Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

OR

For the transition period from              to             

Commission File Number 1-11706

CARRAMERICA REALTY CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (202) 729-1700

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  ¨

Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).    Yes  x    No  ¨

As of June 30, 2004, the aggregate market value of Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $1.6 billion, based upon the closing price of $30.23 on the New York Stock Exchange composite tape on such date.

Number of shares of Common Stock outstanding as of February 9, 2005: 54,903,094

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: Portions of the proxy statement for the Annual Stockholders Meeting to be held in 2005 are incorporated by reference into Part III.

Table of Contents

PART 1

Item 1. Business

THE COMPANY

GENERAL

CarrAmerica Realty Corporation is a fully integrated, self-administered and self-managed publicly traded real estate investment trust (“REIT”). We focus on the acquisition, development, ownership and operation of office properties, located primarily in selected markets across the United States. As of December 31, 2004, we owned greater than 50% interests in 251 operating office buildings containing a total of approximately 19.9 million square feet of net rentable area. The stabilized operating buildings (those in operation more than one year) in which we owned a controlling interest as of December 31, 2004 were 88.2% leased. These properties had approximately 1,027 tenants. As of December 31, 2004, we also owned minority interests (ranging from 15% to 50%) in 41 operating office buildings and one building under construction. The 41 operating office buildings contain a total of approximately 6.5 million square feet of net rentable area. The one office building under construction will contain approximately 124,000 square feet of net rentable area. The stabilized operating buildings in which we owned a minority interest as of December 31, 2004 were 88.0% leased.

We were organized as a Maryland corporation on July 9, 1992. We or our predecessor, The Oliver Carr Company (“OCCO”), have developed, owned and operated office buildings in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area for more than 40 years. Our experienced staff of approximately 690 employees, including about 400 on-site building employees, provides a broad range of real estate services. Our principal executive offices are located at 1850 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006. Our telephone number is 202-729-1700. Our web site can be found at www.carramerica.com.

Business Strategy

Our primary business objectives are to achieve long-term sustainable per share earnings and cash flow growth and to maximize stockholder value by acquiring, developing, owning and operating office properties primarily in markets throughout the United States that we believe exhibit strong, long-term growth characteristics. We believe we utilize our knowledge of our core markets to evaluate market conditions and determine whether those conditions favor acquisition, development or disposition of assets. During the last five years, we have actively deployed capital between acquisitions and development in order to create a portfolio with strong long-term growth prospects. In addition to seeking growth through acquisitions and development, we continue to strive to retain tenants and attract new tenants in our existing portfolio. We believe that our focus on our local relationships in our core markets, on customer service, primarily through superior property management, and our fast and responsive leasing initiatives has enabled us to maintain strong portfolio performance in a challenging office market.

Our principal segment of operations is real estate property operations, which consists primarily of commercial property ownership. Approximately 95.3% of our operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 were associated with our real estate property operations. Other business activities, including development and property management services, are included in other operations.

Market Focus

Core Market Data and Outlook

We have properties in twelve U.S. markets. While we are active in all of our markets, our invested capital is concentrated in four markets: Northern California; Washington, D.C.; Southern California; and Seattle, Washington. During 2004, 84.1% of our total property operating income was derived from these markets.

Each of our markets is managed by a Market Managing Director (MMD), who is responsible for maximizing returns on our existing portfolio and pursuing investment, development and service opportunities. They ensure that we are consistently meeting the needs of our customers, identifying new growth or capital deployment opportunities and sustaining active relationships with real estate brokers. Because of their ties and experience in the local markets, our MMDs have extensive knowledge of local conditions in their respective markets and are invaluable in building our local operations and investment strategies.

2

Table of Contents

Our property operating income by market for the year ended December 31, 2004 was as follows:

As a result of the weak economic climate over the last several years, the office real estate markets were materially affected. The contraction of office workforces reduced demand for office space and overall vacancy rates for office properties increased in all of our markets through 2002 and our operations were adversely impacted. In 2003, vacancy rates appeared to peak in many of our markets and some positive net absorption of space started to occur. In 2004, the positive trend of reduced vacancy rates and positive net absorption continued in most of our markets. As a result of improved job growth, leasing activity is up significantly, and we believe that market rental rates have stabilized in all of our markets and are beginning to improve in some of our markets including Washington, D.C and Southern California. Rental economics are expected to improve in most of our markets by the end of 2005.

