{"url_path":"/sec/krc/10-k/2026/item-2","section_key":"item-2","section_title":"Item 2 PROPERTIES","topic":"sec","document":{"doc_type":"10-K","doc_date":"2026-02-11","source_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1025996/0001628280-26-007051-index.html","accession_number":"0001628280-26-007051","cik":"0001025996","ticker":"KRC","issuer_name":"KILROY REALTY CORP","edgar_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1025996/0001628280-26-007051-index.html","primary_entity_key":"0001025996","primary_entity_name":"KILROY REALTY CORP"},"word_count":3530,"has_tables":true,"body_markdown":"ITEM 2.    PROPERTIES\n\nGeneral\n\nOur stabilized portfolio of operating properties was comprised of the following properties at December 31, 2025:\n\nNumber of\nBuildingsRentable\nSquare FeetNumber of\nTenants\nPercentage \n\nOccupied (1)\n\nStabilized Office Properties (2)\n121 16,292,164 438 81.6 %\n\n_______________________\n\n(1)Represents economic occupancy for space where we have achieved revenue recognition for the associated lease agreements.\n\n(2)Includes stabilized life science and retail space.\n\nNumber of\nProperties\nNumber of\n\nUnits\n\n2025 Average Occupancy\n\nStabilized Residential Properties3 1,001 94.1 %\n\nOur stabilized portfolio includes all of our properties with the exception of development and redevelopment properties currently committed for construction, under construction, or in the tenant improvement phase, undeveloped land, and real estate assets held for sale, if any. We define redevelopment properties as those properties for which we expect to spend significant development and construction costs pursuant to a formal plan to change its use, the intended result of which is a higher economic return on the property. We define a property in the tenant improvement phase as a development or redevelopment property where the project has reached “cold shell condition” and is ready for tenant improvements, which may require additional major base building modifications before being placed in service. Projects in the tenant improvement phase are moved into our stabilized portfolio once the project reaches the earlier of 95% occupancy or one year from the date of the cessation of major base building construction activities. Costs capitalized to construction in progress for development and redevelopment properties are transferred to land and improvements, buildings and improvements, and deferred leasing costs on our consolidated balance sheets as the projects or phases of projects are placed in service.\n\nAs of December 31, 2025, the following properties and projects were excluded from our stabilized portfolio:\n\nNumber of\nProperties / Projects\nActual / Estimated\n\nRentable Square Feet (1)\n\nProperties held for sale (2)\n1427,764\n\nIn-process development project - tenant improvement1871,738\n\n________________________\n\n(1)For the property classified as held for sale, represents actual rentable square feet and consists of three buildings. For the in-process development project in the tenant improvement phase, represents estimated rentable square feet upon completion.\n\n(2)See Note 4 “Dispositions and Held For Sale” to our consolidated financial statements included in this report for additional information.\n\nOur stabilized portfolio also excludes our future development pipeline, which as of December 31, 2025, was comprised of eight potential future development sites.\n\nAs of December 31, 2025, all of our properties and development and redevelopment projects, and all of our business was conducted in the state of California with the exception of ten stabilized office properties and one future development project located in the state of Washington, and one stabilized office property and one future development project located in Austin, Texas. All of our properties and development and redevelopment projects are 100% owned, excluding four office properties owned by three consolidated property partnerships.