UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549


FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

x                                 ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006

OR

o                                   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                          to                         .

Commission File Number: 001-32269

EXTRA SPACE STORAGE INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Maryland

 

20-1076777

(State or other jurisdiction of

 

(I.R.S. Employer

incorporation or organization)

 

Identification No.)

 

2795 East Cottonwood Parkway, Suite 400
Salt Lake City, Utah 84121

(Address of principal executive offices and zip code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (801) 562-5556

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class

 

Name of exchange on which registered

Common Stock, $.01 par value

 

New York Stock Exchange, Inc.

 

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 x No o

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No 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 of this Form 10-K. Yes o No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer x

 

Accelerated filer o

 

Non-accelerated filer o

 

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

The aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $752,502,827 based upon the closing price on the New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2006, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently compeleted second fiscal quarter. This calculation does not reflect a determination that persons whose shares are excluded from the computation are affiliates for any other purpose.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, as of February 15, 2007 was 64,242,922.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be issued in connection with the registrant’s annual stockholders’ meeting to be held in 2007 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 




EXTRA SPACE STORAGE INC.
Table of Contents

PART I

 

5

 

Item 1. Business

 

5

 

Item 1A. Risk Factors

 

9

 

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

 

23

 

Item 2. Properties

 

23

 

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

 

27

 

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

 

27

 

PART II

 

28

 

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities  

 

28

 

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

 

29

 

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

30

 

Item 7a. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

 

46

 

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

 

48

 

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

 

92

 

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

 

92

 

Item 9B. Other Information

 

94

 

PART III

 

95

 

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

 

95

 

Item 11. Executive Compensation

 

95

 

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters   

 

95

 

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

 

95

 

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

 

95

 

PART IV

 

96

 

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

 

97

 

SIGNATURES

 

100

 

 

2




Explanatory Note

The financial statements covered in this report for the period from January 1, 2004 to August 16, 2004 contain the results of operations and financial condition of Extra Space Storage LLC and its subsidiaries, the predecessor to Extra Space Storage Inc. and its subsidiaries, prior to the consummation of Extra Space Storage Inc.’s initial public offering on August 17, 2004, and various formation transactions. In addition, the financial statements covered in this report contain the results of operations and financial condition of Extra Space Storage Inc. for the period from August 17, 2004 to December 31, 2006. Amounts are in thousands (except per share data and unless otherwise stated).

Statements Regarding Forward-Looking Information

Certain information set forth in this report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements include statements concerning our plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events, future revenues or performance, capital expenditures, financing needs, plans or intentions relating to acquisitions and other information that is not historical information. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “believes,” “expects,” “estimates,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “anticipates,” or “intends” or the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology, or by discussions of strategy. We may also make additional forward-looking statements from time to time. All such subsequent forward-looking statements, whether written or oral, by us or on our behalf, are also expressly qualified by these cautionary statements.

All forward-looking statements, including without limitation, management’s examination of historical operating trends and estimate of future earnings, are based upon our current expectations and various assumptions. Our expectations, beliefs and projections are expressed in good faith and we believe there is a reasonable basis for them, but there can be no assurance that management’s expectations, beliefs and projections will result or be achieved. All forward-looking statements apply only as of the date made. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise forward-looking statements which may be made to reflect events or circumstances after the date made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

There are a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained in or contemplated by this report. Any forward-looking statements should be considered in light of the risks referenced in “Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors” below. Such factors include, but are not limited to:

·       changes in general economic conditions and in the markets in which we operate;

·       the effect of competition from new self-storage facilities or other storage alternatives, which would cause rents and occupancy rates to decline;

·       our ability to effectively compete in the industry in which we do business;

·       difficulties in our ability to evaluate, finance and integrate acquired and developed properties into our existing operations and to lease up those properties, which could adversely affect our profitability;

·       the impact of the regulatory environment as well as national, state, and local laws and regulations including, without limitation, those governing Real Estate Investment Trusts, which could increase our expenses and reduce our cash available for distribution;

·       difficulties in raising capital at reasonable rates, which could impede our ability to grow;

·       delays in the development and construction process, which could adversely affect our profitability; and

·       economic uncertainty due to the impact of war or terrorism, which could adversely affect our business plan.

3




The forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future performance, taking into account all information currently available to us. These beliefs, assumptions and expectations are subject to risks and uncertainties and can change as a result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are known to us. If a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations may vary materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. You should carefully consider these risks before you make an investment decision with respect to our securities.

We disclaim any duty or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect new information, future events or otherwise.

4




PART I

Item 1.                        Business

General

Extra Space Storage Inc. (“we,” “our,” “us” or the “Company”) is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”) formed as a Maryland corporation on April 30, 2004 to own, operate, acquire, develop and redevelop professionally managed self-storage facilities. We closed our initial public offering (“IPO”) on August 17, 2004. Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “EXR.”

We were formed to continue the business of Extra Space Storage LLC and its subsidiaries (the “Predecessor”), which had engaged in the self-storage business since 1977. These companies were reorganized after the consummation of our IPO and various formation transactions. As of December 31, 2006, we held ownership interests in 567 properties located in 32 states and Washington, D.C. with an aggregate of approximately 41 million square feet of net rentable space and greater than 280,000 customers. Of these 567 properties, 219 are wholly-owned, and 348 are owned in joint-venture partnerships. An additional 74 properties are owned by franchisees or third parties and operated by us in exchange for a management fee, bringing total properties which we own and/or manage to 641.

We operate in two distinct segments: (1) property management and development and (2) rental operations. Our property management and development activities include acquiring, managing, developing and selling self-storage facilities. The rental operations activities include rental operations of self-storage facilities.

Substantially all of our business is conducted through Extra Space Storage LP (the “Operating Partnership”), and through our wholly-owned Massachusetts business trust subsidiaries. Our primary assets are general partner and limited partner interests in the Operating Partnership. This structure is commonly referred to as an umbrella partnership REIT, or UPREIT. We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”). To the extent we continue to qualify as a REIT we will not be subject to tax, with certain exceptions, on our net taxable income that is distributed to our stockholders.

We file our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). You may obtain copies of these documents by visiting the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549, by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 or by accessing the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. In addition, as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are furnished to the SEC, we make copies of these documents available to the public free of charge through our website at www.extraspace.com, or by contacting our Secretary at our principal offices, which are located at 2795 Cottonwood Parkway, Suite 400, Salt Lake City, Utah 84121, telephone number (801) 562-5556.

Management

Members of our executive management team have significant experience in all aspects of the self-storage industry, and have an average of more than ten years of industry experience. The senior management team has collectively acquired and/or developed more than 675 properties during the past 25 years for the Company, the Predecessor and other entities. Kenneth M. Woolley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Richard S. Tanner, Senior Vice President Development, have worked in the self-storage industry since 1977 and led some of the earliest self-storage facility development projects in the United States.

5




The remainder of our executive management team and their years of industry experience are as follows: Kent Christensen, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, 9 years; Charles Allen, Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer, 9 years; and Karl Haas, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, 19 years.

Members of the executive management team have guided the Company through substantial growth, developing and acquiring over $2.9 billion in assets since 1996. This growth has been funded through equity offerings and more than $2.0 billion in private equity capital since 1998. This private equity capital has come primarily from sophisticated, high net-worth individuals and institutional investors such as affiliates of Prudential Financial, Inc. and Fidelity Investments.

Our executive management and board of directors have a significant ownership position in the Company with executive officers and directors owning approximately 4.4 million shares or 6.8% of our outstanding common stock as of February 15, 2007.

Industry & Competition

Self-storage facilities refers to properties that offer do-it-yourself, month-to-month storage space rental for personal or business use. Self-storage offers a cost-effective and flexible storage alternative. Tenants rent fully enclosed spaces that can vary in size according to their specific needs and to which they have unlimited, exclusive access. Tenants have responsibility for moving their items into and out of their units. Self-storage unit sizes typically range from five feet by five feet to 20 feet by 20 feet, with an interior height of eight to 12 feet. Properties generally have on-site managers who supervise and run the day-to-day operations, providing tenants with assistance as needed.

Self-storage provides a convenient way for individuals and businesses to store their possessions, due to life-changes, or simply because of a need for storage space. The mix of residential tenants using a self-storage property is determined by a property’s local demographics and often includes people who are looking to downsize their living space or others who are not yet settled into a permanent residence.

Items that residential tenants place in self-storage properties range from cars, boats and recreational vehicles, to furniture, household items and appliances. Commercial tenants tend to include small business owners who require easy and frequent access to their goods, records, extra inventory or storage for seasonal goods.

Our research has shown that tenants choose a self-storage property based primarily on the convenience of the site to their home or business, making high-density, high-traffic population centers ideal locations for a self-storage property. A property’s perceived security and the general professionalism of the site managers and staff are also contributing factors to a site’s ability to successfully secure rentals. Although most self-storage properties are leased to tenants on a month-to-month basis, tenants tend to continue their leases for extended periods of time.