Due to the improving market conditions described above and the elimination of most of our poor credit quality tenants through lease defaults and terminations in the last few years, we believe that our average occupancy in most markets stabilized in the second half of 2004. Our occupancy in the portfolio of operating properties increased to 88.2% at December 31, 2004 compared to 87.8% at December 31, 2003 and 92.3% at December 31, 2002. If demand continues to improve in 2005, we expect that our overall portfolio average occupancy may improve further. Our occupancy improved slightly in 2004 over 2003 due to acquisitions of properties with higher occupancies and dispositions of certain low occupancy properties. Our same store (properties we owned in both years) occupancy was 88.0% in 2004 compared to 90.2% in 2003, although same store occupancy began to improve in the second half of 2004 increasing from 87.1% at June 30, 2004 to 88.0% at December 31, 2004. In connection with terminating tenants in 2004, we earned $7.0 million of termination fees. These fees are non-recurring in nature and while we expect we will earn modest termination fees in 2005, we expect that they will be substantially lower than in 2004.

Rental rates on space that was re-leased in 2004 decreased an average of 14.4% in comparison to rates that were in effect under expiring leases. While market rental rates have stabilized in our markets, rental rates on in-place leases in certain markets remain significantly above current market rental rates. We estimate that market rental rates on leased space expiring in 2005 will be, on average, approximately 8%-12% lower than straight-lined rents on expiring leases. We have 1.6 million square feet of space on which leases are currently scheduled to expire in 2005.

3

Table of Contents

Market Strategy

While we believe that most of our core markets provide opportunities for strong returns on investment, we believe that the supply and demand characteristics of our four largest markets will result in higher returns from long term ownership. We regularly re-evaluate our investment focus between our markets and periodically reallocate capital between them. As part of our continuing evaluation of our portfolio, we have determined that we will be better positioned in this market environment by concentrating our focus in markets where we have greater scale and market penetration, which we believe will enable us to reduce overhead while maintaining our growth initiatives and the diversification of our tenant base. In addition, as part of our ongoing portfolio evaluation process, we review from time to time entering into new markets where we believe that we can successfully compete with existing property owners and obtain attractive returns on our investments.

Disciplined Investment Strategy

We have established a set of physical, geographic and financial criteria to evaluate how we allocate our capital resources among investment choices. Our disciplined investment strategy is adjusted from time to time in response to market changes or corporate priorities between markets or asset types depending upon the market or the investment opportunity. In general, we focus our investing on high quality assets that improve our quality of cash flows via the location of the asset, its physical characteristics and/or the creditworthiness of the property’s tenants. Consistent with this strategy, we are currently focusing our new investment capital on upgrading our portfolio by seeking to acquire Class A properties primarily in the Washington, D.C. metro area, Northern and Southern California and Seattle, Washington and pursuing investments opportunistically in our other markets.

Acquisitions and Dispositions

From time to time, we have been very active in acquiring office properties. We believe that our responsiveness to seller timing and structural parameters helps provide us with a competitive advantage in consummating acquisitions in a highly-competitive marketplace. During 2004, we acquired six operating properties from third parties and we entered into a new joint venture that acquired operating properties. The acquisitions involved properties totaling almost 1.9 million rentable square feet and our investment was approximately $463.6 million. The acquisition environment has become more competitive over the last several years and it has become increasingly difficult to find acquisitions that meet our financial return objectives. However, we will continue to selectively pursue acquisitions in our markets where attractive opportunities exist, particularly when pricing yields make acquisitions of existing properties attractive in comparison to new property development. In addition, we will continue to pursue our strategy of upgrading our portfolio by recycling capital out of underperforming properties and redeploying such capital primarily in our Washington, D.C., Northern and Southern California and Seattle, Washington markets.

We also may dispose of assets that become inconsistent with our long-term strategic or return objectives. We may then redeploy the proceeds from the dispositions into other office properties, or use them to fund development operations or to support other corporate needs. We also may contribute properties that we own to joint ventures with third parties. Given the difficult acquisition market previously described, during 2005, we expect to dispose of more assets than we acquire. Currently, market conditions are very favorable for selling properties and we expect, on a weighted-average basis, dispositions to exceed acquisitions by approximately $150.0 million in 2005. However, if the acquisition market improves and pricing becomes more favorable, it is possible that net dispositions during 2005 may be significantly less.

We are currently marketing for sale CarrAmerica Corporate Center, an approximately 1.0 million rentable square feet property, in the San Francisco Bay area of California and two properties with approximately 0.3 million rentable square feet in Southern California. The three properties had a net book value at December 31, 2004 of approximately $132.7 million. We are seeking to consummate the transactions by the end of the first quarter, but there can be no assurance that the properties will be marketed successfully or that, even if marketed successfully, the sales will be completed in the expected time frame. The properties did not meet our criteria to be classified as held for sale for financial reporting purposes at December 31, 2004.

