UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Form 10-K

 

 

Commission File Number 333-21873

 

FIRST INDUSTRIAL, L.P.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

 

 

 

(312) 344-4300
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

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

None

 

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

None

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes o     No þ

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  Yes o     No þ

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes o     No o

 

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 þ     No o

 

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.  þ

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One):

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes o     No þ

 

 

FIRST INDUSTRIAL, L.P.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

This report contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and 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 the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are including this statement for purposes of complying with those safe harbor provisions. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “project,” “seek,” “target,” “potential,” “focus,” “may,” “should,” or similar expressions. Our ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain. Factors which could have a materially adverse effect on our operations and future prospects include, but are not limited to: changes in national, international, regional and local economic conditions generally and real estate markets specifically; changes in legislation/regulation (including changes to laws governing the taxation of real estate investment trusts) and actions of regulatory authorities (including the Internal Revenue Service); our ability to qualify and maintain our status as a real estate investment trust; the availability and attractiveness of financing (including both public and private capital) to us and to our potential counterparties; the availability and attractiveness of terms of additional debt repurchases; interest rates; our credit agency ratings; our ability to comply with applicable financial covenants; competition; changes in supply and demand for industrial properties (including land, the supply and demand for which is inherently more volatile than other types of industrial property) in the Company’s current and proposed market areas; difficulties in consummating acquisitions and dispositions; risks related to our investments in properties through joint ventures; environmental liabilities; slippages in development or lease-up schedules; tenant creditworthiness; higher-than-expected costs; changes in asset valuations and related impairment charges; changes in general accounting principles, policies and guidelines applicable to real estate investment trusts; international business risks and those additional factors described in Item 1A, “Risk Factors” and in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). We caution you not to place undue reliance on forward looking statements, which reflect our analysis only and speak only as of the date of this report or the dates indicated in the statements. We assume no obligation to update or supplement forward-looking statements. Unless the context otherwise requires, the term “Operating Partnership” refers to First Industrial, L.P. and the terms “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to First Industrial, L.P. and its controlled subsidiaries. Effective September 1, 2009, our taxable real estate investment trust subsidiary, First Industrial Investment, Inc. (the “old TRS”) merged into First Industrial Investment II, LLC (“FI LLC”), which is wholly owned by the Operating Partnership. Immediately thereafter, certain assets and liabilities of FI LLC were contributed to a new subsidiary, FR Investment Properties, LLC (“FRIP”). FRIP is 1% owned by FI LLC and 99% owned by a new taxable real estate investment trust subsidiary, First Industrial Investment Properties, Inc. (the “new TRS,” which, collectively with the old TRS and certain wholly owned taxable real estate investment trust subsidiaries of FI LLC, will be referred to as the “TRSs”), which is wholly owned by FI LLC (see Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

THE COMPANY

 

 

General

 

First Industrial, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”) was organized as a limited partnership in the state of Delaware on November 23, 1993. The sole general partner is First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) which owns common units in the Operating Partnership (“Units”) representing an approximate 92.8% ownership interest at December 31, 2010. The Company also owns a preferred general partnership interest in the Operating Partnership represented by preferred units (“Preferred Units”) with an aggregate liquidation priority of $275.0 million. The Company is a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) as defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”). The Company’s operations are conducted primarily through the Operating Partnership. The limited partners of the Operating Partnership owned, in the aggregate, approximately a 7.2% interest in the Operating Partnership at December 31, 2010.

 

The Operating Partnership is the sole member of several limited liability companies (the “L.L.C.s”) and the sole stockholder of the TRS, (together with the Operating Partnership and the L.L.C.s, the “Consolidated Operating Partnership”), the operating data of which is consolidated with that of the Operating Partnership as presented herein. We also hold at least a 99% limited partnership interest in First Industrial Financing Partnership, L.P. (the “Financing Partnership”), First Industrial Securities, L.P. (the “Securities Partnership”), First Industrial Mortgage Partnership, (the “Mortgage Partnership”), L.P. First Industrial Pennsylvania, L.P. (the “Pennsylvania Partnership”), First Industrial Harrisburg, L.P. (the “Harrisburg Partnership”), First Industrial Indianapolis, L.P. (the “Indianapolis Partnership”), TK-SV, LTD., and FI Development Services L.P. and wholly owned L.L.C.s (together, the “Other Real Estate Partnerships”). The Other Real Estate Partnerships’ operating data is presented herein on a combined basis, separate from that of the Consolidated Operating Partnership. The general partners of the Other Real Estate Partnerships are separate corporations, each with at least a .01% general partnership interest in the Other Real Estate Partnerships for which it acts as a general partner. Each general partner of the Other Real Estate Partnerships is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.

 

The Operating Partnership or the new TRS, through separate wholly-owned limited liability companies of which it is the sole member, also owns noncontrolling equity interests in, and provides services to, two joint ventures (the “2003 Net Lease Joint Venture” and the “2007 Europe Joint Venture”). During 2010, we provided various services to, and ultimately disposed of our equity interests in, five joint ventures (the “2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture,” the “2005 Core Joint Venture,” the “2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program,” the “2006 Land/Development Joint Venture” and the “2007 Canada Joint Venture;” together with the 2003 Net Lease Joint Venture and the 2007 Europe Joint Venture, the “Joint Ventures”). The Joint Ventures are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Accordingly, the operating data of our Joint Ventures is not consolidated with that of the Consolidated Operating Partnership as presented herein. On May 25, 2010, we sold our interest in the 2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program to our joint venture partner. On August 5, 2010, we sold our interests in the 2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture, the 2005 Core Joint Venture, the 2006 Land/Development Joint Venture and the 2007 Canada Joint Venture to our joint venture partner. The 2007 Europe Joint Venture does not own any properties. See Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the Joint Ventures.

 

The Other Real Estate Partnerships and the Joint Ventures are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. The operating data of the Other Real Estate Partnerships and the Joint Ventures are not consolidated with that of the Consolidated Operating Partnership as presented herein.

 

As of December 31, 2010, we owned 705 in-service industrial properties, containing an aggregate of approximately 60.8 million square feet of gross leasable area (“GLA”). On a combined basis, as of December 31, 2010, the Other Real Estate Partnerships owned 69 in-service industrial properties, containing an aggregate of approximately 7.8 million square feet of GLA. Of the 69 industrial properties owned by the

Other Real Estate Partnerships at December 31, 2010, 21 are held by the Financing Partnership, 17 are held by the Pennsylvania Partnership, nine are held by the Securities Partnership, nine are held by the Mortgage Partnership, seven are held by the Harrisburg Partnership, four are held by the Indianapolis Partnership, one is held by TK-SV, LTD. and one is held by FI Development Services, L.P. Beginning January 1, 2009, our in-service portfolio includes all properties other than developed, redeveloped and acquired properties that have not yet reached stabilized occupancy (generally defined as properties that are 75% leased). Properties which are at least 75% occupied at acquisition are placed in-service. Acquired properties less than 75% occupied are placed in-service upon the earlier of reaching 90% occupancy or one year from the acquisition date. Development properties are placed in-service upon the earlier of reaching 90% occupancy or one year from the date construction is completed. Redevelopments (generally projects which require capital expenditures exceeding 25% of basis) are placed in-service upon the earlier of reaching 90% occupancy or one year from the completion of renovation construction.

 

We utilize an operating approach which combines the effectiveness of decentralized, locally based property management, acquisition, sales and development functions with the cost efficiencies of centralized acquisition, sales and development support, capital markets expertise, asset management and fiscal control systems. At February 23, 2011, we had 183 employees.

 

We maintain a website at www.firstindustrial.com. Information on this website shall not constitute part of this Form 10-K. Copies of our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports are available without charge on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are filed with or furnished to the SEC. In addition, our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee Charter, along with supplemental financial and operating information prepared by us, are all available without charge on our website or upon request to us. Amendments to, or waivers from, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that apply to our executive officers or directors will also be posted to our website. We also post or otherwise make available on our website from time to time other information that may be of interest to our investors. Please direct requests as follows:

 

First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc.
311 S. Wacker, Suite 3900
Chicago, IL 60606
Attention: Investor Relations

 

Business Objectives and Growth Plans

 

Our fundamental business objective is to maximize the total return to our partners through per unit distributions and increases in the value of our properties and operations. Our long-term business growth plans include the following elements:

 

 

Our ability to pursue our long-term growth plans is affected by market conditions and our financial condition and operating capabilities.

Business Strategies

 

We utilize the following seven strategies in connection with the operation of our business:

 

 

 

 

Although we believe we will be successful in meeting our liquidity needs and maintaining compliance with other debt covenants through a combination of capital retention, mortgage and equity financings, asset sales and debt reduction, if we were to be unsuccessful in executing one or more of the strategies outlined above, our financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected.