There are seasonal fluctuations in occupancy rates for self-storage properties. Based on our experience, generally, there is increased leasing activity at self-storage properties during the summer months due to the higher number of people who relocate during this period. The highest level of occupancy is typically at the end of July, while the lowest level of occupancy is seen in late February and early March.

Since inception in the early 1970’s the self-storage industry has experienced significant growth. In the past ten years, there has been even greater growth. According to the Self-Storage Almanac (the “Almanac”), in 1996 there were only 25,180 self-storage properties in the United States, with an average occupancy rate of 88.5% of net rentable square feet compared to 42,976 self-storage properties in 2006 with an average occupancy rate of 83.0 % of net rentable square feet. As population densities have

6




increased in the United States, there has been an increase in self-storage awareness and corresponding development, which we expect will continue in the future.

Increased competition has affected our business and has led to both pricing and discount pressure. This has limited our ability to increase revenues in many markets in which we operate. Many markets have been able to absorb the increase in self-storage development due to superior demographics and density. However, select markets have not been able to absorb the new facilities and have not performed as well.

We have encountered competition when we seek to acquire properties, especially for brokered portfolios. Aggressive bidding practices have been commonplace between both public and private entities, and this competition will continue to be a challenge for the Company’s growth strategy.

Increased development within the self-storage industry has also led to an increased emphasis on site location, property design, innovation and functionality. We strive to have a creative and flexible approach to our development projects and we are open to a broad array of opportunities because of this flexibility. This is especially true for new sites slated for high-density population centers, to accommodate the requirements and tastes of local planning and zoning boards, and to distinguish a facility from other offerings in the market. Due to the attractive architecture of many of our development properties, we have been able to eliminate a typical barrier of entry for most self-storage developers in areas usually reserved for more traditional retail and commercial users.

The industry is also characterized by fragmented ownership. According to the 2007 Almanac, the top ten self-storage companies in the United States owned approximately 11.6% of total U.S. self-storage properties, and the top 50 self-storage companies owned approximately 15.5% of the total U.S. properties. We believe this fragmentation will contribute to continued consolidation at some level in the future. We also believe we are well positioned to be able to compete for acquisitions given our enhanced ability to access capital as a public company and our historical reputation for closing deals.

After our acquisition of the Storage USA properties on July 14, 2005, we became the second largest self-storage operator in the United States. We are now one of four public self-storage REITS along with Public Storage Inc. (NYSE: PSA), Sovran Self-Storage, Inc. (NYSE: SSS), and U-Store-It Inc. (NYSE: YSI).

Growth and Investment Strategies

Our primary business objectives are to maximize cash flow available for distribution to our stockholders and to achieve sustainable long-term growth in cash flow per share in order to maximize long-term stockholder value. We continue to evaluate a range of growth initiatives and opportunities. These include:

·       Maximize the performance of properties through strategic, efficient and proactive management.   We plan to pursue revenue generating and expense minimizing opportunities in our operations. Our revenue management team will seek to maximize revenue by responding to changing market conditions through our technology system’s ability to provide real-time, interactive rental rate and discount management. Our scale allows greater ability than the majority of our competitors to implement national, regional and local marketing programs, which we believe will attract more customers to our stores at a lower net cost.

·       Focus on the acquisition of self-storage properties from strategic partners and third parties.   Our acquisitions team will continue to pursue the acquisition of single properties and multi-property portfolios that we believe can provide stockholder value. Our July 2005 acquisition of Storage USA has bolstered our reputation as a reliable, ethical buyer, which we believe enhances our ability to negotiate and close non-brokered, private deals. In addition, our status as an umbrella partnership real estate investment trust enables flexibility when structuring deals.

7




·       Develop new self-storage properties.   We have several joint venture and wholly-owned development properties and will continue to develop new self-storage properties in our core markets. Our development pipeline through 2009 includes 27 projects. The majority of the projects will be developed on a wholly-owned basis by the Company.

·       Expand our management business.   We see the management business as a future acquisition pipeline and expect to pursue strategic relationships with owners that should strengthen our acquisition pipeline through agreements which give us first right of refusal to purchase the managed property in the event of a potential sale. Twelve of our 2006 acquisitions came from this channel.

Financing of Our Growth Strategies

·       Acquisition and Development Financing

We, as guarantor, and our Operating Partnership currently have a $100 million revolving line of credit (the “credit facility”) that is collateralized by our self-storage properties. As of December 31, 2006, the credit facility had approximately $81.0 million of available capacity based on the assets collateralizing the credit facility. We expect to maintain a flexible approach in financing new property acquisitions. We plan to finance future acquisitions through a combination of borrowings under the credit facility, traditional secured mortgage financing and additional equity offerings.

·       Development Joint Venture Financing

We own 338 of our stabilized properties and 10 of our lease-up properties through joint ventures with third parties, including affiliates of Prudential Financial, Inc. In each joint venture, we generally manage the day-to-day operations of the underlying properties and have the right to participate in major decisions relating to sales of properties or financings by the applicable joint venture. Our joint venture partners typically provide most of the equity capital required for the operation of the respective business. Under the operating agreements for the joint ventures, we typically maintain the right to receive between 17.0% and 50.0% of the available cash flow from operations after our joint venture partners have received a predetermined return, and between 17.0% and 50.0% of the available cash flow from capital transactions after our joint venture partners have received a return of their capital plus such predetermined return. Most joint venture agreements include buy-sell rights, as well as rights of first refusal in connection with the sale of properties by the joint venture.

·       Disposition of Properties

We will continue to review our portfolio for properties or groups of properties that are not strategically located and determine whether to dispose of these properties to fund other growth.

Regulation

Generally, self-storage properties are subject to various laws, ordinances and regulations, including regulations relating to lien sale rights and procedures. Changes in any of these laws or regulations, as well as changes in laws, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation Liability Act, or CERCLA, which increase the potential liability for environmental conditions or circumstances existing or created by tenants or others on properties, or laws affecting development, construction, operation, upkeep, safety and taxation may result in significant unanticipated expenditures, loss of self-storage sites or other impairments to operations, which would adversely affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the “ADA”), all places of public accommodation are required to meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. These requirements became effective in 1992. A number of additional U.S. federal, state and local laws also exist

8




that may require modifications to the properties, or restrict further renovations thereof, with respect to access thereto by disabled persons. Noncompliance with the ADA could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants and also could result in an order to correct any non-complying feature, thereby requiring substantial capital expenditures. To the extent our properties are not in compliance, we are likely to incur additional costs to comply with the ADA.

Insurance activities are subject to state insurance laws and regulations as determined by the particular insurance commissioner for each state in accordance with the McCarran-Ferguson Act, and are subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the privacy regulations promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission pursuant thereto.

Property management activities are often subject to state real estate brokerage laws and regulations as determined by the particular real estate commission for each state.

Changes in any of the laws governing our conduct could have an adverse impact on our ability to conduct our business or could materially affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Employees

As of February 15, 2007, we had 1,835 employees and believe our relationship with our employees to be good. Our employees are not represented by a collective bargaining agreement.

Item 1A.                Risk Factors

An investment in our securities involves various risks. All investors should carefully consider the following risk factors in conjunction with the other information contained in this Annual Report before trading in our securities. If any of the events set forth in the following risks actually occur, our business, operating results, prospects and financial condition could be harmed.

Our performance is subject to risks associated with real estate investments. We are a real estate company that derives our income from operation of our properties. There are a number of factors that may adversely affect the income that our properties generate, including the following:

Risks Related to Our Properties and Operations

If we are unable to promptly re-let our units or if the rates upon such re-letting are significantly lower than expected, then our business and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Virtually all of our leases are on a month-to-month basis. Any delay in re-letting units as vacancies arise would reduce our revenues and harm our operating results. In addition, lower than expected rental rates upon re-letting could impede our growth.

We face increasing competition for the acquisition of self-storage properties and other assets, which may impede our ability to make future acquisitions or may increase the cost of these acquisitions.

We compete with many other entities engaged in real estate investment activities for acquisitions of self-storage properties and other assets, including national, regional and local operators and developers of self-storage properties. These competitors may drive up the price we must pay for self-storage properties or other assets we seek to acquire or may succeed in acquiring those properties or assets themselves. In addition, our potential acquisition targets may find our competitors to be more attractive suitors because they may have greater resources, may be willing to pay more or may have a more compatible operating philosophy. In addition, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable investment properties may increase. This competition will result in increased demand for these assets and therefore increased prices paid for them. Because of an increased interest in single-property acquisitions among tax-motivated individual purchasers, we may pay higher prices if we purchase single properties in

9




comparison with portfolio acquisitions. If we pay higher prices for self-storage properties or other assets, our profitability will be reduced.

Our investments in development and redevelopment projects may not yield anticipated returns, which would harm our operating results and reduce the amount of funds available for distributions.

A key component of our growth strategy is exploring new asset development and redevelopment opportunities through strategic joint ventures and on a wholly-owned basis. To the extent that we engage in these development and redevelopment activities, they will be subject to the following risks normally associated with these projects:

·       we may be unable to obtain financing for these projects on favorable terms or at all;

·       we may not complete development projects on schedule or within budgeted amounts;

·       we may encounter delays or refusals in obtaining all necessary zoning, land use, building, occupancy and other required governmental permits and authorizations; and

·       occupancy rates and rents at newly developed or redeveloped properties may fluctuate depending on a number of factors, including market and economic conditions, and may result in our investment not being profitable.