4

Table of Contents

Development

Development of office properties is a component of our long-term growth strategy. We believe that long-term investment returns resulting from stabilized properties we develop should generally exceed those from properties we acquire. We seek to control development risks by:

The competitive acquisition environment has driven acquisition prices in some markets to at or above replacement cost. As a result, we are now considering build-to-own projects in selected markets with or without pre-leasing commitments.

Financing

We manage our capital structure to reflect a flexible, long-term investment approach, generally seeking to match the stable return nature of our assets with a mix of equity and various debt instruments. We mainly use fixed rate debt instruments in order to match the returns from our real estate assets. We also utilize variable rate debt for short-term financing purposes or to protect against the risk, that at certain times, fixed rates may overstate our long-term costs of borrowing if assumed inflation or growth in the economy implicit in higher fixed interest rates do not materialize. At times, our mix of variable and fixed rate debt may not suit our needs. At those times, we use derivative financial instruments, including interest rate swaps and caps, forward interest rate options or interest rate options in order to assist us in managing our debt mix. We will either hedge our variable rate debt to give it a fixed interest rate or hedge fixed rate debt to give it a variable interest rate. We do not expect to materially increase our leverage ratio in 2005 to grow our portfolio. However, we may need to borrow under our line of credit or sell assets in order to maintain our common stock dividend at the current rate. We currently expect to maintain our common stock dividend rate of $0.50 per quarter in 2005. There can be no assurance that circumstances may not change and as a result of poorer than expected operating results or the inability to obtain financing on favorable terms, or at all, that we will not later reduce our dividend below the current rate. We generally are restricted from paying dividends that would exceed 90% of our funds from operations during any four-quarter period.

Joint Ventures

We use joint venture arrangements selectively to reduce investment risk by diversifying capital deployment and to enhance returns on invested capital through fee income derived from service arrangements with joint ventures. In 2004, we invested in a joint venture with JP Morgan Fleming Asset Management to acquire three existing buildings and a small development site in Dallas, Texas.

Corporate Structure

In December 2003, our Board of Directors approved a plan to restructure the manner in which we hold our assets by converting to what is commonly referred to as an umbrella partnership REIT, or UPREIT, structure. To effect the UPREIT restructuring, we formed CarrAmerica Realty Operating Partnership, L.P., or the Operating Partnership, to which we contributed substantially all of our assets on June 30, 2004 in exchange for 100% of the units of common and preferred partnership interest in the Operating Partnership and the assumption by the Operating Partnership of substantially all of our liabilities, including the assumption of the obligations under our unsecured credit facility and our senior unsecured notes. At December 31, 2004, we owned all of the outstanding units of partnership interest of the Operating Partnership.

Since the UPREIT restructuring, substantially all of our business is being conducted through the Operating Partnership and our primary asset is our interest in the Operating Partnership. We undertook the UPREIT

5

Table of Contents

restructuring to enable us to better compete with other office REITs, many of which are structured as UPREITs, for the acquisition of properties from tax-motivated sellers. As a result of the UPREIT restructuring, the Operating Partnership can issue units of limited partnership interest in the Operating Partnership to tax-motivated sellers who contribute properties to the Operating Partnership, thereby enabling those sellers to realize certain tax benefits that would be unavailable if we purchased properties directly for cash.

2004 Activities

Acquisition Activity

During 2004, we made six acquisitions of operating properties (12 buildings) from third parties. The acquisitions involved properties totaling almost 1.5 million rentable square feet and our investment was approximately $449.2 million. The table below details our 2004 consolidated acquisitions.

Also, during 2004, we entered into a new joint venture arrangement which acquired operating properties and land. The table below details our 2004 joint venture investments.

Disposition Activity

During 2004, we sold 14 operating properties (20 buildings) totaling approximately 2.0 million square feet for approximately $213.0 million in cash recognizing a total gain on the sales of $19.9 million. The table below details our 2004 dispositions.

6

Table of Contents

In addition, in 2004, a joint venture in which we are a 50% partner sold its interest in a building with 222,989 rentable square feet for approximately $41.3 million. Our portion of the gain recognized on the sale was approximately $20.1 million.

Development Activity

As of December 31, 2004, we had under construction approximately 124,000 rentable square feet in an office building in a joint venture project in which we own a minority interest. This project is expected to cost $15.9 million, of which our total investment is expected to be approximately $5.6 million. Through December 31, 2004, approximately $9.8 million or 61.7% of total project costs had been expended on this project.