 

Recent Developments

 

During 2010, we acquired three industrial properties for a total investment of approximately $22.4 million. We also sold 10 industrial properties and several parcels of land for an aggregate gross sales price of $66.8 million (see Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). At December 31, 2010, we owned 705 in-service industrial properties containing approximately 60.8 million square feet of GLA.

 

On May 25, 2010, we sold our interest in the 2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program to our joint venture partner and on August 5, 2010, we sold our interest in the 2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture, the

2005 Core Joint Venture, the 2006 Land/Development Joint Venture and the 2007 Canada Joint Venture to our joint venture partner (see Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

During 2010, we repurchased and retired $264.8 million of our senior unsecured notes and recognized a loss on early debt retirement of $4.1 million (see Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

During 2010, we obtained $82.5 million in mortgage financings at a weighted average interest rate of 6.16%, with maturities ranging between February 2015 and October 2020. Also, we paid off and retired $14.6 million in mortgage loans payable (see Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

Effective October 22, 2010, we amended our Unsecured Credit Facility to provide for a $200.0 million term loan and a $200.0 million revolving line of credit. The Unsecured Credit Facility matures on September 28, 2012. On October 22, 2010, we repaid $99.1 million in connection with the decrease in the Unsecured Credit Facility’s capacity to $400.0 million from $500.0 million as part of the amendment. For the term borrowing, the Unsecured Credit Facility requires interest only payments through March 29, 2012 at LIBOR plus 325 basis points or at a base rate plus 225 basis points, at our election. The term borrowing requires quarterly principal pay-downs of $10.0 million beginning March 30, 2012 until maturity on September 28, 2012. For the revolving borrowings, the Unsecured Credit Facility provides for interest only payments at LIBOR plus 275 basis points or at a base rate plus 175 basis points, at our election. Additionally, certain financial covenants were changed in connection with the amendment, including the fixed charge coverage ratio, which decreased to 1.2 times from 1.5 times. Also, the calculation of Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“EBITDA”), as defined in the Unsecured Credit Facility and used in the fixed charge coverage ratio, no longer includes economic gains or losses from property sales.

 

The following shows the material changes to the financial covenants:

 

 

Commencing October 1, 2011, certain covenants, including the consolidated leverage ratio, the ratio of value of unencumbered assets to outstanding consolidated senior unsecured debt and the property operating income ratio on unencumbered assets become more restrictive. The Company has various liquidity strategies, such as selling additional industrial properties or land parcels and issuing additional equity, that it may employ in order to ensure compliance with the covenants. However, no assurances can be made that the sales of assets and additional equity issuances will occur on favorable terms or at all.

 

In conjunction with the amendment of our Unsecured Credit Facility, during the third quarter of 2010 management reassessed the holding period of the Non-Strategic Assets, which, at September 30, 2010, consisted of 177 industrial properties comprising approximately 15.2 million square of GLA and land parcels comprising approximately 664 gross acres. As a result of this reassessment, we determined that 120 of the industrial properties comprising approximately 10.0 million square feet of GLA and land parcels comprising approximately 445 gross acres were impaired, and as such, we recorded an aggregate non-cash impairment charge of approximately $156.7 million during the third quarter.

 

At December 31, 2010, the Non-Strategic Assets consisted of 175 industrial properties comprising approximately 15.0 million square of GLA and land parcels comprising approximately 635 gross acres. The Non-Strategic Assets (except one industrial property comprising 0.3 million square feet of GLA) were

classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2010. During the three months ended December 31, 2010, we recorded an additional non-cash impairment charge of $20.3 million relating to the Non-Strategic Assets. The additional charge is primarily comprised of estimated closing costs for 110 of the 174 industrial properties comprising approximately 9.9 million square feet of GLA and land parcels comprising approximately 391 gross acres classified as held for sale, as well as additional impairment related to certain industrial properties and land parcels within the Non-Strategic Assets due to a change in our estimates of fair value based upon recent market information, including receipt of third party purchase offers.

 

Additionally, during the first quarter of 2010 we recorded an impairment charge in the amount of $9.2 million related to a property comprised of 0.3 million square feet of GLA located in Grand Rapids, Michigan in connection with the negotiation of a new lease. See Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on impairment.

 

During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company issued 875,402 shares of its common stock, generating approximately $6.0 million in net proceeds, under the direct stock purchase component of the DRIP. Additionally, the Company issued 5,469,767 shares of the Company’s common stock, generating $43.9 million in net proceeds, under the ATM. These proceeds were contributed to us in exchange for an equivalent number of Units (see Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

We committed to a plan to reduce organizational and overhead costs in October 2008 and have subsequently modified that plan with the goal of further reducing these costs. On June 21, 2010, we committed to additional modifications to the plan consisting of further organizational and overhead cost reductions. For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded as restructuring costs a pre-tax charge of $1.9 million to provide for employee severance and benefits ($0.5 million), costs associated with the termination of certain office leases ($0.7 million) and other costs ($0.7 million) associated with implementing the restructuring plan (see Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

Future Property Acquisitions, Developments and Property Sales

 

We have acquisition and development programs through which we seek to identify portfolio and individual industrial property acquisitions and developments.

 

We also sell properties based on market conditions and property related factors. As a result, we are currently engaged in negotiations relating to the possible sale of certain industrial properties in our portfolio.

 

When evaluating potential industrial property acquisitions and developments, as well as potential industrial property sales, we will consider such factors as: (i) the geographic area and type of property; (ii) the location, construction quality, condition and design of the property; (iii) the potential for capital appreciation of the property; (iv) our ability to improve the property’s performance through renovation; (v) the terms of tenant leases, including the potential for rent increases; (vi) the potential for economic growth and the tax and regulatory environment of the area in which the property is located; (vii) the potential for expansion of the physical layout of the property and/or the number of sites; (viii) the occupancy and demand by tenants for properties of a similar type in the vicinity; and (ix) competition from existing properties and the potential for the construction of new properties in the area.

 

INDUSTRY

 

Industrial properties are typically used for the design, assembly, packaging, storage and distribution of goods and/or the provision of services. As a result, the demand for industrial space in the United States is related to the level of economic output. Historically, occupancy rates for industrial property in the United States have been higher than office property. We believe that the higher occupancy rate in the industrial property sector is a result of the construction-on-demand nature of, and the comparatively short development time required for, industrial property. For the five years ended December 31, 2010, the national occupancy rate for industrial properties in the United States has ranged from 85.4% *to 90.3%*, with an occupancy rate of 85.7%* at December 31, 2010.

 

 

 * Source: CBRE Econometric Advisors

 

 

Risk Factors

 

Our operations involve various risks that could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, ability to pay distributions on our Units and the market value of our Units. These risks, among others contained in the Operating Partnership’s other filings with the SEC, include:

 

Disruptions in the financial markets could affect our ability to obtain financing and may negatively impact our liquidity, financial condition and operating results.

 

The capital and credit markets in the United States and other countries have experienced significant price volatility, dislocations and liquidity disruptions, which have caused market prices of many securities and the spreads on prospective debt financings to fluctuate substantially. These circumstances have materially impacted liquidity in the financial markets, making terms for certain financings less attractive, and in some cases have resulted in the unavailability of financing. A majority of our existing indebtedness was sold through capital markets transactions. We anticipate that the capital markets could be a source of refinancing of our existing indebtedness in the future, including our 4.625% Exchangeable Notes due on September 15, 2011 in the aggregate amount of $128.9 million as of December 31, 2010. This source of refinancing may not be available if capital market volatility and disruption continues, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity. Furthermore, we could potentially lose access to our current available liquidity under our Unsecured Credit Facility if one or more participating lenders default on their commitments. While the ultimate outcome of these market conditions cannot be predicted, they may have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and financial condition if our ability to borrow money under our Unsecured Credit Facility or to issue additional debt or equity securities to finance future acquisitions, developments and redevelopments and Joint Venture activities were to be impaired.

 

In addition, capital and credit market price volatility could make the valuation of our properties more difficult. There may be significant uncertainty in the valuation, or in the stability of the value, of our properties that could result in a substantial decrease in the value of our properties. As a result, we may not be able to recover the carrying amount of our properties, which may require us to recognize an impairment loss in earnings.

 

Real estate investments’ value fluctuates depending on conditions in the general economy and the real estate business. These conditions may limit the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s revenues and available cash.