In deciding whether to develop or redevelop a particular property, we make certain assumptions regarding the expected future performance of that property. We may underestimate the costs necessary to bring the property up to the standards established for its intended market position or may be unable to increase occupancy at a newly acquired property as quickly as expected or at all. Any substantial unanticipated delays or expenses could adversely affect the investment returns from these development or redevelopment projects and harm our operating results, liquidity and financial condition, which could result in a decline in the value of our securities.

We may in the future develop self-storage properties in geographic regions where we do not currently have a significant presence and where we do not possess the same level of familiarity with development, which could adversely affect our ability to develop such properties successfully or at all or to achieve expected performance.

We rely on the investments of our joint venture partners for funding our development and redevelopment projects. If our reputation in the self-storage industry changes or the number of investors considering us an attractive strategic partner is otherwise reduced, our ability to develop or redevelop properties could be affected, which would limit our growth.

We may not be successful in identifying and consummating suitable acquisitions that meet our criteria, which may impede our growth and negatively affect our stock price.

Our ability to expand through acquisitions is integral to our business strategy and requires us to identify suitable acquisition candidates or investment opportunities that meet our criteria and are compatible with our growth strategy. We may not be successful in identifying suitable properties or other assets that meet our acquisition criteria or in consummating acquisitions or investments on satisfactory terms or at all. Failure to identify or consummate acquisitions will slow our growth, which could in turn adversely affect our stock price.

10




Our ability to acquire properties on favorable terms and successfully integrate and operate them may be constrained by the following significant risks:

·       competition from local investors and other real estate investors with significant capital, including other publicly-traded REITs and institutional investment funds;

·       competition from other potential acquirers may significantly increase the purchase price which could reduce our profitability;

·       satisfactory completion of due diligence investigations and other customary closing conditions;

·       failure to finance an acquisition on favorable terms or at all;

·       we may spend more than the time and amounts budgeted to make necessary improvements or renovations to acquired properties; and

·       we may acquire properties subject to liabilities without any recourse, or with only limited recourse, with respect to unknown liabilities such as liabilities for clean-up of undisclosed environmental contamination, claims by persons dealing with the former owners of the properties and claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the former owners of the properties.

In addition, strategic decisions by us, such as acquisitions, may adversely affect the price of our securities.

We may not be successful in integrating and operating acquired properties.

We expect to make future acquisitions of self-storage properties. If we acquire any self-storage properties, we will be required to integrate them into our existing portfolio. The acquired properties may turn out to be less compatible with our growth strategy than originally anticipated, may cause disruptions in our operations or may divert management’s attention away from day-to-day operations, which could impair our results of operations as a whole.

We depend upon our on-site personnel to maximize tenant satisfaction at each of our properties, and any difficulties we encounter in hiring, training and maintaining skilled field personnel may harm our operating performance.

We had 1,618 field personnel as of February 15, 2007 in the management and operation of our properties. The general professionalism of our site managers and staff are contributing factors to a site’s ability to successfully secure rentals and retain tenants. We also rely upon our field personnel to maintain clean and secure self-storage properties. If we are unable to successfully recruit, train and retain qualified field personnel, the quality of service we strive to provide at our properties could be adversely affected which could lead to decreased occupancy levels and reduced operating performance.

Other self-storage operators may employ STORE or a technology similar to STORE, which could enhance their ability to compete with us.

We rely on STORE to support all aspects of our business operations and to help us implement new development and acquisition opportunities and strategies. If other self-storage companies obtain a license to use STORE, or employ or develop a technology similar to STORE, their ability to compete with us could be enhanced.

11




Uninsured losses or losses in excess of our insurance coverage could adversely affect our financial condition and our cash flow.

We maintain comprehensive liability, fire, flood, earthquake, wind (as deemed necessary or as required by our lenders), extended coverage and rental loss insurance with respect to our properties with policy specifications, limits and deductibles customarily carried for similar properties. Certain types of losses, however, may be either uninsurable or not economically insurable, such as losses due to earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, riots, acts of war or terrorism. Should an uninsured loss occur, we could lose both our investment in and anticipated profits and cash flow from a property. In addition, if any such loss is insured, we may be required to pay a significant deductible on any claim for recovery of such a loss prior to our insurer being obligated to reimburse us for the loss, or the amount of the loss may exceed our coverage for the loss. As a result, our operating results may be adversely affected.

Increases in taxes and regulatory compliance costs may reduce our income.

Costs resulting from changes in real estate tax laws generally are not passed through to tenants directly and will affect us. Increases in income, property or other taxes generally are not passed through to tenants under leases and may reduce our net income, funds from operations (“FFO”), cash flow, financial condition, ability to pay or refinance our debt obligations, ability to make distributions to stockholders, and the trading price of our securities. Similarly, changes in laws increasing the potential liability for environmental conditions existing on properties or increasing the restrictions on discharges or other conditions may result in significant unanticipated expenditures, which could similarly adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We do not always obtain independent appraisals of our properties, and thus the consideration paid for these properties may exceed the value that may be indicated by third-party appraisals.

We do not always obtain third-party appraisals in connection with our acquisition of properties and the consideration being paid by us in exchange for those properties may exceed the value as determined by third-party appraisals. In such cases, the terms of any agreements and the valuation methods used to determine the value of the properties were determined by our senior management team.

Environmental compliance costs and liabilities associated with operating our properties may affect our results of operations.

Under various U.S. federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, owners and operators of real estate may be liable for the costs of investigating and remediating certain hazardous substances or other regulated materials on or in such property. Such laws often impose such liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such substances or materials. The presence of such substances or materials, or the failure to properly remediate such substances, may adversely affect the owner’s or operator’s ability to lease, sell or rent such property or to borrow using such property as collateral. Persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances or other regulated materials may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of such substances at a disposal or treatment facility, whether or not such facility is owned or operated by such person. Certain environmental laws impose liability for release of asbestos-containing materials into the air and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real properties for personal injury associated with asbestos-containing materials.

Certain environmental laws also impose liability, without regard to knowledge or fault, for removal or remediation of hazardous substances or other regulated materials upon owners and operators of contaminated property even after they no longer own or operate the property. Moreover, the past or present owner or operator from which a release emanates could be liable for any personal injuries or

12




property damages that may result from such releases, as well as any damages to natural resources that may arise from such releases.

Certain environmental laws impose compliance obligations on owners and operators of real property with respect to the management of hazardous materials and other regulated substances. For example, environmental laws govern the management of asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paint. Failure to comply with these laws can result in penalties or other sanctions.

No assurances can be given that existing environmental studies with respect to any of our properties reveal all environmental liabilities, that any prior owner or operator of our 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 one or more of our properties. There also exists the risk that material environmental conditions, liabilities or compliance concerns may have arisen after the review was completed or may arise in the future. Finally, future laws, ordinances or regulations and future interpretations of existing laws, ordinances or regulations may impose additional material environmental liability.

Adverse economic or other conditions in the markets in which we do business could negatively affect our occupancy levels and rental rates and therefore our operating results.

Our operating results are dependent upon our ability to maximize occupancy levels and rental rates in our self-storage properties. Adverse economic or other conditions in the markets in which we operate may lower our occupancy levels and limit our ability to increase rents or require us to offer rental discounts. If our properties fail to generate revenues sufficient to meet our cash requirements, including operating and other expenses, debt service and capital expenditures, our net income, FFO, cash flow, financial condition, ability to make distributions to stockholders and trading price of our securities could be adversely affected. The following factors, among others, may adversely affect the operating performance of our properties:

·       the national economic climate and the local or regional economic climate in the markets in which we operate, which may be adversely impacted by, among other factors, industry slowdowns, relocation of businesses and changing demographics;

·       periods of economic slowdown or recession, rising interest rates or declining demand for self-storage or the public perception that any of these events may occur could result in a general decline in rental rates or an increase in tenant defaults;

·       local or regional real estate market conditions such as the oversupply of self-storage or a reduction in demand for self-storage in a particular area;

·       perceptions by prospective users of our self-storage properties of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of our properties and the neighborhoods in which they are located;

·       increased operating costs, including need for capital improvements, insurance premiums, real estate taxes and utilities;

·       changes in supply of or demand for similar or competing properties in an area;

·       the impact of environmental protection laws;

·       earthquakes, hurricanes and other natural disasters, terrorist acts, civil disturbances or acts of war which may result in uninsured or underinsured losses; and

·       changes in tax, real estate and zoning laws.

13




Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure

Our business could be harmed if key personnel with long-standing business relationships in the self-storage industry terminate their employment with us.

Our success depends, to a significant extent, on the continued services of our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and the other members of our executive management team. Our executive management team has substantial experience in the self-storage industry. In addition, our ability to continue to develop properties depends on the significant relationships our executive management team has developed with our institutional joint venture partners such as affiliates of Prudential Financial, Inc. There is no guarantee that any of them will remain employed by us. We do not maintain key person life insurance on any of our officers. The loss of services of one or more members of our executive management team, particularly our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, could harm our business and our prospects.