Financing Activity

We issued $225.0 million principal amount of senior unsecured notes in March 2004 with net proceeds of approximately $222.7 million. The notes bear interest at 3.625% per annum payable semi-annually beginning October 1, 2004. The notes mature on April 1, 2009. We used the proceeds from the notes to pay down our unsecured credit facility.

We issued $200.0 million principal amount of senior unsecured notes in August 2004 with net proceeds of approximately $197.2 million. The notes bear interest at 5.125% per annum payable semi-annually beginning March 1, 2005. The notes mature on September 1, 2011. We used the proceeds from the notes to pay down our unsecured credit facility.

$150.0 million of senior unsecured notes matured on July 1, 2004 and were repaid on that date using borrowings from our unsecured credit facility.

We repaid $107.7 million of fixed rate mortgage debt in 2004 and converted $19.7 million of mortgages to notes payable secured by letters of credit.

As of December 31, 2004, 70.8% of our debt carried a fixed rate of interest (excluding the impact of interest rate cap agreements) and 29.2% is subject to a variable rates of interest, including our line of credit and debt related to interest rate swap agreements.

Forward-Looking Statements

Statements contained in this Form 10-K which are not historical fact may be forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Such statements (none of which is intended as a guarantee of performance) are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, which could cause our actual future results, achievements or transactions to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date this Form 10-K is filed with the SEC. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements as the same may be supplemented from time to time. Such factors include, among others:

7

Table of Contents

Available Information

The address of our site on the World Wide Web is www.carramerica.com. You may obtain on our web site, free of charge, a copy of this Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments filed to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such reports with the SEC.

Our Directors

The current members of our Board of Directors are as follows:

8

Table of Contents

Investment Income Trust, Inc. (and other funds) and Borg-Warner Automotive, Inc. From June 1995 through August 1998, Dr. Brimmer served as chairman of the District of Columbia Financial Control Board. He was a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System from March 1966 through August 1974. Dr. Brimmer received a Bachelor of Arts degree and a master’s degree in economics from the University of Washington and a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University. Dr. Brimmer is chairman of the Audit Committee and a member of the Conflicts Committee, the Executive Compensation Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors.

Our Executive Officers and Certain Key Employees

Our executive officers and key employees (including employees of CarrAmerica Development, Inc. and other affiliates) are as follows:

9

Table of Contents

as a Senior Vice President since May 1997. Prior to that, Ms. Dorigan served as one of our Vice Presidents since January 1996. Prior to that, Ms. Dorigan served for more than nine years in a variety of capacities in the development business of The Oliver Carr Company, including from February 1993 to January 1996 as a Vice President. Ms. Dorigan holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Economics from the University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School. Ms. Dorigan is a member of management’s Operating and Investment Committees.

10

Table of Contents

Greninger had been the Senior Vice President of Carr Real Estate Services Inc., since March 1995. Prior to that time, he had been Vice President of Carr Real Estate Services Inc. since February 1993. During 1994, Mr. Greninger served as President of the Greater Washington Apartment and Office Building Association. Mr. Greninger has served as a director of both the Institute of Real Estate Management and the Building Owners and Managers Association and a former Chairman of its National Advisory Council. Mr. Greninger holds a Masters in Business Administration from the University of Cincinnati and a Bachelor of Science degree from Ohio State University. Mr. Greninger is a member of management’s Operating Committee.

11

Table of Contents

MICROS Systems, Inc. Mr. Simon holds a Master of Science degree in Applied Behavorial Science and Organizational Development from Johns Hopkins University and a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology and Communications from John Carroll University. He also holds a certification as a Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR). Mr. Simon is a member of management’s Operating Committee.

Risk Factors

In addition to the other information in this document, you should consider carefully the following risk factors in evaluating an investment in our securities. Any of these risks or the occurrence of any one or more of the uncertainties described below could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and the performance of our business.

Our performance and share value are subject to risks associated with the real estate industry

We derive a substantial majority of our operating and net income from the ownership and operation of office buildings. If we do not generate income sufficient to meet our operating expenses, including debt service and

12

Table of Contents

capital expenditures necessary to maintain or improve our properties, our financial performance, the value of our real estate assets and our ability to pay distributions to our securityholders, and consequently the value of our securities, will be adversely affected. We are susceptible to, among others, the following real estate industry risks:

Further declines in overall economic activity, particularly in our Northern California, Washington, DC Metro Area, Southern California and Seattle core markets, could adversely affect our operating results

As a result of the weak economic climate over the last several years, the office real estate markets were materially affected. The contraction of office workforces reduced demand for office space and overall vacancy rates for office properties increased in all of our markets through 2002 and our operations were adversely impacted.