\n\nWe own our interests in all of our real estate assets through the Operating Partnership. All our properties are held in fee, except for the fourteen office buildings that are held subject to five long-term ground leases for the land (see Note 17 “Commitments and Contingencies” to our consolidated financial statements included in this report for additional information regarding our ground lease obligations).\n\n33\n\nIn general, our office properties are leased to tenants on a full service gross, modified gross, or triple net basis. Under a full service gross lease, we are obligated to pay the tenant’s proportionate share of real estate taxes, insurance, and operating expenses up to the amount incurred during the tenant’s first year of occupancy (“Base Year”). The tenant pays its pro-rata share of increases in expenses above the Base Year. A modified gross lease is similar to a full service gross lease, except tenants are obligated to pay their proportionate share of certain operating expenses, usually electricity, directly to the service provider. In addition, some office and life science properties, primarily in Seattle and Austin and certain properties in certain submarkets in the San Francisco Bay Area, San Diego, and Los Angeles, are leased to tenants on a triple net basis, pursuant to which the tenants pay their proportionate share of real estate taxes, operating costs, and utility costs. At December 31, 2025, 46% of our properties were leased to tenants on a triple net basis, 26% of our properties were leased to tenants on a modified gross basis, and 22% of our properties were leased to tenants on a full service gross basis, and 6% of our properties were leased to tenants on a modified net basis, in each case as a percentage of our annualized base rental revenue.\n\nWe believe that all of our properties are well maintained and do not require significant capital improvements. As of December 31, 2025, all of our stabilized office properties, excluding our three residential properties, were managed through internal property managers.\n\nCommercial Real Estate Properties\n\nThe following table sets forth certain information relating to each of the stabilized properties, excluding our stabilized residential properties, owned as of December 31, 2025:\n\nProperty LocationNo. of\nBuildingsYear Built / RenovatedRentable\nSquare Feet\nPercentage\n\nOccupied (1)\n\nAnnualized\n\nBase Rent\n\n(in thousands) (2)\n\nAnnualized Rent Per Square Foot (2)\n\nLos Angeles\n\n335-345 North Maple Drive,\nBeverly Hills, California1\n1987 /\n\n2017\n306,366 77.5 %$18,322 $78.53 \n\n3101-3243 S. La Cienega Boulevard,\n\nCulver City, California\n192008-2017166,207 43.6 %4,764 66.32 \n\n2240 East Imperial Highway,\nEl Segundo, California1\n1983 /\n\n2008\n122,870 100.0 %3,713 30.21 \n\n2250 East Imperial Highway,\nEl Segundo, California11983298,728 37.7 %3,346 30.05 \n\n2260 East Imperial Highway,\nEl Segundo, California1\n1983 /\n\n2012\n298,728 100.0 %9,026 30.21 \n\n909 North Pacific Coast Highway,\nEl Segundo, California1\n1972 /\n\n2005\n244,880 67.4 %6,451 39.76 \n\n999 North Pacific Coast Highway,\nEl Segundo, California1\n1962 /\n\n2003\n138,389 51.9 %2,594 39.28 \n\n1350 Ivar Avenue,\nLos Angeles, California1202016,448 100.0 %1,005 61.10 \n\n1355 Vine Street,\nLos Angeles, California12020183,129 100.0 %10,882 59.42 \n\n1375 Vine Street,\nLos Angeles, California12020159,236 100.0 %9,805 61.58 \n\n1395 Vine Street,\nLos Angeles, California120202,575 100.0 %161 62.65 \n\n1500 North El Centro Avenue,\nLos Angeles, California12016113,447 63.6 %4,872 67.54 \n\n1525 North Gower Street,\nLos Angeles, California120169,610 100.0 %650 67.61 \n\n1575 North Gower Street,\nLos Angeles, California12016264,430 98.3 %16,015 61.61 \n\n6115 West Sunset Boulevard,\nLos Angeles, California1\n1938 /\n\n2015\n26,238 73.4 %1,037 53.85 \n\n6121 West Sunset Boulevard,\nLos Angeles, California1\n1938 /\n\n2015\n93,418 — %— — \n\n3750 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California1198910,718 100.0 %128 33.52 \n\n34\n\nProperty LocationNo. of\nBuildingsYear Built / RenovatedRentable\nSquare Feet\nPercentage\n\nOccupied (1)\n\nAnnualized\n\nBase Rent\n\n(in thousands) (2)\n\nAnnualized Rent Per Square Foot (2)\n\n3760 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California11989166,761 