 

The factors that affect the value of our real estate and the revenues we derive from our properties include, among other things:

 

 

These factors may be amplified in light of the disruption of the global credit markets. Our investments in real estate assets are concentrated in the industrial sector, and the demand for industrial space in the United States is related to the level of economic output. Accordingly, reduced economic output may lead to lower occupancy rates for our properties. In addition, if any of our tenants experiences a downturn in its business that weakens its financial condition, delays lease commencement, fails to make rental payments when due, becomes insolvent or declares bankruptcy, the result could be a termination of the tenant’s lease, which could adversely affect our cash flow from operations.

 

Many real estate costs are fixed, even if income from properties decreases.

 

Our financial results depend on leasing space to tenants on terms favorable to us. Our income and funds available for distribution to our unitholders 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.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may be unable to sell properties when appropriate because real estate investments are not as liquid as certain other types of assets.

 

Real estate investments generally cannot be sold quickly and, therefore, will tend to limit our ability to adjust our property portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other conditions. The inability to respond promptly to changes in the performance of our property portfolio could adversely affect our financial condition and ability to service debt and make distributions to our unitholders. In addition, like other companies qualifying as REITs under the Code, the Company must comply with the safe harbor rules relating to the number of properties disposed of in a year, their tax basis and the cost of improvements made to the properties, or meet other tests which enable a REIT to avoid punitive taxation on the sale of assets. Thus, our ability at any time to sell assets may be restricted.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may be unable to sell properties on advantageous terms.

 

We have sold to third parties a significant number of properties in recent years and, as part of our business, we intend to continue to sell properties to third parties. Our ability to sell properties on advantageous terms depends on factors beyond our control, including competition from other sellers and the availability of attractive financing for potential buyers of our properties. If we are unable to sell properties on favorable terms or redeploy the proceeds of property sales in accordance with our business strategy, then our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay distributions on, and the market value of, our Units could be adversely affected.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may be unable to complete development and re-development projects on advantageous terms.

 

As part of our business, we develop new and re-develop existing properties when and as conditions warrant. In addition, we have sold to third parties or sold to our Joint Ventures a significant number of development and re-development properties in recent years, and we intend to continue to sell such properties to third parties or to sell or contribute such properties to our Joint Ventures as opportunities arise. The real estate development and re-development business involves significant risks that could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay distributions on, and the market value of, our Units, which include:

 

 

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may be unable to renew leases or find other lessees.

 

We are subject to the risks that, upon expiration, leases may not be renewed, the space subject to such leases may not be relet or the terms of renewal or reletting, including the cost of required renovations, may be less favorable than expiring lease terms. If we were unable to promptly renew a significant number of expiring leases or to promptly relet the space covered by such leases, or if the rental rates upon renewal or reletting were significantly lower than the current rates, our financial condition, results of operation, cash flow and ability to pay distributions on, and the market value of, our Units could be adversely affected. As of December 31, 2010, leases with respect to approximately 7.6 million, 8.4 million and 8.0 million square feet of GLA, representing 15%, 17% and 16% of GLA, expire in 2011, 2012 and 2013, respectively.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may be unable to acquire properties on advantageous terms or acquisitions may not perform as the Consolidated Operating Partnership expects.

 

We acquire and intend to continue to acquire primarily industrial properties. The acquisition of properties entails various risks, including the risks that our investments may not perform as expected and that our cost estimates for bringing an acquired property up to market standards may prove inaccurate. Further, we face significant competition for attractive investment opportunities from other well-capitalized real estate investors, including both publicly-traded REITs and private investors. This competition increases as investments in real estate become attractive relative to other forms of investment. As a result of competition, we may be unable to acquire additional properties as we desire or the purchase price may be elevated. In addition, we expect to finance future acquisitions through a combination of borrowings under the Unsecured Credit Facility, proceeds from equity or debt offerings and debt originations by the Consolidated Operating Partnership and proceeds from property sales, which may not be available and which could adversely affect our cash flow. Any of the above risks could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay distributions on, and the market value of, our Units.

 

The Company might fail to qualify or remain qualified as a REIT.

 

The Company intends to operate so as to qualify as a REIT under the Code. Although the Company believes that it is organized and will operate in a manner so as to qualify as a REIT, qualification as a REIT involves the satisfaction of numerous requirements, some of which must be met on a recurring basis. These requirements are established under highly technical and complex Code provisions of which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations and involve the determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control.

 

If the Company were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, it would be subject to federal income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on its taxable income at corporate rates. This could result in a discontinuation or substantial reduction in dividends to stockholders and in cash to pay interest and principal on debt securities that we issue. Unless entitled to relief under certain statutory provisions, the Company would be disqualified from electing treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which it failed to qualify as a REIT.

 

Certain property transfers may generate prohibited transaction income, resulting in a penalty tax on the gain attributable to the transaction.

 

As part of our business, we sell properties to third parties as opportunities arise. Under the Code, a 100% penalty tax could be assessed on the gain resulting from sales of properties that are deemed to be prohibited transactions. The question of what constitutes a prohibited transaction is based on the facts and circumstances surrounding each transaction. The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) could contend that certain sales of properties by us are prohibited transactions. While we do not believe that the IRS would prevail in such a

dispute, if the matter were successfully argued by the IRS, the 100% penalty tax could be assessed against the profits from these transactions. In addition, any income from a prohibited transaction may adversely affect the Company’s ability to satisfy the income tests for qualification as a REIT.

 

The REIT distribution requirements may limit the Company’s ability to retain capital and require the Company to turn to external financing sources.

 

The Company could, in certain instances, have taxable income without sufficient cash to enable us to meet the distribution requirements of the REIT provisions of the Code. In that situation, we could be required to borrow funds or sell properties on adverse terms in order to meet those distribution requirements. In addition, because the Company must distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of the Company’s REIT taxable income each year, the Company’s ability to accumulate capital may be limited. Thus, to provide capital resources for our ongoing business, and to satisfy our debt repayment obligations and other liquidity needs, the Company may be more dependent on outside sources of financing, such as debt financing or issuances of additional capital stock, which may or may not be available on favorable terms. Additional debt financings may substantially increase our leverage and additional equity offerings may result in substantial dilution of unitholders’ interests.

 

Debt financing, the degree of leverage and rising interest rates could reduce the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s cash flow.

 

Where possible, we intend to continue to use leverage to increase the rate of return on our investments and to allow us to make more investments than we otherwise could. Our use of leverage presents an additional element of risk in the event that the cash flow from our properties is insufficient to meet both debt payment obligations and the distribution requirements of the REIT provisions of the Code. In addition, rising interest rates would reduce our cash flow by increasing the amount of interest due on our floating rate debt and on our fixed rate debt as it matures and is refinanced.

 

Failure to comply with covenants in our debt agreements could adversely affect our financial condition.

 

The terms of our agreements governing our Unsecured Credit Facility and other indebtedness require that we comply with a number of financial and other covenants, such as maintaining debt service coverage and leverage ratios and maintaining insurance coverage. Complying with such covenants may limit our operational flexibility. Our failure to comply with these covenants could cause a default under the applicable debt agreement even if we have satisfied our payment obligations. Consistent with our prior practice, we will, in the future, continue to interpret and certify our performance under these covenants in a good faith manner that we deem reasonable and appropriate. However, these financial covenants are complex and there can be no assurance that these provisions would not be interpreted by the noteholders or lenders in a manner that could impose and cause us to incur material costs. We anticipate that we will be able to operate in compliance with our financial covenants in 2011. Our ability to meet our financial covenants may be adversely affected if economic and credit market conditions limit our ability to reduce our debt levels consistent with, or result in net operating income below, our current expectations. Under our Unsecured Credit Facility, an event of default can also occur if the lenders, in their good faith judgment, determine that a material adverse change has occurred which could prevent timely repayment or materially impair our ability to perform our obligations under the loan agreement.

 

Upon the occurrence of an event of default, we would be subject to higher finance costs and fees, and the lenders under our Unsecured Credit Facility will not be required to lend any additional amounts to us. In addition, our outstanding senior unsecured notes as well as all outstanding borrowings under the Unsecured Credit Facility, together with accrued and unpaid interest and fees, could be accelerated and declared to be immediately due and payable. Furthermore, our Unsecured Credit Facility and the indentures governing our senior unsecured notes contain certain cross-default provisions, which are triggered in the event that our other material indebtedness is in default. These cross-default provisions may require us to repay or restructure the Unsecured Credit Facility and the senior unsecured notes or other debt that is in default, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market

price of, our stock. If repayment of any of our borrowings is accelerated, we cannot provide assurance that we will have sufficient assets to repay such indebtedness or that we would be able to borrow sufficient funds to refinance such indebtedness. Even if we are able to obtain new financing, it may not be on commercially reasonable terms, or terms that are acceptable to us.