Rental rates on space that was re-leased in 2004 decreased an average of 14.4% in comparison to rates that were in effect under expiring leases. While market rental rates have stabilized in our markets, rental rates on in-place leases in certain markets remain significantly above current market rental rates. We estimate that market rental rates on leased space expiring in 2005 will be, on average, approximately 8%-12% lower than straight-lined rents on expiring leases. We have 1.6 million square feet of space on which leases are currently scheduled to expire in 2005.

We are particularly subject to the economic risks in our Northern California, Washington, DC Metro Area, Southern California and Seattle core markets. These markets represented approximately 34.3%, 29.6%, 15.0% and 5.2%, respectively, of our property operating income in 2004. A downturn in the economies of these markets, or the impact of a continued national economic downturn on these markets, could result in reduced demand for office space and decreasing rental rates.

One of the factors contributing to the decline in occupancy for our office properties was the increased level of early lease terminations. Future rental income may be affected by future lease terminations as we are unlikely to be able to collect upon termination the full contracted amount payable under the leases as well as the additional cost of re-leasing the space.

Further decreases in occupancy rates and/or further declines in rental rates, particularly in our Northern California, Washington, DC Metro Area, Southern California and Seattle core markets, may adversely affect our revenues and results of operations in subsequent periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and financial condition, our ability to make distributions to our securityholders and result in a decline in the market value of our securities.

13

Table of Contents

We may be unable to renew leases or relet space on similar terms, or at all, as leases expire or are terminated, or may expend significant capital in our efforts to relet space

From 2005 through 2009, leases on our office properties will expire on a total of approximately 62.6% of our rentable square feet at our currently stabilized properties, with leases on over 8.3% of our rentable square feet expiring in each of those years. We may not be able to renew leases with our existing tenants or we may be unable to relet space to new tenants if our current tenants do not renew their leases or terminate their leases early. Even if our tenants renew their leases or we are able to relet the space, the terms and other costs of renewal or reletting, including the cost of required renovations, increased tenant improvement allowances, leasing commissions, declining rental rates and other potential concessions may be less favorable or more costly than the terms of our current leases or than we anticipate and could require the expenditure of significant amounts of capital. If we are unable to renew leases or relet space in a reasonable time, or if rental rates decline or tenant improvement, leasing commissions and other costs increase, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition and result in a decline in the value of our securities.

Our properties face significant competition

We face significant competition from other owners, operators and developers of office properties. Substantially all of our properties face competition from similar properties in the same markets. Such competition may affect our ability to attract and retain tenants and reduce the rents we are able to charge. These competing properties may have vacancy rates higher than our properties, which may result in their owners being willing to rent space at lower rental rates than we or in their owners providing greater tenant improvement allowances or other leasing concessions. This combination of circumstances could adversely affect our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, which could cause a decline in the value of our securities.

We face potential adverse effects from tenant delinquencies, bankruptcies or insolvencies

The bankruptcy or insolvency or other failure to pay of our tenants is likely to adversely affect the income produced by our properties. If a tenant defaults, we may experience delays and incur substantial costs in enforcing our rights as landlord. If a tenant files for bankruptcy, we may not be able to evict the tenant solely because of such bankruptcy or failure to pay. A court, however, may authorize a tenant to reject and terminate its lease with us. In such a case, our claim against the tenant for unpaid, future rent would be subject to a statutory cap that might be substantially less than the remaining rent owed under the lease. In addition, certain amounts paid to us within 90 days prior to the tenant’s bankruptcy filing could be required to be returned to the tenant’s bankruptcy estate. In any event, it is highly unlikely that a bankrupt or insolvent tenant would pay in full amounts it owes us under a lease. In other circumstances, where a tenant’s financial condition has become impaired, we have agreed to partially or wholly terminate the lease in advance of the termination date in consideration for a lease termination fee that is less than the agreed rental amount. Without regard to the manner in which the lease termination occurs, we are likely to incur additional costs in the form of tenant improvements and leasing commissions in our efforts to lease the space to a new tenant. In any of the foregoing circumstances, our results from operations, liquidity and financial condition could be adversely affected, which could result in a decline in the value of our securities.