We may change our investment and financing strategies and enter into new lines of business without stockholder consent, which may subject us to different risks.

We may change our investment and financing strategies and enter into new lines of business without stockholder consent, which may subject us to different risks. We may change our investment and financing strategies and enter into new lines of business at any time without the consent of our stockholders, which could result in our making investments and engaging in business activities that are different from, and possibly riskier than, the investments and businesses described in this document. A change in our investment strategy or our entry into new lines of business may increase our exposure to other risks or real estate market fluctuations.

If other self-storage companies convert to an UPREIT structure or if tax laws change, we may no longer have an advantage in competing for potential acquisitions.

Because we are structured as an UPREIT, we are a more attractive acquirer of properties to tax-motivated sellers than our competitors that are not structured as UPREITs. However, if other self-storage companies restructure their holdings to become UPREITs, this competitive advantage will disappear. In addition, new legislation may be enacted or new interpretations of existing legislation may be issued by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), or the U.S. Treasury Department that could affect the attractiveness of our UPREIT structure so that it may no longer assist us in competing for acquisitions.

Tax indemnification obligations may require the Operating Partnership to maintain certain debt levels.

In connection with the formation transactions entered into prior to our IPO in 2004, we agreed to make available to each of Kenneth M. Woolley, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Richard S. Tanner, our Senior Vice President, Development, and other third parties, the following tax protections: for nine years, with a three-year extension if the applicable party continues to own at least 50% of the OP units received by it in the formation transactions at the expiration of the initial nine-year period, the opportunity to (1) guarantee debt or (2) enter into a special loss allocation and deficit restoration obligation, in an aggregate amount, with respect to the foregoing contributors, of at least $60.0 million. We agreed to these provisions in order to assist these contributors in preserving their tax position after their contributions. These obligations may require us to maintain certain indebtedness that we would not otherwise require for our business.

Our joint venture investments could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority.

As of December 31, 2006, we held interests in 348 properties through joint ventures. All of these arrangements could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on co-venturers’ financial conditions and disputes between us and our co-venturers. We expect to continue our

14




joint venture strategy by entering into more joint ventures for the purpose of developing new self-storage properties and acquiring existing properties. In such event, we would not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding the property, partnership, joint venture or other entity. The decision-making authority regarding the properties we currently hold through joint ventures is either vested exclusively with our joint venture partners, is subject to a majority vote of the joint venture partners or equally shared by us and the joint venture partners. In addition, investments in partnerships, joint ventures or other entities may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present were a third party not involved, including the possibility that partners or co-venturers might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions. Partners or co-venturers may have economic or other business interests or goals which are inconsistent with our business interests or goals, and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or objectives. Such investments may also have the potential risk of impasses on decisions, such as a sale, because neither we nor the partner or co-venturer would have full control over the partnership or joint venture. Disputes between us and partners or co-venturers may result in litigation or arbitration that would increase our expenses and prevent our officers and/or directors from focusing their time and efforts on our business. Consequently, actions by or disputes with partners or co-venturers might result in subjecting properties owned by the partnership or joint venture to additional risk. In addition, we may in certain circumstances be liable for the actions of our third-party partners or co-venturers, which could harm our financial condition.

Kenneth M. Woolley, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Spencer F. Kirk, one of our directors, Richard S. Tanner, Senior Vice President, Development, Kent W. Christensen, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, and Charles L. Allen, Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer, members of our senior management team, have outside business interests which could divert their time and attention away from us, which could harm our business.

Kenneth M. Woolley, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, as well as one of our directors and certain other members of our senior management team, have outside business interests. These business interests include the ownership of a self-storage property located in Pico Rivera, California, which as of December 31, 2006 was in lease-up, and the ownership of Extra Space Development LLC. Other than this property and Extra Space Development, LLC, the members of our senior management are not currently engaged in any other self-storage activities outside the Company. In addition, Mr. Woolley’s employment agreement includes an exception to his non-competition covenant pursuant to which he is permitted to devote a portion of his time to the management and operations of Nevada West Development, LLC (formerly known as RMI Development, LLC), a multi-family business in which he has a majority ownership. Although Mr. Woolley’s employment agreement requires that he devote substantially his full business time and attention to us, this agreement also permits him to devote time to his outside business interests. These outside business interests could interfere with his ability to devote time to our business and affairs and as a result, our business could be harmed.

Conflicts of interest could arise as a result of our relationship with our Operating Partnership.

Conflicts of interest could arise in the future as a result of the relationships between us and our affiliates, and our Operating Partnership or any partner thereof. Our directors and officers have duties to our Company under applicable Maryland law in connection with their management of our Company. At the same time, we, through our wholly-owned subsidiary, have fiduciary duties, as a general partner, to our Operating Partnership and to the limited partners under Delaware law in connection with the management of our Operating Partnership. Our duties, through our wholly-owned subsidiary, as a general partner to our Operating Partnership and its partners may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers to our Company. The partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership does not require us to resolve such conflicts in favor of either our Company or the limited partners in our Operating Partnership.

15




Unless otherwise provided for in the relevant partnership agreement, Delaware law generally requires a general partner of a Delaware limited partnership to adhere to fiduciary duty standards under which it owes its limited partners the highest duties of good faith, fairness, and loyalty and which generally prohibit such general partner from taking any action or engaging in any transaction as to which it has a conflict of interest.

Additionally, the partnership agreement expressly limits our liability by providing that neither we, our direct wholly-owned Massachusetts business trust subsidiary, as the general partner of the Operating Partnership, nor any of our or their trustees, directors or officers, will be liable or accountable in damages to our Operating Partnership, the limited partners or assignees for errors in judgment, mistakes of fact or law or for any act or omission if we, or such trustee, director or officer, acted in good faith. In addition, our Operating Partnership is required to indemnify us, our affiliates and each of our respective trustees, officers, directors, employees and agents to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law against any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities (whether joint or several), expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and other legal fees and expenses), judgments, fines, settlements and other amounts arising from any and all claims, demands, actions, suits or proceedings, civil, criminal, administrative or investigative, that relate to the operations of the Operating Partnership, provided that our Operating Partnership will not indemnify for (1) willful misconduct or a knowing violation of the law, (2) any transaction for which such person received an improper personal benefit in violation or breach of any provision of the partnership agreement, or (3) in the case of a criminal proceeding, the person had reasonable cause to believe the act or omission was unlawful.

The provisions of Delaware law that allow the common law fiduciary duties of a general partner to be modified by a partnership agreement have not been resolved in a court of law, and we have not obtained an opinion of counsel covering the provisions set forth in the partnership agreement that purport to waive or restrict our fiduciary duties that would be in effect under common law were it not for the partnership agreement.

Our management’s ownership of contingent conversion shares, or CCSs, and contingent conversion units, or CCUs, may cause them to devote a disproportionate amount of time to the performance of the related 14 wholly-owned early-stage lease-up properties, which could cause our overall operating performance to suffer.

In connection with our IPO, we issued to certain contributors, which included certain members of our senior management, CCSs and/or a combination of OP units and CCUs. The terms of the CCSs and CCUs provide that they will convert into our common stock and OP units, respectively, only if the relevant 14 lease-up properties identified at the time of the IPO achieve specified performance thresholds prior to December 31, 2008. As a result, our directors and officers who own CCSs and CCUs may have an incentive to devote a disproportionately large amount of their time and attention to these properties in comparison with our remaining properties, which could harm our operating results.

We may pursue less vigorous enforcement of terms of contribution and other agreements because of conflicts of interest with certain of our officers.

Kenneth M. Woolley, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Spencer F. Kirk, who serves as director, Kent W. Christensen, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Charles L. Allen, Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer, and Richard S. Tanner, Senior Vice President, Development had direct or indirect ownership interests in certain properties that were contributed to our Operating Partnership in the formation transactions. Following the completion of the formation transactions, we, under the agreements relating to the contribution of such interests, became entitled to indemnification and damages in the event of breaches of representations or warranties made by the contributors. In addition, Kenneth M. Woolley’s employment agreement includes an exception to his non-

16




competition covenant pursuant to which he is permitted to devote time to the management and operations of Nevada West Development, LLC (formerly known as RMI Development, LLC), a multi-family business. None of these contribution and non-competition agreements was negotiated at an arm’s-length basis. We may choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, our rights under these contribution and non-competition agreements because of our desire to maintain our ongoing relationships with the individuals party to these agreements.

Certain provisions of Maryland law and our organizational documents, including the stock ownership limit imposed by our charter, may inhibit market activity in our stock and could prevent or delay a change in control transaction.