 

Cross-collateralization of mortgage loans could result in foreclosure on substantially all of the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s properties if the Consolidated Operating Partnership is unable to service its indebtedness.

 

We intend to obtain additional mortgage debt financing in the future if it is available to us. These mortgages may be issued on a recourse, non-recourse or cross-collateralized basis. Cross-collateralization makes all of the subject properties available to the lender in order to satisfy our debt. Holders of indebtedness that is so secured will have a claim against these properties. To the extent indebtedness is cross-collateralized, lenders may seek to foreclose upon properties that are not the primary collateral for their loan, which may, in turn, result in acceleration of other indebtedness secured by properties. Foreclosure of properties would result in a loss of income and asset value to us, making it difficult for us to meet both debt payment obligations and the distribution requirements of the REIT provisions of the Code. At December 31, 2010, 19 of our mortgage loans payable were cross-collateralized, totaling $138.4 million, inclusive of three mortgage loans payable held by the Other Real Estate Partnerships (see Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may have to make lump-sum payments on its existing indebtedness.

 

We are required to make the following lump-sum or “balloon” payments under the terms of some of our indebtedness, including:

 

 

The Unsecured Credit Facility provides for a $200.0 million term loan and a $200.0 million revolving line of credit. The term borrowing requires quarterly principal pay-downs of $10.0 million beginning March 30, 2012 until maturity on September 28, 2012. The revolving borrowings provide for the repayment of principal in a lump-sum or “balloon” payment at maturity on September 28, 2012. As of December 31, 2010, $376.2 million was outstanding under the Unsecured Credit Facility at a weighted average interest rate of 3.376%.

 

Our ability to make required payments of principal on outstanding indebtedness, whether at maturity or otherwise, may depend on our ability either to refinance the applicable indebtedness or to sell properties. We

have no commitments to refinance the 2011 Exchangeable Notes, the 2012 Notes, the 2014 Notes, the 2016 Notes, the 2017 Notes, the 2017 II Notes, the 2027 Notes, the 2028 Notes, the 2032 Notes, the Unsecured Credit Facility or the mortgage loans (see Subsequent Events). Our existing mortgage loan obligations are secured by our properties and therefore such obligations will permit the lender to foreclose on those properties in the event of a default.

 

There is no limitation on debt in the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s organizational documents.

 

As of December 31, 2010, our ratio of debt to our total market capitalization was 64.6%. We compute that percentage by calculating our total consolidated debt as a percentage of the aggregate market value of all outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, assuming the exchange of all of our limited partnership units for the Company’s common stock, plus the aggregate stated value of all outstanding shares of preferred stock and total consolidated debt. Our organizational documents do not contain any limitation on the amount or percentage of indebtedness we may incur. Accordingly, we could become more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in debt service that could adversely affect our ability to make expected distributions to unitholders and in an increased risk of default on our obligations.

 

Rising interest rates on the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s Unsecured Credit Facility could decrease the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s available cash.

 

Our Unsecured Credit Facility bears interest at a floating rate. As of December 31, 2010, our Unsecured Credit Facility had an outstanding balance of $376.2 million at a weighted average interest rate of 3.376%. Our Unsecured Credit Facility presently bears interest at LIBOR plus 325 basis points or at a base rate plus 225 basis points, at our election for the $200.0 million term borrowing, and for the $200.0 million revolving borrowings, at LIBOR plus 275 basis points or at a base rate plus 175 basis points, at our election. Based on the outstanding balance on our Unsecured Credit Facility as of December 31, 2010, a 10% increase in interest rates would increase interest expense by $1.3 million on an annual basis. Increases in the interest rate payable on balances outstanding under our Unsecured Credit Facility would decrease our cash available for distribution to unitholders.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership’s mortgages may impact its ability to sell encumbered properties on advantageous terms or at all.

 

As part of our plan to enhance liquidity and pay down our debt, we have originated numerous mortgage financings and we are in active discussions with various lenders regarding the origination of additional mortgage financings. Certain of our mortgages contain, and it is anticipated that some future mortgages will contain, substantial prepayment premiums which we would have to pay upon the sale of a property, thereby reducing the net proceeds to us from the sale of any such property. As a result, our willingness to sell certain properties and the price at which we may desire to sell a property may be impacted by the terms of any mortgage financing encumbering a property. If we are unable to sell properties on favorable terms or redeploy the proceeds of property sales in accordance with our business strategy, then our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our common stock could be adversely affected.

 

Adverse market and economic conditions could cause us to recognize additional impairment charges.

 

We regularly review our real estate assets for impairment indicators, such as a decline in a property’s occupancy rate. If we determine that indicators of impairment are present, we review the properties affected by these indicators to determine whether an impairment charge is required. We use considerable judgment in making determinations about impairments, from analyzing whether there are indicators of impairment to the assumptions used in calculating the fair value of the investment. Accordingly, our subjective estimates and evaluations may not be accurate, and such estimates and evaluations are subject to change or revision.

 

Ongoing adverse market and economic conditions and market volatility will likely continue to make it difficult to value the real estate assets owned by us as well as the value of our interests in unconsolidated joint

ventures. There may be significant uncertainty in the valuation, or in the stability of the cash flows, discount rates and other factors related to such assets due to the adverse market and economic conditions that could result in a substantial decrease in their value. We may be required to recognize additional asset impairment charges in the future, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Earnings and cash dividends, asset value and market interest rates affect the price of the Company’s common stock.

 

As a REIT, the market value of the Company’s common stock, in general, is based primarily upon the market’s perception of the Company’s growth potential and its current and potential future earnings and cash dividends. The market value of the Company’s common stock is based secondarily upon the market value of the Company’s underlying real estate assets. For this reason, shares of the Company’s common stock may trade at prices that are higher or lower than the Company’s net asset value per share. To the extent that the Company retains operating cash flow for investment purposes, working capital reserves, or other purposes, these retained funds, while increasing the value of the Company’s underlying assets, may not correspondingly increase the market price of the Company’s common stock. The Company’s failure to meet the market’s expectations with regard to future earnings and cash dividends likely would adversely affect the market price of the Company’s common stock. Further, the distribution yield on the common stock (as a percentage of the price of the common stock) relative to market interest rates may also influence the price of the Company’s common stock. An increase in market interest rates might lead prospective purchasers of the Company’s common stock to expect a higher distribution yield, which would adversely affect the market price of the Company’s common stock.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership may incur unanticipated costs and liabilities due to environmental problems.

 

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, an owner or operator of real estate may be liable for the costs of clean-up of certain conditions relating to the presence of hazardous or toxic materials on, in or emanating from a property, and any related damages to natural resources. Environmental laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of hazardous or toxic materials. The presence of such materials, or the failure to address those conditions properly, may adversely affect the ability to rent or sell the property or to borrow using the property as collateral. Persons who dispose of or arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic materials may also be liable for the costs of clean-up of such materials, or for related natural resource damages, at or from an off-site disposal or treatment facility, whether or not the facility is owned or operated by those persons. No assurance can be given that existing environmental assessments with respect to any of our properties reveal all environmental liabilities, that any prior owner or operator of any of the properties did not create any material environmental condition not known to us or that a material environmental condition does not otherwise exist as to any of our properties. In addition, changes to existing environmental regulation to address, among other things, climate change, could increase the scope of our potential liabilities.

 

The Consolidated Operating Partnership’s insurance coverage does not include all potential losses.

 

We currently carry comprehensive insurance coverage including property, boiler & machinery, liability, fire, flood, terrorism, earthquake, extended coverage and rental loss as appropriate for the markets where each of our properties and their business operations are located. The insurance coverage contains policy specifications and insured limits customarily carried for similar properties and business activities. We believe our properties are adequately insured. However, there are certain losses, including losses from earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, pollution, acts of war, acts of terrorism or riots, that are not generally insured against or that are not generally fully insured against because it is not deemed to be economically feasible or prudent to do so. If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occurs with respect to one or more of our properties, we could experience a significant loss of capital invested and potential revenues from these properties, and could potentially remain obligated under any recourse debt associated with the property.

The Consolidated Operating Partnership is subject to risks and liabilities in connection with its investments in properties through Joint Ventures.

 

As of December 31, 2010, the 2003 Net Lease Joint Venture owned approximately 4.9 million square feet of properties. Our net investment in this Joint Venture was $2.5 million at December 31, 2010. Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of available funds that we may invest in Joint Ventures and we intend to continue to develop and acquire properties through Joint Ventures with other persons or entities when warranted by the circumstances. Joint venture investments, in general, involve certain risks, including:

 

 

The occurrence of one or more of the events described above could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, its common stock.