New developments and acquisitions may fail to perform as expected

We continue to develop and acquire office properties. New office property developments are subject to a number of risks, including construction delays, complications in obtaining necessary zoning, occupancy and other governmental permits, cost overruns, financing risks, and the possible inability to meet expected occupancy and rent levels. If any of these problems occur, development costs for a project may increase, and there may be costs incurred for projects that are not completed. In deciding whether to acquire or develop a particular property, we make certain assumptions regarding the expected future performance of that property. We may underestimate the costs necessary to bring an acquired property up to standards established for its intended market position, or may be unable to increase occupancy at a newly acquired property as quickly as expected, or at all. If newly acquired properties or development projects are not completed in the timing or at the costs expected or do not perform as expected, our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition may be adversely affected, which could result in a decline in the value of our securities.

14

Table of Contents

Competition for acquisitions or an oversupply of properties for sale could adversely affect us

Generally, other major real estate investors with significant capital compete with us for attractive investment opportunities. These competitors include publicly traded REITs, private REITs, investment banking firms and private institutional investment funds. This competition has caused and may continue to cause increased prices for office properties. We also face competition with other property owners in our efforts to dispose of assets, which may result in lower sales prices. This increase in competition for acquisitions over the last several years has caused a significant increase in prices for Class A office buildings in our markets. As a result we may be unable to acquire office properties which are accretive to our earnings. A continuation of an increase in prices for acquired office properties at current levels or decrease in prices for properties to be sold by us could impair our growth prospects or reduce our available capital, either of which could have an adverse effect on our liquidity and financial condition, which could result in a decline in the value of our securities.

We may not be able to sell properties when appropriate or on attractive terms

Real estate investments generally cannot be sold quickly. In addition, there are limitations under the federal income tax laws applicable to REITs and agreements that we have entered into in connection with the acquisition of some of our properties that may limit our ability to sell our assets. In addition, we are subject to income taxes on the sale of any properties owned by any of our taxable REIT subsidiaries. Our inability to sell our properties in the time frame expected or at attractive prices could limit our ability to make acquisitions or other capital expenditures necessary to upgrade our portfolio or to recycle our capital to more productive markets, which could have an adverse effect on our liquidity and financial condition and our ability to service debt and make distributions to our securityholders, which could result in a decline in the value of our securities.

Our use of debt subjects us to various financing risks

We regularly borrow money to finance our operations, particularly the acquisition and development of properties. We generally incur unsecured debt, although in some cases we will incur mortgage debt that is secured by one or more of our office buildings. In the future, our financial condition could be materially and adversely affected by our use of debt financing, in part due to the following risks:

15

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2004, we are in compliance with all debt covenants, however, our ability to draw on our unsecured credit facility or incur other unsecured debt in the future could be restricted by the covenants. Our maximum ratio of total debt to tangible fair market value of our assets cannot exceed 55%. As of December 31, 2004, our total debt to tangible fair market value was 53.2% and could restrict our ability to draw the full amount available to us under our credit facility or to incur significant other debt. If our total debt ratio increases further, it could impact our business and operations, including limiting our ability to incur additional unsecured debt, including drawing on our unsecured line of credit which is our primary source of liquidity, or to invest in properties.

16

Table of Contents

An earthquake or terrorist act could adversely affect our business

Over 55.4% of our property operating income in 2004 was generated by properties located in California, Oregon and the State of Washington, which are high risk geographical areas for earthquakes. In addition, a significant portion of our properties is located in Washington, DC and other major urban areas which could be the targets of future terrorist acts. Depending upon its magnitude, an earthquake or terrorist act could severely damage one or more of our properties or otherwise cause a loss of tenants or other economic downturn in the market in which the event occurs, which could adversely affect our business. Although we maintain earthquake and terrorism insurance for our properties and the resulting business interruption, any earthquake or terrorist attack, whether or not insured, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, and result in a decline in the value of our securities.

Our insurance may not be adequate to cover losses, including those that result from earthquakes or terrorist acts

Although we believe our properties are adequately covered by insurance, we cannot predict at this time if we will be able to obtain appropriate coverage at a reasonable cost in the future. Our insurance costs have fluctuated significantly in recent years, increasing significantly in mid-2002, while decreasing in connection with our 2004-2005 renewal.

In May 2004, we formed a wholly-owned captive insurance company which provides $490 million in coverage against losses due solely to biological, chemical or radioactive contamination arising out of a certified terrorist act. In the event of a covered loss, we expect our captive insurance company to recover 90% of its losses, less certain deductibles, from the United States government, but it has not reinsured its remaining exposure and may have insufficient capital to fully pay our claim.

Should an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occur, we could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the property. Nevertheless, we might remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property. It is also possible that third-party insurance carriers will not be able to maintain reinsurance sufficient to cover any losses that may be incurred.