Our charter, subject to certain exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT and to limit any person to actual or constructive ownership of no more than 7.0% (by value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of our outstanding common stock or 7.0% (by value or by number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of our outstanding capital stock. Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, may exempt a proposed transferee from the ownership limit. However, our board of directors may not grant an exemption from the ownership limit to any proposed transferee whose ownership could jeopardize our qualification as a REIT. These restrictions on ownership will not apply if our board of directors determines that it is no longer in our best interests to attempt to qualify, or to continue to qualify, as a REIT. The ownership limit may delay or impede a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our securities or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders. Different ownership limits apply to the family of Kenneth M. Woolley, certain of his affiliates, family members and estates and trusts formed for the benefit of the foregoing and Spencer F. Kirk, certain of his affiliates, family members and estates and trusts formed for the benefit of the foregoing and certain designated investment entities (as defined in our charter).

Our board of directors has the power to issue additional shares of our stock in a manner that may not be in the best interest of our stockholders.

Our charter authorizes our board of directors to issue additional authorized but unissued shares of common stock or preferred stock and to increase the aggregate number of authorized shares or the number of shares of any class or series without stockholder approval. In addition, our board of directors may classify or reclassify any unissued shares of common stock or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. Our board of directors could issue additional shares of our common stock or establish a series of preferred stock that could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control or other transaction that might involve a premium price for our securities or otherwise not be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.

Maryland law provides that a director or officer has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in our best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances. In addition, our charter eliminates our directors’ and officers’ liability to us and our stockholders for money damages except for liability resulting from actual receipt of an improper benefit in money, property or services or active and deliberate dishonesty established by a final judgment and which is material to the cause of action. Our bylaws require us to indemnify our directors and officers for liability resulting from actions taken by them in those capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might

17




otherwise exist under common law. In addition, we may be obligated to fund the defense costs incurred by our directors and officers.

To the extent our distributions represent a return of capital for U.S. federal income tax purposes, our stockholders could recognize an increased capital gain upon a subsequent sale of common stock.

Distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits and not treated by us as a dividend will not be taxable to a U.S. stockholder under current U.S. federal income tax law to the extent those distributions do not exceed the stockholder’s adjusted tax basis in his, her, or its common stock, but instead will constitute a return of capital and will reduce such adjusted basis. If distributions result in a reduction of a stockholder’s adjusted basis in such holder’s common stock, subsequent sales of such holder’s common stock will result in recognition of an increased capital gain or realized capital loss due to the reduction in such adjusted basis.

Risks Related to the Real Estate Industry

Our primary business involves the ownership, operation and development of self-storage properties.

Our current strategy is to own, operate and develop only self-storage properties. Consequently, we are subject to risks inherent in investments in a single industry. Because investments in real estate are inherently illiquid, this strategy makes it difficult for us to diversify our investment portfolio and to limit our risk when economic conditions change. Decreases in market rents, negative tax, real estate and zoning law changes and changes in environmental protection laws may also increase our costs, lower the value of our investments and decrease our income, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

Any negative perceptions of the self-storage industry generally may result in a decline in our stock price.

To the extent that the investing public has a negative perception of the self-storage industry, the value of our securities may be negatively impacted, which could result in our securities trading below the inherent value of our assets.

Costs associated with complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 may result in unanticipated expenses.

Under the ADA, all places of public accommodation are required to meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. These requirements became effective in 1992. A number of additional U.S. federal, state and local laws may also require modifications to our properties, or restrict certain further renovations of the properties, with respect to access thereto by disabled persons. Noncompliance with the ADA could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants and also could result in an order to correct any non-complying feature, which could result in substantial capital expenditures. We have not conducted an audit or investigation of all of our properties to determine our compliance and we cannot predict the ultimate cost of compliance with the ADA or other legislation. If one or more of our properties is not in compliance with the ADA or other legislation, then we would be required to incur additional costs to bring the facility into compliance. If we incur substantial costs to comply with the ADA or other legislation, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading price of our securities and our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and to make distributions to our stockholders could be adversely affected.

18




Illiquidity of real estate investments could significantly impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our properties.

Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, our ability to promptly sell one or more properties in our portfolio in response to changing economic, financial and investment conditions is limited. The real estate market is affected by many factors, such as general economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and other factors, including supply and demand, that are beyond our control. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any property for the price or on the terms set by us or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We also cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of a property.

We may be required to expend funds to correct defects or to make improvements before a property can be sold. We cannot assure you that we will have funds available to correct those defects or to make those improvements. In acquiring a property, we may agree to transfer restrictions that materially restrict us from selling that property for a period of time or impose other restrictions, such as a limitation on the amount of debt that can be placed or repaid on that property. These transfer restrictions would impede our ability to sell a property even if we deem it necessary or appropriate.

Any investments in unimproved real property may take significantly longer to yield income-producing returns, if at all, and may result in additional costs to us to comply with re-zoning restrictions or environmental regulations.

We have invested in the past, and may invest in the future, in unimproved real property. Unimproved properties generally take longer to yield income-producing returns based on the typical time required for development. Any development of unimproved property may also expose us to the risks and uncertainties associated with re-zoning the land for a higher use or development and environmental concerns of governmental entities and/or community groups. Any unsuccessful investments or delays in realizing an income-producing return or increased costs to develop unimproved real estate could restrict our ability to earn our targeted rate of return on an investment or adversely affect our ability to pay operating expenses which would harm our financial condition and operating results.

Risks Related to Our Debt Financings

Required payments of principal and interest on borrowings may leave us with insufficient cash to operate our properties or to pay the distributions currently contemplated or necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT and may expose us to the risk of default under our debt obligations.

As of December 31, 2006, we had approximately $948.2 million of outstanding indebtedness. We expect to incur additional debt in connection with future acquisitions. We may borrow under our line of credit or borrow new funds to acquire these future properties. Additionally, we do not anticipate that our internally generated cash flow will be adequate to repay our existing indebtedness upon maturity and, therefore, we expect to repay our indebtedness through refinancings and equity and/or debt offerings. Further, we may need to borrow funds to make distributions required to maintain our qualification as a REIT or to meet our expected distributions.

If we are required to utilize our line of credit for purposes other than acquisition activity, this will reduce the amount available for acquisitions and could slow our growth. Therefore, our level of debt and the limitations imposed on us by our debt agreements could have significant adverse consequences, including the following:

·       our cash flow may be insufficient to meet our required principal and interest payments;

·       we may be unable to borrow additional funds as needed or on favorable terms, including to make acquisitions or distributions required to maintain our qualification as a REIT;

19




·       we may be unable to refinance our indebtedness at maturity or the refinancing terms may be less favorable than the terms of our original indebtedness;

·       because a portion of our debt bears interest at variable rates, an increase in interest rates could materially increase our interest expense;

·       we may be forced to dispose of one or more of our properties, possibly on disadvantageous terms;

·       after debt service, the amount available for distributions to our stockholders is reduced;

·       our debt level could place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors with less debt;

·       we may experience increased vulnerability to economic and industry downturns, reducing our ability to respond to changing business and economic conditions;

·       we may default on our obligations and the lenders or mortgagees may foreclose on our properties that secure their loans and receive an assignment of rents and leases;

·       we may violate restrictive covenants in our loan documents, which would entitle the lenders to accelerate our debt obligations; and

·       our default under any one of our mortgage loans with cross-default or cross-collateralization provisions could result in a default on other indebtedness or result in the foreclosures of other properties.

We could become highly leveraged in the future because our organizational documents contain no limitation on the amount of debt we may incur.

Our organizational documents contain no limitations on the amount of indebtedness that we or our Operating Partnership may incur. We could alter the balance between our total outstanding indebtedness and the value of our portfolio at any time. If we become more highly leveraged, then the resulting increase in debt service could adversely affect our ability to make payments on our outstanding indebtedness and to pay our anticipated distributions and/or the distributions required to maintain our REIT qualification, and could harm our financial condition.

Increases in interest rates may increase our interest expense and adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to service our indebtedness and make distributions to our stockholders.

As of December 31, 2006 we had approximately $948.2 million of debt outstanding, of which approximately $85.1 million, or 9.0% was subject to variable interest rates (including $61.8 million on which we had a reverse interest rate swap). This variable rate debt had a weighted average interest rate of approximately 6.6% per annum. Increases in interest rates on this variable rate debt would increase our interest expense, which could harm our cash flow and our ability to pay distributions. For example, if market rates of interest on this variable rate debt increased by 100 basis points, the increase in interest expense would decrease future earnings and cash flows by approximately $0.9 million annually.

Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may adversely affect our results of operations.

In certain cases we may seek to manage our exposure to interest rate volatility by using interest rate hedging arrangements. Hedging involves risks, such as the risk that the counterparty may fail to honor its obligations under an arrangement. Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

20




Risks Related to Qualification and Operation as a REIT

To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we may be forced to borrow funds on a short-term basis during unfavorable market conditions.

To qualify as a REIT, we generally must distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our net taxable income each year, excluding net capital gains, and we are subject to regular corporate income taxes to the extent that we distribute less than 100% of our net taxable income each year. In addition, we are subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which distributions made by us in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior years. In order to maintain our REIT qualification and avoid the payment of income and excise taxes, we may need to borrow funds on a short-term basis, or possibly long-term, to meet the REIT distribution requirements even if the then prevailing market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings. These borrowing needs could result from a difference in timing between the actual receipt of cash and inclusion of income for U.S. federal income tax purposes, or the effect of non-deductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt amortization payments.