 

In addition, joint venture investments in real estate involve all of the risks related to the ownership, acquisition, development, sale and financing of real estate discussed in the risk factors above. To the extent the Company’s investments in Joint Ventures are adversely affected by such risks, the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, its common stock could be adversely affected.

 

We are subject to risks associated with our international operations.

 

As of December 31, 2010, we owned three industrial properties and several land parcels located in Canada. Our international operations will be subject to risks inherent in doing business abroad, including:

 

 

When we acquire properties located outside of the United States, we may face risks associated with a lack of market knowledge or understanding of the local economy, forging new business relationships in the area and unfamiliarity with local government and permitting procedures. We work to mitigate such risks through extensive diligence and research and associations with experienced partners; however, there can be no guarantee that all such risks will be eliminated.

 

Adverse changes in our credit ratings could negatively affect our liquidity and business operations.

 

The credit ratings of the Operating Partnership’s senior unsecured notes and the Company’s preferred stock are based on the Company’s operating performance, liquidity and leverage ratios, overall financial position and other factors employed by the credit rating agencies in their rating analyses. Our credit ratings can affect the availability, terms and pricing of any indebtedness that we may incur going forward. There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain any credit rating, and in the event any credit rating is downgraded, we could incur higher borrowing costs or be unable to access certain capital markets at all.

 

 

None.

 

 

General

 

At December 31, 2010, the Company owned 774 in-service industrial properties (705 of which were owned by the Consolidated Operating Partnership and 69 of which were owned by the Other Real Estate Partnerships) containing an aggregate of approximately 68.6 million square feet of GLA (60.8 million square feet of which comprised the properties owned by the Consolidated Operating Partnership and 7.8 million square feet of which comprised the properties owned by the Other Real Estate Partnerships) in 28 states in the United States and one province in Canada, with a diverse base of approximately 1,800 tenants engaged in a wide variety of businesses, including manufacturing, retail, wholesale trade, distribution and professional services. The average annual rental per square foot on a portfolio basis, calculated at December 31, 2010, was $4.36. The properties are generally located in business parks that have convenient access to interstate highways and/or rail and air transportation. The weighted average age of our properties on a combined basis as of December 31, 2010 was approximately 20 years. We maintain insurance on our properties that we believe is adequate.

 

We classify our properties into five industrial categories: light industrial, bulk warehouse, R&D/flex, regional warehouse and manufacturing. While some properties may have characteristics which fall under more than one property type, we have used what we believe is the most dominant characteristic to categorize the property.

 

The following describes, generally, the different industrial categories:

 

 

 

The following tables summarize certain information as of December 31, 2010, with respect to the in-service properties owned by the Consolidated Operating Partnership, each of which is wholly-owned.

 

Consolidated Operating Partnership
In-Service Property Summary Totals

 

 

 

Consolidated Operating Partnership
In-Service Property Summary Totals

 

 

 

 

Property Acquisition Activity

 

During 2010, we acquired three industrial properties for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $22.4 million. The acquired industrial properties have the following characteristics:

 

 

Property Sales

 

During 2010, we sold 10 industrial properties totaling approximately 1.0 million square feet of GLA and several land parcels. Total gross sales proceeds approximated $66.8 million. The 10 industrial properties sold have the following characteristics:

 

 

Property Acquisitions and Sales Subsequent to Year End

 

From January 1, 2011 to February 23, 2011, we sold four industrial properties comprising approximately 0.3 million square feet of GLA. Gross proceeds from the sale of the four industrial properties were approximately $3.9 million. There were no industrial properties acquired during this period.

 

Tenant and Lease Information

 

We have a diverse base of approximately 1,800 tenants engaged in a wide variety of businesses including manufacturing, retail, wholesale trade, distribution and professional services. Most leases have an initial term of between three and six years and provide for periodic rent increases that are either fixed or based on changes in the Consumer Price Index. Industrial tenants typically have net or semi-net leases and pay as additional rent their percentage of the property’s operating costs, including the costs of common area maintenance, property taxes and insurance. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 84% of the GLA of our in-service properties was leased, and no single tenant or group of related tenants accounted for more than 2.4% of the Consolidated Operating Partnerships’ and Other Real Estate Partnerships’ combined rent revenues, nor did any single tenant or group of related tenants occupy more than 2.0% of the Consolidated Operating Partnership’s and Other Real Estate Partnership’s combined total GLA of our in-service properties as of December 31, 2010.

Lease Expirations(1)

 

The following table shows scheduled lease expirations for all leases for our in service properties as of December 31, 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

We are involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. All such proceedings, taken together, are not expected to have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or liquidity.

 

 

None.

 

 

There is no established public trading market for the general partner and limited partner Units. As of February 23, 2010, there were 180 holders of record of general partner and limited partner Units.

 

We did not pay or declare distributions during the years ended December 31, 2010 or 2009. Our ability to make distributions depends on a number of factors, including our net cash provided by operating activities, capital commitments and debt repayment schedules. Holders of general partner and limited partner Units are entitled to receive distributions when, as and if declared by the Board of Directors of the Company, our general partner, after the priority distributions required under our partnership agreement have been made with

respect to Preferred Units out of any funds legally available for that purpose. For 2011, we intend to make per Unit distributions equivalent to the per share distributions the Company is required to make to meet its minimum distribution requirements as a REIT.

 

During 2010, the Operating Partnership did not issue any Units.

 

Subject to certain lock-up periods, holders of limited partner Units of the Operating Partnership can redeem their Units by providing written notification to the General Partner of the Operating Partnership. Unless the General Partner provides notice of a redemption restriction to the holder, redemption must be made within seven business days after receipt of the holder’s notice. The redemption can be effectuated, as determined by the General Partner, either by exchanging the Units for shares of common stock of the REIT on a one-for-one basis, subject to adjustment, or by paying cash equal to the fair market value of such shares. Prior requests for redemption have generally been fulfilled with shares of common stock of the REIT, and we intend to continue this practice. If each Unit of the Operating Partnership were redeemed as of December 31, 2010, we could satisfy our redemption obligations by making an aggregate cash payment of approximately $47.0 million or by issuing 5,363,151 shares of REIT common stock.

 

 

The following sets forth selected financial and operating data for the Consolidated Operating Partnership on a historical consolidated basis. The following data should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto and Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. The historical statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006 include our results of operations as derived from our audited financial statements, adjusted for discontinued operations. The results of operations of properties sold are presented in discontinued operations if such properties met both of the following criteria: (a) the operations and cash flows of the property have been (or will be) eliminated from our ongoing operations as a result of the disposition and (b) we will not have any significant involvement in the operations of the property after the disposal transaction. The historical balance sheet data and other data as of December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006 include our balances as derived from our audited financial statements.

 

 

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with “Selected Financial Data” and the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

 

In addition, the following discussion contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are including this statement for purposes of complying with those safe harbor provisions. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “project,” “seek,” “target,” “potential,” “focus,” “may,” “should,” or similar expressions. Our ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain. Factors which could have a materially adverse effect on our operations and future prospects include, but are not limited to: changes in national, international, regional and local economic conditions generally and real estate markets specifically; changes in legislation/regulation (including changes to laws governing the taxation of REITs) and actions of regulatory authorities (including the IRS); our ability to qualify and maintain our status as a REIT; the availability and attractiveness of financing (including both public and private capital) to us and to our potential counterparties; the availability and attractiveness of terms of additional debt repurchases; interest rates; our credit agency ratings; our ability to comply with applicable financial covenants; competition; changes in supply and demand for industrial properties (including land, the supply and demand for which is inherently more volatile than other types of industrial property) in the Company’s current and proposed market areas; difficulties in consummating acquisitions and dispositions; risks related to our investments in properties through joint ventures; environmental liabilities; slippages in development or lease-up schedules; tenant creditworthiness; higher-than-expected costs; changes in asset valuations and related impairment charges; changes in general accounting principles, policies and guidelines applicable to real estate investment trusts; international business risks and those additional factors described in Item 1A, “Risk Factors” and in our other filings with the SEC. We caution you not to place undue reliance on forward looking statements, which reflect our analysis only and speak only as of the date of this report or the dates indicated in the statements. We assume no obligation to update or supplement forward-looking statements.

 

First Industrial, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”) was organized as a limited partnership in the state of Delaware on November 23, 1993. The sole general partner is First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) which owns common units in the Operating Partnership (“Units”) representing an approximate 92.8% ownership interest at December 31, 2010. The Company also owns a preferred general partnership interest in the Operating Partnership (“Preferred Units”) with an aggregate liquidation priority of $275.0 million at December 31, 2010. The Company is a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) as defined in the Code. The Company’s operations are conducted primarily through the Operating Partnership. The limited partners of the Operating Partnership own, in the aggregate, approximately a 7.2% interest in the Operating Partnership at December 31, 2010.