In addition, if any of our properties were to experience a catastrophic loss that was insured, there can be no assurance that such coverage will adequately compensate us for any loss, that our coverage would continue after a loss, or that a loss, even if covered, would not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. It could still seriously disrupt our operations, delay revenue and result in large expenses to repair or rebuild the property. Also, due to inflation, changes in codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors, it may not be feasible to use insurance proceeds to replace a building after it has been damaged or destroyed.

Also, we have to renew our policies in most cases on an annual basis and negotiate acceptable terms for coverage, exposing us to the volatility of the insurance markets, including the possibility of rate increases. Any material increase in insurance rates or decrease in available coverage in the future could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, which could cause a decline in the market value of our securities.

Increases in taxes and regulatory compliance costs, including compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, may adversely affect our results of operations

We may not be able to pass all real estate tax increases through to our tenants. Therefore, any tax increases may adversely affect our results of operations. Our properties are also subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and life safety requirements. Some trade associations, such as the Building Owners and Managers Association and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), publish standards that are adopted by government authorities. These include standards relating to life, safety and fire protection systems published by the NFPA. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in the imposition of fines by governmental authorities or awards of damages to private litigants. In addition, we cannot provide any assurance that these requirements will not be changed or that new requirements will not be imposed that would require significant unanticipated expenditures by us and could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

17

Table of Contents

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and various state and local laws, all public accommodations and commercial facilities must meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Compliance with these requirements could involve removal of structural barriers from certain disabled persons’ entrances. Other federal, state and local laws may require modifications to or restrict further renovations of our properties with respect to such means of access. Although we believe that our properties are substantially in compliance with present requirements, noncompliance with the ADA or related laws or regulations could result in the imposition of fines by government authorities or in the award to private litigants of damages against us.

Any such adverse effect on our results of operations, whether from real estate tax increases or changes in regulatory requirements, could cause the market value of our securities to decline.

We may be subject to costs and liabilities associated with environmental contamination

Federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment may require a current or previous owner or operator of real property to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum product releases at the property. In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration are increasingly involved in indoor air quality standards, especially with respect to asbestos, mold and medical waste. The clean up of any environmental contamination, including asbestos and mold, can be costly. The presence of or failure to clean up contamination may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease a property or to borrow using a property as collateral or could prove so costly as to have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, which could result in our inability to make distributions to our securityholders and result in a decline in the value of our securities.

We do not have exclusive control over our joint venture investments

We have invested in projects or properties as a co-venturer or partner in the development of new properties. These investments involve risks not present in a wholly-owned project. Risks related to these investments could include:

In addition, most of our joint venture agreements contain provisions that could require us to buy our partner’s interest or sell our interest or the property or project at a time we do not deem favorable for financial or other reasons, including the availability of cash at such time and the impact of tax consequences resulting from any sale.

Certain officers and directors may have interests that conflict with the interests of stockholders

Certain of our officers and members of our board of directors own limited partnership units in Carr Realty Holdings, L.P., a partnership that holds some of our properties. These individuals may have personal interests that conflict with the interests of our stockholders with respect to business decisions affecting us and Carr Realty Holdings, L.P., such as interests in the timing and pricing of property sales or refinancings in order to obtain favorable tax treatment. We, as the sole general partner of Carr Realty Holdings, L.P., have the exclusive authority to determine whether and on what terms Carr Realty Holdings, L.P. will sell or refinance an individual property, but the effect of certain transactions on these unitholders may influence our decisions affecting these properties.

18

Table of Contents

Our wholly-owned subsidiary, CarrAmerica Realty Operating Partnership, L.P. intends to qualify as a partnership, but cannot guarantee that it will qualify

CarrAmerica Realty Operating Partnership, L.P. intends to qualify as a partnership for federal income tax purposes at such time, if any, that it admits limited partners other than ourselves. If classified as a partnership, it generally will not be a taxable entity and will not incur federal income tax liability. However, it would be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes if it were a “publicly traded partnership,” unless at least 90% of its income were qualifying income as defined in the tax code. A “publicly traded partnership” is a partnership whose partnership interests are traded on an established securities market or are readily tradable on a secondary market (or the substantial equivalent thereof). Although its partnership units will not be traded on an established securities market, because of the redemption right, its units held by limited partners could be viewed as readily tradable on a secondary market (or the substantial equivalent thereof), and there could be no assurance that it would qualify for one of the “safe harbors” under the applicable tax regulations. Qualifying income for the 90% test generally includes passive income, such as real property rents, dividends and interest. The income requirements applicable to REITs and the definition of qualifying income for purposes of this 90% test are similar in most respects. We cannot guarantee that the partnership would meet this qualifying income test. If it were to be taxed as a corporation, it would incur substantial tax liabilities. We would then fail to qualify as a REIT for tax purposes, unless we qualified for relief under certain statutory savings provisions, and our ability to raise additional capital would be impaired.