Dividends payable by REITs generally do not qualify for reduced tax rates.

The maximum U.S. federal income tax rate for dividends paid by domestic corporations to individual U.S. stockholders is 15% (through 2008). Dividends paid by REITs, however, are generally not eligible for the reduced rates. The more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate dividends could cause stockholders who are individuals to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the stock of REITs, including our securities.

In addition, the relative attractiveness of real estate in general may be adversely affected by the favorable tax treatment given to corporate dividends, which could negatively affect the value of our properties.

Possible legislative or other actions affecting REITs could adversely affect our stockholders.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect our stockholders. It cannot be predicted whether, when, in what forms, or with what effective dates, the tax laws applicable to us or our stockholders will be changed.

The power of our board of directors to revoke our REIT election without stockholder approval may cause adverse consequences to our stockholders.

Our charter provides that our board of directors may revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if it determines that it is no longer in our best interests to continue to qualify as a REIT. If we cease to qualify as a REIT, we would become subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income and would no longer be required to distribute most of our net taxable income to our stockholders, which may have adverse consequences on the total return to our stockholders.

Our failure to qualify as a REIT would have significant adverse consequences to us and the value of our stock.

We operate in a manner that allows us to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes under the Internal Revenue Code. If we fail to qualify as a REIT or lose our qualification as a REIT at any

21




time, we will face serious tax consequences that would substantially reduce the funds available for distribution for each of the years involved because:

·       we would not be allowed a deduction for distributions to stockholders in computing our taxable income and would be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates;

·       we also could be subject to the U.S. federal alternative minimum tax and possibly increased state and local taxes; and

·       unless we are entitled to relief under applicable statutory provisions, we could not elect to be taxed as a REIT for four taxable years following a year during which we were disqualified.

In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we will not be required to make distributions to stockholders, and all distributions to stockholders will be subject to tax as regular corporate dividends to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits. This means that our U.S. individual stockholders would be taxed on our dividends at capital gains rates, and our U.S. corporate stockholders would be entitled to the dividends received deduction with respect to such dividends, subject, in each case, to applicable limitations under the Internal Revenue Code. As a result of all these factors, our failure to qualify as a REIT also could impair our ability to expand our business and raise capital, and could adversely affect the value of our securities.

Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. The complexity of these provisions and of the applicable Treasury regulations that have been promulgated under the Internal Revenue Code is greater in the case of a REIT that, like us, holds its assets through a partnership. The determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control may affect our ability to qualify as a REIT. In order to qualify as a REIT, we must satisfy a number of requirements, including requirements regarding the composition of our assets and sources of our gross income. Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon our analysis of the fair market value of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals. Also, we must make distributions to stockholders aggregating annually at least 90% of our net taxable income, excluding capital gains. In addition, legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions may adversely affect our investors, our ability to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes or the desirability of an investment in a REIT relative to other investments.

We will pay some taxes.

Even though we qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we will be required to pay some U.S. federal, state and local taxes on our income and property. Extra Space Management, Inc. manages self-storage properties for our joint venture properties and properties owned by third parties. We, jointly with Extra Space Management, Inc., elected to treat Extra Space Management, Inc. as a “taxable REIT subsidiary” of our Company for U.S. federal income tax purposes. A taxable REIT subsidiary is a fully taxable corporation, and may be limited in its ability to deduct interest payments made to us. In addition, we will be subject to a 100% penalty tax on certain amounts if the economic arrangements among our tenants, our taxable REIT subsidiary and us are not comparable to similar arrangements among unrelated parties or if we receive payments for inventory or property held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. To the extent that we are or our taxable REIT subsidiary is required to pay U.S. federal, state or local taxes, we will have less cash available for distribution to stockholders.

22




Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. In order to meet these tests, we may be required to forego attractive business or investment opportunities. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may adversely affect our ability to operate solely to maximize profits.

Item 1B.               Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2.                        Properties

As of December 31, 2006, we owned or had ownership interests in 567 self-storage properties located in 32 states and Washington, D.C. Of these properties, 219 are wholly-owned and 348 are held in joint ventures. In addition, we managed an additional 74 properties for franchisees or third parties bringing the total numbers of properties which we own and/or manage to 641. We receive a management fee equal to approximately 6% of gross revenues to manage the joint venture, third party and franchise sites. As of December 31, 2006, we owned or had ownership interest in approximately 41 million square feet of space configured in approximately 380,000 separate storage units. Approximately 70% of our properties are clustered around the larger population centers, such as Atlanta, Baltimore/Washington, D.C., Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, St. Petersburg/Tampa and San Francisco. These markets contain above-average population and income demographics for new self-storage properties. The clustering of assets around these population centers enables us to reduce our operating costs through economies of scale. The Storage USA acquisition has given us an increased scale in many core markets as well as a foothold in many markets where we had no previous presence.

We consider a property to be in the lease-up stage after it has been issued a certificate of occupancy, but before it has achieved stabilization. We consider a property to be stabilized once it has achieved either an 80% occupancy rate or has been open for three years.

As of December 31, 2006, greater than 100,000 tenants were leasing storage units at our 219 wholly-owned properties, primarily on a month-to-month basis, providing the flexibility to increase rental rates over time as market conditions permit. Although leases are short-term in duration, the typical tenant tends to remain at our properties for an extended period of time. For properties that were stabilized as of December 31, 2006, the median length of stay was approximately eleven months.

Our property portfolio is a made up of different types of construction and building configurations depending on the site and the municipality where it is located. Most often sites are what we consider “hybrid” facilities, a mix of both drive-up buildings and multi-floor buildings. We have a number of multi-floor buildings with elevator access only, and a number of facilities featuring ground-floor access only.

The following table sets forth additional information regarding the occupancy of our stabilized properties on a state-by-state basis as of December 31, 2006 and 2005. The information as of December 31, 2005 is on a pro forma basis as though all the properties owned at December 31, 2006 were under our control as of December 31, 2005.

23




Stabilized Property Data Based on Location

 

 

 

 

Company

 

Pro forma

 

Company

 

Pro forma

 

Company

 

Pro forma

 

Location

 

 

 

Number of
Properties

 

Number of
Units as of
December 31,
2006(1)

 

Number of
Units as of
December 31,
2005

 

Net Rentable
Square Feet as
of December 31,
2006(2)

 

Net Rentable
Square Feet as
of December 31,
2005

 

Square Foot
Occupancy %
December 31,
2006

 

Square Foot
Occupancy %
December 31,
2005

 

Wholly-Owned Properties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arizona

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,691

 

 

 

1,674

 

 

 

224,435

 

 

 

218,105

 

 

 

91.9

%

 

 

97.2

%

 

California

 

 

30

 

 

 

19,659

 

 

 

19,708

 

 

 

2,136,868

 

 

 

2,134,583

 

 

 

86.9

%

 

 

86.2

%

 

Colorado

 

 

5

 

 

 

2,393

 

 

 

2,408

 

 

 

301,591

 

 

 

301,581

 

 

 

85.9

%

 

 

82.1

%

 

Florida

 

 

25

 

 

 

16,840

 

 

 

16,644

 

 

 

1,789,677

 

 

 

1,776,185

 

 

 

84.9

%

 

 

92.7

%

 

Georgia

 

 

9

 

 

 

5,004

 

 

 

5,012

 

 

 

649,758

 

 

 

645,864

 

 

 

87.4

%

 

 

85.7

%

 

Illinois

 

 

3

 

 

 

2,123

 

 

 

2,144

 

 

 

195,324

 

 

 

197,197

 

 

 

84.3

%

 

 

77.2

%

 

Kansas

 

 

1

 

 

 

502

 

 

 

504

 

 

 

49,940

 

 

 

50,225

 

 

 

89.4

%

 

 

79.4

%

 

Kentucky

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,578

 

 

 

1,567

 

 

 

194,351

 

 

 

194,340

 

 

 

83.1

%

 

 

88.0

%

 

Louisiana

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,413

 

 

 

1,411

 

 

 

147,990

 

 

 

147,900

 

 

 

92.6

%

 

 

97.4

%

 

Maryland

 

 

6

 

 

 

5,430

 

 

 

5,475

 

 

 

573,157

 

 

 

583,504

 

 

 

83.5

%

 

 

81.6

%

 

Massachusetts

 

 

22

 

 

 

12,091

 

 

 

12,014

 

 

 

1,316,372

 

 

 

1,271,915

 

 

 

82.6

%

 

 

83.6

%

 

Michigan

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,046

 

 

 

1,042

 

 

 

134,722

 

 

 

134,912

 

 

 

80.5

%

 

 

74.2

%

 

Missouri

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,349

 

 

 

1,340

 

 

 

169,067

 

 

 

167,487

 

 

 

83.2

%

 

 

75.9

%

 

Nevada

 

 

1

 

 

 

464

 

 

 

462

 

 

 

56,800

 

 

 

56,500

 

 

 

72.4

%

 

 

95.2

%

 

New Hampshire

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,006

 

 

 

1,015

 

 

 

125,609

 

 

 

117,268

 

 

 

81.6

%

 

 

78.8

%

 