 

The Operating Partnership is the sole stockholder of First Industrial Investment, Inc., a taxable REIT subsidiary (the “TRS”), and the Operating Partnership or the TRS is the sole member of several limited liability companies (the “L.L.C.s”, and, together with the Operating Partnership and the TRS, the “Consolidated Operating Partnership”), the operating data of which is consolidated with that of the Operating Partnership. We hold at least a 99% limited partnership interest in First Industrial Financing Partnership, L.P. (the “Financing Partnership”), First Industrial Securities, L.P. (the “Securities Partnership”), First Industrial Mortgage Partnership, L.P. (the “Mortgage Partnership”), First Industrial Pennsylvania, L.P. (the “Pennsylvania Partnership”), First Industrial Harrisburg, L.P. (the “Harrisburg Partnership”), First Industrial Indianapolis, L.P. (the “Indianapolis Partnership”), TK-SV, LTD., and FI Development Services, L.P. and wholly owned L.L.C.s (together, the “Other Real Estate Partnerships”). The Other Real Estate Partnerships’ operating data is presented on a combined basis, separate from that of the Consolidated Operating Partnership.

 

The Operating Partnership or the new TRS, through separate wholly-owned limited liability companies of which it is the sole member, also owns noncontrolling equity interests in and provides services to two joint

ventures (the 2003 Net Lease Joint Venture and the 2007 Europe Joint Venture). During 2010, we also owned noncontrolling equity interests in, and ultimately disposed of our equity interestes in, five joint ventures (the 2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture, the 2005 Core Joint Venture, the 2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program, the 2006 Land/Development Joint Venture and the 2007 Canada Joint Venture). On May 25, 2010, we sold our interest in the 2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program to our joint venture partner. On August 5, 2010, we sold our interest in the 2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture, the 2005 Core Joint Venture, the 2006 Land/Development Joint Venture and the 2007 Canada Joint Venture to our joint venture partner. The 2007 Europe Joint Venture does not own any properties. See Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the Joint Ventures.

 

The general partners of the Other Real Estate Partnerships are separate corporations, each with at least a .01% general partnership interest in the Other Real Estate Partnerships for which it acts as a general partner. Each general partner of the Other Real Estate Partnerships is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.

 

Our financial statements report the L.L.C.s and the TRS on a consolidated basis and the Other Real Estate Partnerships and the Joint Ventures are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Profits, losses and distributions of the Operating Partnership, the L.L.C.s and the Other Real Estate Partnerships are allocated to the general partner and the limited partners, or members, as applicable, in accordance with the provisions contained in the partnership agreements or operating agreements, as applicable, of the Operating Partnership, the L.L.C.s and the Other Real Estate Partnerships.

 

As of December 31, 2010, we owned 705 in-service industrial properties, containing an aggregate of approximately 60.8 million square feet of GLA. On a combined basis, as of December 31, 2010, the Other Real Estate Partnerships owned 69 in-service industrial properties, containing an aggregate of approximately 7.8 million square feet of GLA. Of the 69 industrial properties owned by the Other Real Estate Partnerships at December 31, 2010, 21 are held by the Financing Partnership, 17 are held by the Pennsylvania Partnership, nine are held by the Securities Partnership, nine are held by the Mortgage Partnership, seven are held by the Harrisburg Partnership, four are held by the Indianapolis Partnership, one is held by TK-SV, LTD and one is held by FI Development Services, L.P.

 

We believe our financial condition and results of operations are, primarily, a function of our performance in four key areas: leasing of industrial properties, acquisition and development of additional industrial properties, disposition of industrial properties and debt reduction and access to external capital.

 

We generate revenue primarily from rental income and tenant recoveries from long-term (generally three to six years) operating leases of our industrial properties. Such revenue is offset by certain property specific operating expenses, such as real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, property management, utilities and insurance expenses, along with certain other costs and expenses, such as depreciation and amortization costs and general and administrative and interest expenses. Our revenue growth is dependent, in part, on our ability to (i) increase rental income, through increasing either or both occupancy rates and rental rates at our properties, (ii) maximize tenant recoveries and (iii) minimize operating and certain other expenses. Revenues generated from rental income and tenant recoveries are a significant source of funds, in addition to income generated from gains/losses on the sale of our properties (as discussed below), for our liquidity. The leasing of property, in general, and occupancy rates, rental rates, operating expenses and certain non-operating expenses, in particular, are impacted, variously, by property specific, market specific, general economic and other conditions, many of which are beyond our control. The leasing of property also entails various risks, including the risk of tenant default. If we were unable to maintain or increase occupancy rates and rental rates at our properties or to maintain tenant recoveries and operating and certain other expenses consistent with historical levels and proportions, our revenue would decline. Further, if a significant number of our tenants were unable to pay rent (including tenant recoveries) or if we were unable to rent our properties on favorable terms, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and the Company’s ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, the Company’s common stock would be adversely affected.

 

Our revenue growth is also dependent, in part, on our ability to acquire existing, and acquire and develop new, additional industrial properties on favorable terms. The Consolidated Operating Partnership seeks to identify opportunities to acquire existing industrial properties on favorable terms, and, when conditions permit,

also seeks to identify opportunities to acquire and develop new industrial properties on favorable terms. Existing properties, as they are acquired, and acquired and developed properties, as they are leased, generate revenue from rental income, tenant recoveries and fees, income from which, as discussed above, is a source of funds for our distributions. The acquisition and development of properties is impacted, variously, by property specific, market specific, general economic and other conditions, many of which are beyond our control. The acquisition and development of properties also entails various risks, including the risk that our investments may not perform as expected. For example, acquired existing and acquired and developed new properties may not sustain and/or achieve anticipated occupancy and rental rate levels. With respect to acquired and developed new properties, we may not be able to complete construction on schedule or within budget, resulting in increased debt service expense and construction costs and delays in leasing the properties. Also, we face significant competition for attractive acquisition and development opportunities from other well-capitalized real estate investors, including both publicly-traded REITs and private investors. Further, as discussed below, we may not be able to finance the acquisition and development opportunities we identify. If we were unable to acquire and develop sufficient additional properties on favorable terms or if such investments did not perform as expected, our revenue growth would be limited and our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and the Company’s ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, the Company’s common stock would be adversely affected.

 

We also generate income from the sale of our properties (including existing buildings, buildings which we have developed or re-developed on a merchant basis and land). The gain/loss on, and fees from, the sale of such properties are included in our income and can be a significant source of funds, in addition to revenues generated from rental income and tenant recoveries, for our operations. Currently, a significant portion of our proceeds from sales are being used to repay outstanding debt. Market conditions permitting, however, a significant portion of our proceeds from such sales may also be used to fund the acquisition of existing, and the acquisition and development of new, industrial properties. The sale of properties is impacted, variously, by property specific, market specific, general economic and other conditions, many of which are beyond our control. The sale of properties also entails various risks, including competition from other sellers and the availability of attractive financing for potential buyers of our properties. Further, our ability to sell properties is limited by safe harbor rules applying to REITs under the Code which relate to the number of properties that may be disposed of in a year, their tax bases and the cost of improvements made to the properties, along with other tests which enable a REIT to avoid punitive taxation on the sale of assets. If we were unable to sell properties on favorable terms, our income growth would be limited and our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and the Company’s ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, the Company’s common stock would be adversely affected.

 

We utilize a portion of the net sales proceeds from property sales, borrowings under our Unsecured Credit Facility, and proceeds from the issuance, when and as warranted, of additional debt and equity securities to refinance debt and finance future acquisitions and developments. Access to external capital on favorable terms plays a key role in our financial condition and results of operations, as it impacts our cost of capital and our ability and cost to refinance existing indebtedness as it matures and to fund acquisitions and developments or through the issuance, when and as warranted, of additional equity securities. Our ability to access external capital on favorable terms is dependent on various factors, including general market conditions, interest rates, credit ratings on our capital stock and debt, the market’s perception of our growth potential, our current and potential future earnings and cash distributions and the market price of the Company’s capital stock. If we were unable to access external capital on favorable terms, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and the Company’s ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, the Company’s common stock would be adversely affected.