Certain Factors May Inhibit Changes in Control of the Company

The market value of our securities can be adversely affected by many factors

As with any public company, a number of factors may adversely influence the public market price of our common stock, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include:

19

Table of Contents

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, also could adversely affect prevailing market prices for our stock. In addition to the possibility that we may sell shares of our stock in a public offering at any time, we also may issue shares of common stock upon redemption of units of interest held by third parties in affiliated partnerships that we control, as well as upon exercise of stock options that we grant to our employees and others. All of these shares will be available for sale in the public markets from time to time.

Our status as a REIT

We believe that we qualify for taxation as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, and we plan to operate so that we can continue to meet the requirements for taxation as a REIT. If we qualify as a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on our income that we distribute currently to our shareholders. Many of the REIT requirements, however, are highly technical and complex. The determination that we are a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances that may not be totally within our control. For example, to qualify as a REIT, at least 95% of our gross income must come from specific passive sources, like rent, that are itemized in the REIT tax laws. In determining that we have satisfied this requirement, we have concluded that certain services, such as cafeteria services that we had provided to tenants through an independent contractor at certain of our properties under arrangements where we bore part or all of the expenses of such services, were considered customary in the geographic area where such properties are located. There can be no assurance that the IRS or a court would agree with such conclusion or other positions we have taken interpreting the REIT requirements. We also are required to distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (excluding capital gains). The fact that we hold some of our assets through partnerships and their subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Furthermore, Congress and the IRS might make changes to the tax laws and regulations, and the courts might issue new rulings, that make it more difficult, or impossible, for us to remain qualified as a REIT.

If we fail to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and do not meet the requirements necessary to avail ourselves of certain statutory relief provisions, we would be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates. Also, unless the IRS granted us relief under such statutory provisions, we would remain disqualified as a REIT for four years following the year we first failed to qualify. If we failed to qualify as a REIT, we would have to pay significant income taxes. This likely would have a significant adverse effect on the value of our securities. In addition, we would no longer be required to pay any dividends to stockholders.

Even if we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we are required to pay certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property. For example, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. The determination as to whether a particular sale is a prohibited transaction depends on the facts and circumstances related to that sale. While we undertake sales of assets that become inconsistent with our long term strategic or return objectives, we do not believe that those sales should be considered prohibited transactions, but there can be no assurance that the IRS would not contend otherwise. In addition, any net taxable income earned directly by some of our affiliates, including Carr Real Estate Services Inc. and CarrAmerica Development Inc., is subject to federal and state corporate income tax. In this regard, several provisions of the laws applicable to REITs and their subsidiaries ensure that a taxable REIT subsidiary will be subject to an appropriate level of federal income taxation. For example, a taxable

20

Table of Contents

REIT subsidiary is limited in its ability to deduct interest payments made to an affiliated REIT. In addition, the REIT has to pay a 100% penalty tax on some payments that it receives or on some deductions taken by the taxable REIT subsidiaries if the economic arrangements between the REIT, the REIT’s tenants, and the taxable REIT subsidiary are not comparable to similar arrangements between unrelated parties. Several entities in which we own interests, including Carr Real Estate Services Inc. and CarrAmerica Development Inc., have elected to be taxable REIT subsidiaries. Finally, some state and local jurisdictions may tax some of our income even though as a REIT we are not subject to federal income tax on that income. To the extent that we and our affiliates are required to pay federal, state and local taxes, we will have less cash available for distributions to our shareholders.

Item 2. PROPERTIES

General

As of December 31, 2004, we owned interests (consisting of whole or partial ownership interests) in 251 operating office buildings located in 12 markets across the United States. As of December 31, 2004, we owned fee simple title or leasehold interests in 249 operating office buildings, controlling partial interests in two operating office buildings and non-controlling partial interests of 15% to 50% in 41 operating office buildings. Except as we disclose in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources,” we have no immediate plans to renovate our operating properties other than for routine capital improvements.

The following table sets forth information about each operating property in which we own an interest as of December 31, 2004.

21

Table of Contents

22

Table of Contents

23

Table of Contents

24

Table of Contents