New Jersey

 

 

20

 

 

 

16,366

 

 

 

16,369

 

 

 

1,596,993

 

 

 

1,592,351

 

 

 

85.2

%

 

 

83.9

%

 

New York

 

 

6

 

 

 

6,053

 

 

 

6,054

 

 

 

388,074

 

 

 

391,067

 

 

 

79.7

%

 

 

80.9

%

 

Ohio

 

 

4

 

 

 

2,042

 

 

 

2,070

 

 

 

275,291

 

 

 

276,670

 

 

 

83.2

%

 

 

79.3

%

 

Oregon

 

 

1

 

 

 

767

 

 

 

764

 

 

 

103,610

 

 

 

103,690

 

 

 

86.6

%

 

 

84.4

%

 

Pennsylvania

 

 

8

 

 

 

6,134

 

 

 

6,053

 

 

 

641,922

 

 

 

627,975

 

 

 

82.9

%

 

 

77.3

%

 

Rhode Island

 

 

1

 

 

 

730

 

 

 

726

 

 

 

75,241

 

 

 

75,836

 

 

 

85.5

%

 

 

89.2

%

 

South Carolina

 

 

4

 

 

 

2,068

 

 

 

2,082

 

 

 

245,734

 

 

 

246,819

 

 

 

89.0

%

 

 

89.5

%

 

Tennessee

 

 

5

 

 

 

3,146

 

 

 

3,129

 

 

 

409,567

 

 

 

407,942

 

 

 

87.6

%

 

 

87.7

%

 

Texas

 

 

19

 

 

 

11,963

 

 

 

11,956

 

 

 

1,343,041

 

 

 

1,326,637

 

 

 

84.3

%

 

 

83.6

%

 

Utah

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,531

 

 

 

1,523

 

 

 

210,350

 

 

 

210,000

 

 

 

91.3

%

 

 

88.5

%

 

Virginia

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,219

 

 

 

1,220

 

 

 

125,458

 

 

 

126,094

 

 

 

84.1

%

 

 

84.9

%

 

Washington

 

 

3

 

 

 

2,030

 

 

 

2,020

 

 

 

244,595

 

 

 

242,525

 

 

 

93.9

%

 

 

83.2

%

 

Total Wholly-Owned Stabilized

 

 

193

 

 

 

126,638

 

 

 

126,386

 

 

 

13,725,537

 

 

 

13,625,172

 

 

 

85.2

%

 

 

85.2

%

 

Properties Held in Joint-Ventures

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alabama

 

 

4

 

 

 

2,329

 

 

 

2,317

 

 

 

281,788

 

 

 

282,330

 

 

 

83.6

%

 

 

82.4

%

 

Arizona

 

 

12

 

 

 

7,465

 

 

 

7,426

 

 

 

805,981

 

 

 

806,392

 

 

 

92.0

%

 

 

91.9

%

 

California

 

 

72

 

 

 

51,864

 

 

 

52,118

 

 

 

5,315,479

 

 

 

5,332,177

 

 

 

86.6

%

 

 

87.1

%

 

Colorado

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,908

 

 

 

1,906

 

 

 

215,913

 

 

 

216,057

 

 

 

81.3

%

 

 

79.1

%

 

Connecticut

 

 

9

 

 

 

6,509

 

 

 

6,530

 

 

 

750,984

 

 

 

755,159

 

 

 

78.0

%

 

 

74.3

%

 

Delaware

 

 

1

 

 

 

589

 

 

 

589

 

 

 

71,655

 

 

 

71,655

 

 

 

87.5

%

 

 

85.6

%

 

Florida

 

 

24

 

 

 

20,347

 

 

 

20,399

 

 

 

2,081,555

 

 

 

2,059,561

 

 

 

85.0

%

 

 

88.9

%

 

Georgia

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,918

 

 

 

1,918

 

 

 

251,510

 

 

 

251,772

 

 

 

78.5

%

 

 

77.5

%

 

Illinois

 

 

5

 

 

 

3,356

 

 

 

3,329

 

 

 

360,937

 

 

 

363,437

 

 

 

75.6

%

 

 

70.8

%

 

Indiana

 

 

9

 

 

 

3,733

 

 

 

3,739

 

 

 

498,278

 

 

 

470,291

 

 

 

80.6

%

 

 

81.0

%

 

Kansas

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,214

 

 

 

1,208

 

 

 

164,200

 

 

 

164,350

 

 

 

85.0

%

 

 

78.9

%

 

Kentucky

 

 

4

 

 

 

2,276

 

 

 

2,254

 

 

 

268,339

 

 

 

266,377

 

 

 

82.6

%

 

 

78.3

%

 

Maryland

 

 

14

 

 

 

10,923

 

 

 

10,931

 

 

 

1,076,932

 

 

 

1,077,181

 

 

 

82.8

%

 

 

81.3

%

 

Massachusetts

 

 

17

 

 

 

9,238

 

 

 

9,281

 

 

 

1,050,215

 

 

 

1,053,174

 

 

 

81.1

%

 

 

78.5

%

 

Michigan

 

 

10

 

 

 

5,957

 

 

 

5,957

 

 

 

783,032

 

 

 

786,087

 

 

 

78.0

%

 

 

73.9

%

 

Missouri

 

 

5

 

 

 

2,763

 

 

 

2,755

 

 

 

324,130

 

 

 

323,765

 

 

 

81.2

%

 

 

79.7

%

 

Nevada

 

 

7

 

 

 

4,642

 

 

 

4,627

 

 

 

620,698

 

 

 

622,937

 

 

 

88.4

%

 

 

88.5

%

 

New Hampshire

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,323

 

 

 

1,330

 

 

 

137,754

 

 

 

138,779

 

 

 

83.6

%

 

 

86.0

%

 

New Jersey

 

 

18

 

 

 

13,154

 

 

 

13,127

 

 

 

1,387,611

 

 

 

1,307,315

 

 

 

85.8

%

 

 

85.3

%

 

New Mexico

 

 

9

 

 

 

4,728

 

 

 

4,473

 

 

 

529,414

 

 

 

517,481

 

 

 

83.9

%

 

 

86.2

%

 

New York

 

 

21

 

 

 

23,523

 

 

 

23,594

 

 

 

1,741,150

 

 

 

1,737,879

 

 

 

83.6

%

 

 

80.8

%

 

Ohio

 

 

12

 

 

 

5,570

 

 

 

5,588

 

 

 

825,812

 

 

 

829,479

 

 

 

85.1

%

 

 

76.4

%

 

Oregon

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,289

 

 

 

1,279

 

 

 

137,140

 

 

 

136,400

 

 

 

92.5

%

 

 

87.0

%

 

Pennsylvania

 

 

10

 

 

 

6,823

 

 

 

6,814

 

 

 

732,970

 

 

 

728,830

 

 

 

83.3

%

 

 

78.7

%

 

24




 

Rhode Island

 

 

1

 

 

 

611

 

 

 

611

 

 

 

73,905

 

 

 

74,005

 

 

 

69.2

%

 

 

58.4

%

 

Tennessee

 

 

23

 

 

 

12,194

 

 

 

12,180

 

 

 

1,585,453

 

 

 

1,588,078

 

 

 

85.2

%

 

 

82.2

%

 

Texas

 

 

19

 

 

 

12,670

 

 

 

12,649

 

 

 

1,603,935

 

 

 

1,600,432

 

 

 

76.9

%

 

 

76.2

%

 

Utah

 

 

1

 

 

 

520

 

 

 

519

 

 

 

59,400

 

 

 

59,400

 

 

 

89.4

%

 

 

78.8

%

 

Virginia

 

 

15

 

 

 

10,387

 

 

 

10,359

 

 

 

1,106,646

 

 

 

1,107,681

 

 

 

80.9

%

 

 

80.1

%

 

Washington

 

 

1

 

 

 

551

 

 

 

551

 

 

 

62,730

 

 

 

62,730

 

 

 

82.2

%

 

 

92.7

%

 

Washington, D.C.