 

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

 

Our significant accounting policies are described in more detail in Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. We believe the following critical accounting policies relate to the more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

 

 

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Comparison of Year Ended December 31, 2010 to Year Ended December 31, 2009

 

Our net loss available to unitholders was $241.2 million and $15.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Basic and diluted net loss available to unitholders was $3.53 per unit for the year ended December 31, 2010 and $0.28 per unit for the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

The tables below summarize our revenues, property and construction expenses and depreciation and other amortization by various categories for the years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009. Same store properties are properties owned prior to January 1, 2009 and held as an operating property through December 31, 2010 and developments and redevelopments that were placed in service prior to January 1, 2009 or were substantially completed for the 12 months prior to January 1, 2009. Properties which are at least 75% occupied at acquisition are placed in service. All other properties are placed in service as they reach the earlier of a) stabilized occupancy (generally defined as 90% occupied), or b) one year subsequent to acquisition or development completion. Acquired properties are properties that were acquired subsequent to December 31,

2008 and held as an operating property through December 31, 2010. Sold properties are properties that were sold subsequent to December 31, 2008. (Re)Developments and land are land parcels and developments and redevelopments that were not: a) substantially complete 12 months prior to January 1, 2009 or b) stabilized prior to January 1, 2009. Other revenues are derived from the operations of our maintenance company, fees earned from our Joint Ventures and other miscellaneous revenues. Construction revenues and expenses represent revenues earned and expenses incurred in connection with the old TRS acting as general contractor or development manager to construct industrial properties, including industrial properties for the 2006 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture and also include revenues and expenses related to the development and sale of properties built for third parties. Other expenses are derived from the operations of our maintenance company and other miscellaneous regional expenses.

 

Our future financial condition and results of operations, including rental revenues, may be impacted by the future acquisition and sale of properties. Our future revenues and expenses may vary materially from historical rates.

 

For the years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the occupancy rates of our same store properties were 82.2% and 82.4%, respectively.

 

 

Revenues from same store properties decreased $5.2 million due primarily to a decrease in rental rates and a decrease in occupancy. Revenues from acquired properties increased $1.1 million due to the three industrial properties acquired subsequent to December 31, 2008 totaling approximately 0.5 million square feet of GLA. Revenues from sold properties decreased $8.2 million due to the 22 industrial properties and one leased land parcel sold subsequent to December 31, 2008 totaling approximately 2.8 million square feet of GLA. Revenues from (re)developments and land increased $4.5 million primarily due to an increase in occupancy. Other revenues decreased $8.8 million due primarily to a decrease in fees earned from our Joint Ventures. Construction revenues decreased $54.1 million primarily due to the substantial completion prior to

December 31, 2009 of certain development projects for which we were acting in the capacity of development manager.

 

 

Property expenses include real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, property management, utilities, insurance and other property related expenses. Property expenses from same store properties decreased $2.3 million due primarily to a decrease in bad debt expense. Property expenses from acquired properties increased $0.2 million due to properties acquired subsequent to December 31, 2008. Property expenses from sold properties decreased $2.2 million due to properties sold subsequent to December 31, 2008. Property expenses from (re)developments and land remained relatively unchanged. The $1.5 million decrease in other expense is primarily attributable to a decrease in compensation. Construction expenses decreased $52.2 million primarily due to the substantial completion prior to December 31, 2009 of certain development projects for which we were acting in the capacity of development manager.

 

General and administrative expense decreased $11.1 million, or 29.5%, due primarily to a decrease in compensation resulting from the reduction in employee headcount occurring during 2009 and 2010, a decrease in rent expense resulting from office closings in 2009 and 2010 and a decrease in legal and professional services, partially offset by an increase in lawsuit settlements.

 

We committed to a plan to reduce organizational and overhead costs in October 2008 and have subsequently modified that plan with the goal of further reducing these costs. For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recognized $1.9 million in restructuring charges to provide for employee severance and benefits ($0.5 million), costs associated with the termination of certain office leases ($0.7 million) and other costs ($0.7 million) associated with implementing our restructuring plan. Due to the timing of certain related expenses, we expect to record a total of approximately $1.5 million of additional restructuring charges in subsequent quarters. We also anticipate a continued reduction of general and administrative expense in 2011 compared to 2010 as a result of the employee terminations and office closings that were part of our restructuring plan in 2010.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded as restructuring costs a pre-tax charge of $7.8 million to provide for employee severance and benefits ($5.2 million), costs associated with the termination of certain office leases ($1.9 million) and other costs ($0.7 million) associated with implementing the restructuring plan.

 

Due to the expected amendment to our Unsecured Credit Facility in 2010 we reassessed the holding period for our Non-Strategic Assets. As a result of the reassessment, we recorded an impairment loss in the amount of $156.7 million during the third quarter of 2010 on 120 industrial properties comprising approximately 10.0 million square feet of GLA and land parcels comprising approximately 445 gross acres. During the fourth quarter of 2010, we recorded an additional impairment loss to certain Non-Strategic Assets in the amount of $20.3 million. The additional charge is primarily comprised of estimated closing costs on 110 industrial properties comprising 9.9 million square feet of GLA and land parcels comprising

approximately 391 gross acres classified as held for sale, as well as additional impairment related to certain industrial properties and land parcels due to a change in our estimates of fair value based upon recent market information, including receipt of third party purchase offers. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $152.1 million of the impairment loss is included in discontinued operations because our Non-Strategic Assets (except one industrial property comprising approximately 0.3 million square feet of GLA) are classified as held for sale at December 31, 2010. In addition, in connection with the negotiation of a new lease, we recorded an impairment loss in the amount of $9.2 million on one property in Grand Rapids, Michigan during the first quarter of 2010 (see Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Additional impairments may be necessary in the future in the event that market conditions continue to deteriorate and impact the factors used to estimate fair value or in the event that we change our intent to hold a property.

 

As a result of adverse conditions in the credit and real estate markets, we determined in the third quarter of 2009 that an impairment loss in the amount of $6.9 million should be recorded on one property in the Inland Empire market ($1.3 million of this impairment loss is included in discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2009 because one building of the two-building property is classified as held for sale at December 31, 2010).

 

 

Depreciation and other amortization for same store properties decreased $10.4 million primarily due to accelerated depreciation and amortization taken during the year ended December 31, 2009, attributable to certain tenants who terminated their lease early as well the cessation of depreciation and amortization of the Non-Strategic Assets that qualified for held for sale classification during the fourth quarter of 2010. Depreciation and other amortization from acquired properties increased $0.6 million due to properties acquired subsequent to December 31, 2008. Depreciation and other amortization from sold properties decreased $3.6 million due to properties sold subsequent to December 31, 2008. Depreciation and other amortization for (re)developments and land and other increased $0.8 million due primarily to an increase in the substantial completion of developments. Corporate furniture, fixtures and equipment decreased $0.2 million primarily due to accelerated depreciation on furniture, fixtures and equipment taken in 2009 related to the termination of certain office leases.

 

Interest income increased $1.3 million, or 42.8%, primarily due to an increase in the weighted average mortgage loans receivable balance outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2010 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

Interest expense, inclusive of $0.1 million and $0.5 million of interest expense included in discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, decreased $11.8 million, or 10.3%, primarily due to a decrease in the weighted average debt balance outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2010 ($1,823.4 million), as compared to the year ended December 31, 2009 ($2,042.0 million), offset by an increase in the weighted average interest rate for the year ended December 31, 2010 (5.65%), as compared to the year ended December 31, 2009 (5.63%) and by a decrease in capitalized interest for the year ended December 31, 2010 due to a decrease in development activities.

Amortization of deferred financing costs increased $0.3 million, or 11.2%, due primarily to an increase in costs related to the amendment of our Unsecured Credit Facility in October 2010 and the origination of mortgage financings during 2010 and 2009, partially offset by the expensing of capitalized loan fees as a result of the repurchase and retirement of certain of our senior unsecured notes. The net unamortized deferred financing fees related to the prior line of credit are amortized over the remaining amortization period, except for $0.2 million of unamortized deferred financing costs that were expensed as a result of the decrease in the capacity of the Unsecured Credit Facility, which is included in (Loss) Gain From Early Retirement of Debt for the year ended December 31, 2010.

