |
| |
| |
March 6, 2006 | By: | /s/ Dennis D. Oklak | |
| | Dennis D. Oklak |
| | Chairman and Chief Executive |
| | Officer |
| |
| |
| By: | /s/ Matthew A. Cohoat | |
| | Matthew A. Cohoat |
| | Executive Vice President and |
| | Chief Financial Officer |
| | (Principal Financial Officer) |
| | | | | | | | | |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature | | Date | | Title |
| | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Barrington H. Branch* | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
Barrington H. Branch | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Geoffrey Button * | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
Geoffrey Button | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ William Cavanaugh, III* | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
William Cavanaugh, III | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Ngaire E. Cuneo * | | | 3/5/06 | | | Director |
Ngaire E. Cuneo | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Charles R. Eitel* | | | 2/14/06 | | | Director |
Charles R. Eitel | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Dr. R. Glenn Hubbard* | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
Dr. R. Glenn Hubbard | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Dr. Martin C. Jischke* | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
Dr. Martin C. Jischke | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ L. Ben Lytle * | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
L. Ben Lytle | | | | |
91
/s/ William O. McCoy * | | | 2/14/06 | | | Director |
William O. McCoy | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ John W. Nelley, Jr. * | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
John W. Nelley, Jr. | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Jack R. Shaw * | | | 2/15/06 | | | Director |
Jack R. Shaw | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Robert J. Woodward * | | | 2/14/06 | | | Director |
Robert J. Woodward | | | | |
* By Dennis D. Oklak, Attorney-in-Fact | /s/ Dennis D. Oklak | |
92