 

 

1

 

 

 

1,536

 

 

 

1,536

 

 

 

101,990

 

 

 

105,592

 

 

 

86.6

%

 

 

78.3

%

 

Total Stabilized Joint-Ventures

 

 

338

 

 

 

231,910

 

 

 

231,894

 

 

 

25,007,536

 

 

 

24,896,783

 

 

 

83.8

%

 

 

82.6

%

 

Properties Managed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

California

 

 

3

 

 

 

2,176

 

 

 

2,179

 

 

 

275,910

 

 

 

271,530

 

 

 

81.1

%

 

 

81.9

%

 

Colorado

 

 

1

 

 

 

513

 

 

 

520

 

 

 

56,240

 

 

 

56,240

 

 

 

82.9

%

 

 

87.3

%

 

Florida

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,439

 

 

 

1,442

 

 

 

133,860

 

 

 

134,703

 

 

 

90.1

%

 

 

90.3

%

 

Illinois

 

 

1

 

 

 

763

 

 

 

762

 

 

 

108,590

 

 

 

108,690

 

 

 

85.8

%

 

 

83.2

%

 

Maryland

 

 

6

 

 

 

3,930

 

 

 

3,939

 

 

 

432,174

 

 

 

431,034

 

 

 

84.3

%

 

 

83.8

%

 

Nevada

 

 

3

 

 

 

3,387

 

 

 

3,332

 

 

 

257,533

 

 

 

252,653

 

 

 

83.6

%

 

 

83.3

%

 

New Jersey

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,093

 

 

 

1,079

 

 

 

131,492

 

 

 

131,092

 

 

 

87.3

%

 

 

88.5

%

 

New Mexico

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,585

 

 

 

1,587

 

 

 

171,555

 

 

 

170,955

 

 

 

89.2

%

 

 

95.1

%

 

New York

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,792

 

 

 

1,701

 

 

 

122,835

 

 

 

112,375

 

 

 

73.9

%

 

 

84.1

%

 

Pennsylvania

 

 

1

 

 

 

440

 

 

 

441

 

 

 

61,235

 

 

 

61,410

 

 

 

78.8

%

 

 

74.4

%

 

Tennessee

 

 

3

 

 

 

1,278

 

 

 

1,277

 

 

 

196,615

 

 

 

192,240

 

 

 

86.0

%

 

 

81.9

%

 

Texas

 

 

1

 

 

 

586

 

 

 

586

 

 

 

66,601

 

 

 

64,441

 

 

 

87.6

%

 

 

90.4

%

 

Utah

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,162

 

 

 

1,160

 

 

 

183,720

 

 

 

180,130

 

 

 

96.3

%

 

 

88.2

%

 

Virginia

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,433

 

 

 

1,430

 

 

 

136,737

 

 

 

146,457

 

 

 

76.8

%

 

 

67.8

%

 

Washington, D.C.

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,256

 

 

 

1,256

 

 

 

111,809

 

 

 

111,849

 

 

 

82.5

%

 

 

79.1

%

 

Total Stabilized Managed Properties

 

 

34

 

 

 

22,833

 

 

 

22,691

 

 

 

2,446,906

 

 

 

2,425,799

 

 

 

84.7

%

 

 

83.9

%

 

Total Stabilized

 

 

565

 

 

 

381,381

 

 

 

380,971

 

 

 

41,179,979

 

 

 

40,947,754

 

 

 

84.3

%

 

 

83.5

%

 


(1)          Represents unit count as of December 31, 2006, which may differ from December 31, 2005 unit count due to unit conversions or expansions.

(2)          Represents net rentable square feet as of December 31, 2006, which may differ from December 31, 2005 net rentable square feet due to unit conversions or expansions.

25




The following table sets forth additional information regarding the occupancy of our lease-up properties on a state-by-state basis as of December 31, 2006 and 2005. The information as of December 31, 2005 is on a pro forma basis as though all the properties owned at December 31, 2006 were under our control as of December 31, 2005.

Lease-up Property Data Based on Location

 

 

 

 

Company

 

Pro forma

 

Company

 

Pro forma

 

Company

 

Pro forma

 

Location

 

 

 

Number of
Properties

 

Number of
Units as of
December 31,
2006(1)

 

Number of
Units as of
December 31,
2005

 

Net Rentable
Square Feet as
of December 31,
2006(2)

 

Net Rentable
Square Feet as
of December 31,
2005

 

Square Foot
Occupancy %
December 31,
2006

 

Square Foot
Occupancy %
December 31,
2005

 

Wholly-Owned Properties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arizona

 

 

1

 

 

 

599

 

 

 

 

 

 

67,375

 

 

 

 

 

 

55.8

%

 

 

0.0

%

 

 

California

 

 

4

 

 

 

2,830

 

 

 

2,166

 

 

 

346,455

 

 

 

226,688

 

 

 

68.6

%

 

 

63.5

%

 

 

Colorado

 

 

1

 

 

 

360

 

 

 

368

 

 

 

58,928

 

 

 

60,441

 

 

 

71.8

%

 

 

47.8

%

 

 

Connecticut

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,357

 

 

 

1,364

 

 

 

122,990

 

 

 

123,465

 

 

 

77.6

%

 

 

62.5

%

 

 

Florida

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,041

 

 

 

1,010

 

 

 

129,890

 

 

 

127,540

 

 

 

81.6

%

 

 

76.7

%

 

 

Illinois

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,137

 

 

 

1,141

 

 

 

144,570

 

 

 

144,965

 

 

 

75.5

%

 

 

65.8

%

 

 

Massachusetts

 

 

6

 

 

 

4,296

 

 

 

3,328

 

 

 

407,332

 

 

 

321,335

 

 

 

58.8

%

 

 

66.1

%

 

 

Nevada

 

 

1

 

 

 

776

 

 

 

796

 

 

 

74,135

 

 

 

75,385

 

 

 

93.0

%

 

 

77.0

%

 

 

New Jersey

 

 

3

 

 

 

2,487

 

 

 

2,411

 

 

 

237,875

 

 

 

222,985

 

 

 

79.5

%

 

 

76.9

%

 

 

New York

 

 

1

 

 

 

903

 

 

 

912

 

 

 

67,360

 

 

 

68,920

 

 

 

80.3

%

 

 

69.2

%

 

 

Pennsylvania

 

 

1

 

 

 

424

 

 

 

425

 

 

 

47,160

 

 

 

47,680

 

 

 

65.3

%

 

 

53.0

%

 

 

Virginia

 

 

1

 

 

 

728

 

 

 

727

 

 

 

75,451

 

 

 

75,700

 

 

 

81.2

%

 

 

70.9

%

 

 

Washington

 

 

1

 

 

 

527

 

 

 

539

 

 

 

61,250

 

 

 

61,250

 

 

 

83.5

%

 

 

53.0

%

 

 

Total Wholly-Owned Lease-up

 

 

26

 

 

 

17,465

 

 

 

15,187

 

 

 

1,840,771

 

 

 

1,556,354

 

 

 

71.9

%

 

 

67.1

%

 

 

Properties Held in Joint-Ventures

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Illinois

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,627

 

 

 

689

 

 

 

146,388

 

 

 

74,345

 

 

 

54.1

%

 

 

55.7

%

 

 

Maryland

 

 

1

 

 

 

957

 

 

 

 

 

 

73,644

 

 

 

 

 

 

25.1

%

 

 

0.0

%

 

 

New Jersey

 

 

3

 

 

 

2,554

 

 

 

2,550

 

 

 

266,155

 

 

 

266,070

 

 

 

80.9

%

 

 

72.0

%

 

 

New Mexico

 

 

1

 

 

 

508

 

 

 

530

 

 

 

65,904

 

 

 

58,714

 

 

 

92.5

%

 

 

58.1

%

 

 

New York

 

 

1

 

 

 

620

 

 

 

621

 

 

 

64,555

 

 

 

64,565

 

 

 

86.4

%

 

 

66.0

%

 

 

Pennsylvania

 

 

1

 

 

 

764

 

 

 

776

 

 

 

76,773

 

 

 

76,578

 

 

 

82.9

%

 

 

62.3

%

 

 

Virginia

 

 

1

 

 

 

878

 

 

 

878

 

 

 

84,383

 

 

 

85,025

 

 

 

61.2

%

 

 

47.7

%

 

 

Total Lease-up Joint Ventures

 

 

10

 

 

 

7,908

 

 

 

6,044

 

 

 

777,802

 

 

 

625,297

 

 

 

70.1

%

 

 

63.6

%

 

 

Managed Properties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

California

 

 

13

 

 

 

8,593

 

 

 

6,457

 

 

 

871,349

 

 

 

654,024

 

 

 

70.8

%

 

 

64.1

%

 

 

Connecticut

 

 

1

 

 

 

696

 

 

 

696

 

 

 

55,260

 

 

 

55,055

 

 

 

59.0

%

 

 

43.3

%

 

 

Florida

 

 

4

 

 

 

2,197

 

 

 

2,184

 

 

 

182,903

 

 

 

183,442

 

 

 

76.8

%

 

 

56.0

%

 

 

Georgia

 

 

5

 

 

 

2,507

 

 

 

2,700

 

 

 

300,385

 

 

 

300,355

 

 

 

76.4

%

 

 

45.7

%

 

 

Illinois

 

 

2

 

 

 

1,574

 

 

 

1,571

 

 

 

190,509

 

 

 

193,622

 

 

 

59.1

%

 

 

40.6

%

 

 

Indiana

 

 

1

 

 

 

589

 

 

 

604

 

 

 

68,690

 

 

 

68,740

 

 

 

64.9

%

 

 

29.0

%

 

 

Massachusetts

 

 

5

 

 

 

4,454

 

 

 

2,460

 

 

 

373,135

 

 

 

211,064

 

 

 

55.5

%

 

 

51.3

%

 

 

Maryland

 

 

3

 

 

 

2,031

 

 

 

2,003

 

 

 

194,381

 

 

 

194,810

 

 

 

83.2

%

 

 

64.6

%

 

 

New York

 

 

1

 

 

 

1,579

 

 

 

1,580

 

 

 

116,260

 

 

 

117,911

 

 

 

72.6

%

 

 

52.9

%

 

&nbs