 

In October 2008, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement (the “Series F Agreement”) to mitigate our exposure to floating interest rates related to the coupon reset of the Company’s Series F Preferred Stock. The Series F Agreement has a notional value of $50.0 million and is effective from April 1, 2009 through October 1, 2013. The Series F Agreement fixes the 30-year U.S. Treasury rate at 5.2175%. We recorded $1.1 million in mark to market loss, inclusive of reset payments, which is included in Mark-to-Market (Loss) Gain on Interest Rate Protection Agreements for the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared to $2.7 million in mark to market gain, inclusive of reset payments, for the year ended December 31, 2009. Additionally included in Mark-to-Market Gain on Interest Rate Protection Agreements for the year ended December 31, 2009 is $1.0 million related to two forward starting swaps. In January 2008, we entered into two forward starting swaps each with a notional value of $59.8 million, which fixed the interest rate on forecasted debt offerings. We designated both swaps as cash flow hedges. The rates on the forecasted debt issuances underlying the swaps locked on March 20, 2009 (the “Forward Starting Agreement 1”) and on April 6, 2009 (the “Forward Starting Agreement 2”), and as such, the swaps ceased to qualify for hedge accounting. The change in value of Forward Starting Agreement 1 and Forward Starting Agreement 2 from the respective day the interest rate on the underlying debt locked until settlement was $1.0 million and is included in Mark-to-Market Gain on Interest Rate Protection Agreements for the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recognized a net loss from early retirement of debt of $4.3 million due primarily to the redemption of our 2011 Notes. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we recognized a $34.6 million gain from early retirement of debt due to the partial repurchase of certain series of our senior unsecured notes.

 

Equity in income of Other Real Estate Partnerships decreased $15.0 million, or 81.1%, primarily due to an increase in interest expense and a decrease in gain on sale of real estate for the Other Real Estate Partnerships for the year ended December 31, 2010.

 

The Gain on Sale of Joint Venture Interests of $11.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 relates to the sale of our 10% equity interests in each of the 2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture, the 2005 Core Joint Venture, the 2006 Land/Development Joint Venture and the 2007 Canada Joint Venture to our joint venture partner on August 5, 2010. Additionally, the gain includes approximately $2.7 million of proceeds related to the separate sales of three industrial properties by the Joint Ventures during August and October 2010 for which, in accordance with the sale agreement, we were entitled to a final distribution.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2010, Equity in Income of Joint Ventures was $0.7 million, as compared to Equity in Loss of Joint Ventures of $6.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The variance of $7.2 million is due primarily to impairment losses of $5.6 million we recorded during the year ended December 31, 2009 related to the 2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program as a result of adverse conditions in the credit and real estate markets and also due to the gain on sale of our 15% interest in the 2006 Net Lease Co-Investment Program which occurred during the year ended December 31, 2010, partially offset by a decrease in our pro rata share of gain on sale of real estate and earn outs on property sales from the 2005 Development/Repositioning Joint Venture and a decrease in our pro rata share of income from the 2005 Core Joint Venture during the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded an income tax provision of $3.3 million, as compared to an income tax benefit of $23.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The variance of $26.5 million is due primarily to a loss carryback generated from the tax liquidation of the old TRS for the

year ended December 31, 2009 as well as an increase in state taxes related to an unfavorable court decision on business loss carryforwards in the State of Michigan for the year ended December 31, 2010.

 

The following table summarizes certain information regarding the industrial properties included in discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009.

 

 

Loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2010 reflects the results of operations and gain on sale of real estate relating to 10 industrial properties and one land parcel that generated ground rental revenue that were sold during the year ended December 31, 2010 and the results of operations of 174 industrial properties that were identified as held for sale at December 31, 2010.

 

Income from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2009 reflects the results of operations and gain on sale of real estate relating to 12 industrial properties that were sold during the year ended December 31, 2009, the results of operations of 10 industrial properties and one land parcel that generated ground rental revenue that were sold during the year ended December 31, 2010 and the results of operations of the 174 industrial properties identified as held for sale at December 31, 2010.

 

The $0.9 million gain on sale of real estate for the year ended December 31, 2010 resulted from the sale of several land parcels that do not meet the criteria established for inclusion in discontinued operations. The $0.3 million gain on sale of real estate for the year ended December 31, 2009 resulted from the sale of several land parcels that do not meet the criteria for inclusion in discontinued operations.

 

Comparison of Year Ended December 31, 2009 to Year Ended December 31, 2008

 

Our net (loss) income available to unitholders was $(15.2) million and $24.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Basic and diluted net (loss) income available to unitholders were $(0.28) per unit for the year ended December 31, 2009 and $0.44 per unit for the year ended December 31, 2008.

 

The tables below summarize our revenues, property and construction expenses and depreciation and other amortization by various categories for the years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008. Same store properties are properties owned prior to January 1, 2008 and held as an operating property through December 31, 2009 and developments and redevelopments that were placed in service prior to January 1, 2008 or were substantially completed for the 12 months prior to January 1, 2008. Properties which are at least 75% occupied at acquisition are placed in service. All other properties are placed in service as they reach the earlier of a) stabilized occupancy (generally defined as 90% occupied), or b) one year subsequent to acquisition or development completion. Acquired properties are properties that were acquired subsequent to December 31, 2007 and held as an operating property through December 31, 2009. Sold properties are properties that were sold subsequent to December 31, 2007. (Re)Developments and land are land parcels and developments and redevelopments that were not: a) substantially complete 12 months prior to January 1, 2008 or b) stabilized prior to January 1, 2008. Other revenues are derived from the operations of our maintenance company, fees earned from our Joint Ventures and other miscellaneous revenues. Construction revenues and expenses represent revenues earned and expenses incurred in connection with the old TRS acting as general contractor or development manager to construct industrial properties, including industrial properties for the 2006

Development/Repositioning Joint Venture, and also include revenues and expenses related to the development of properties for third parties. Other expenses are derived from the operations of our maintenance company and other miscellaneous regional expenses.

 

Our future financial condition and results of operations, including rental revenues, may be impacted by the future acquisition and sale of properties. Our future revenues and expenses may vary materially from historical rates.

 

For the years ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the occupancy rates of our same store properties were 82.8% and 87.8%, respectively.

 

 

Revenues from same store properties decreased $17.4 million due primarily to a decrease in occupancy and a decrease in tenant recoveries due to a decrease in property expenses. Revenues from acquired properties increased $10.0 million due to the 24 industrial properties acquired subsequent to December 31, 2007 totaling approximately 3.0 million square feet of GLA, as well as acquisitions of land parcels in September and October 2008 for which we receive ground rents. Revenues from sold properties decreased $26.1 million due to the 101 industrial properties sold subsequent to December 31, 2007 totaling approximately 9.2 million square feet of GLA. Revenues from (re)developments and land increased $7.6 million primarily due to an increase in occupancy. Other revenues decreased $11.3 million due primarily to a decrease in development fees earned from our Joint Ventures and a decrease in fees earned related to us assigning our interest in certain purchase contracts to third parties for consideration. Construction revenues decreased $92.3 million primarily due to the substantial completion of certain development projects for which we were acting in the capacity of

development manager, offset by a development project that commenced in August 2008 for which we are acting in the capacity of development manager

 

 

Property expenses include real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, property management, utilities, insurance and other property related expenses. Property expenses from same store properties decreased $4.9 million due primarily to a decrease in real estate tax expense and repairs and maintenance expense. Property expenses from acquired properties increased $3.0 million due to properties acquired subsequent to December 31, 2007. Property expenses from sold properties decreased $8.6 million due to properties sold subsequent to December 31, 2007. Property expenses from (re)developments and land increased $1.3 million due to an increase in the substantial completion of developments. Expenses are no longer capitalized to the basis of a property once the development is substantially complete. The $3.8 million increase in other expense is primarily attributable to an increase in incentive compensation. Construction expenses decreased $86.8 million primarily due to the substantial completion of certain development projects for which we were acting in the capacity of development manager, offset by a development project that commenced in August 2008 for which we are acting in the capacity of development manager.

 

General and administrative expense decreased $46.5 million, or 55.3%, due primarily to a decrease in compensation resulting from the reduction in employee headcount occurring in 2008 and during 2009 as well as a decrease in professional services, marketing, travel and entertainment expenses and costs associated with the pursuit of acquisitions of real estate that were abandoned.

 

We committed to a plan to reduce organizational and overhead costs in October 2008. On February 25 and September 25, 2009, we committed to additional modifications to the plan consisting of further organizational and overhead cost reductions. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded as restructuring costs a pre-tax charge of $7.8 million to provide for employee severance and benefits ($5.2 million), costs associated with the termination of certain office leases ($1.9 million) and other costs ($0.7 million) associated with implementing the restructuring plan.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2008, we incurred $26.7 million in restructuring charges related to employee severance and benefits ($24.8 million), costs associated with the termination of certain office leases ($1.2 million) and contract cancellation and other costs ($0.7 million) related to our restructuring plan to reduce overhead costs.

 

As a result of adverse conditions in the credit and real estate markets, we determined in the third quarter of 2009 that an impairment loss in the amount of $6.9 million should be recorded on one property in the Inland Empire market ($1.3 million of this impairment loss is included in discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2009 because one building of the two-building property is classified as held for sale at

December 31, 2010). Additional impairments may be necessary in the future in the event that market conditions continue to deteriorate and impact the factors used to estimate fair value.