77.5 %4,613 37.20 \n\n3780 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California11989221,452 97.4 %8,088 38.23 \n\n3800 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California12000192,476 93.4 %5,235 29.12 \n\n3840 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California11999138,441 100.0 %5,706 41.22 \n\n3880 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California1\n1987 /\n\n2013\n96,922 91.3 %3,191 36.05 \n\n3900 Kilroy Airport Way,\nLong Beach, California11987130,935 62.3 %3,263 40.10 \n\n8560 West Sunset Boulevard,\nWest Hollywood, California 1\n1963 /\n\n2007\n76,359 98.9 %6,309 84.29 \n\n8570 West Sunset Boulevard,\nWest Hollywood, California 1\n2002 /\n\n2007\n49,276 99.0 %3,232 68.08 \n\n8580 West Sunset Boulevard,\nWest Hollywood, California 1\n2002 /\n\n2007\n6,875 — %— — \n\n8590 West Sunset Boulevard,\nWest Hollywood, California 1\n2002 /\n\n2007\n56,750 99.7 %2,807 49.59 \n\n12100 West Olympic Boulevard,\nLos Angeles, California12003155,679 68.7 %7,932 74.13 \n\n12200 West Olympic Boulevard,\nLos Angeles, California12000154,544 32.0 %973 69.17 \n\n12233 West Olympic Boulevard,\nLos Angeles, California1\n1980 /\n\n2011\n156,746 42.0 %2,308 45.74 \n\n12312 West Olympic Boulevard,\nLos Angeles, California1\n1950 /\n\n1997\n78,900 100.0 %1,503 19.06 \n\n2100/2110 Colorado Avenue,\nSanta Monica, California3\n1992 /\n\n2009\n104,853 55.4 %4,580 78.53 \n\nSubtotal/Weighted Average –\nLos Angeles524,242,386 75.1 %$152,511 $49.14 \n\nSan Diego\n\n12225 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1199858,401 100.0 %$2,543 $43.55 \n\n12235 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1199853,751 100.0 %2,627 48.87 \n\n12340 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1\n2002 /\n\n2022\n110,950 25.9 %1,436 49.93 \n\n12390 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1200073,238 100.0 %4,237 57.85 \n\n12770 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1201675,035 100.0 %4,761 72.40 \n\n12780 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n12013140,591 100.0 %7,138 50.77 \n\n12790 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1201387,944 100.0 %4,940 56.18 \n\n12830 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n12021196,444 100.0 %14,419 73.40 \n\n12860 El Camino Real,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1202192,042 100.0 %6,279 68.22 \n\n12348 High Bluff Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1199939,192 51.5 %926 45.90 \n\n12400 High Bluff Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1\n2004 /\n\n2022\n216,518 100.0 %17,216 79.51 \n\n12707 High Bluff Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1201759,245 91.2 %3,417 63.22 \n\n12777 High Bluff Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1201744,486 100.0 %2,319 52.14 \n\n3579 Valley Centre Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1199954,960 100.0 %3,283 59.74 \n\n35\n\nProperty LocationNo. of\nBuildingsYear Built / RenovatedRentable\nSquare Feet\nPercentage\n\nOccupied (1)\n\nAnnualized\n\nBase Rent\n\n(in thousands) (2)\n\nAnnualized Rent Per Square Foot (2)\n\n3611 Valley Centre Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n12000132,425 100.0 %7,465 56.37 \n\n3661 Valley Centre Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n12001124,756 34.2 %2,902 68.08 \n\n3721 Valley Centre Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n12003117,777 94.8 %6,277 56.24 \n\n3811 Valley Centre Drive,\n\nSan Diego, California\n12000118,912 100.0 %7,943 66.80 \n\n3745 Paseo Place,\n\nSan Diego, California\n1201995,871 89.0 %6,147 72.06 \n\n2100 Kettner Boulevard,\nSan Diego, California12022212,915 45.0 %6,290 68.24 \n\n2305 Historic Decatur Road,\nSan Diego, California12009107,456 88.3 %4,536 47.84 \n\n3535 General Atomics Court,\nSan Diego, California11991/\n201580,543 28.1 %1,222 53.97 \n\n3565 General Atomics Court,\nSan Diego, California1\n1993 /\n\n2017\n43,295 100.0 %2,810 64.90 \n\n3530 John Hopkins Court,\nSan Diego, California11999 / 201245,589 100.0 %4,399 96.48 \n\n3550 John Hopkins Court,\nSan Diego, California1\n2000 /\n\n2012\n62,739 100.0 %5,192 82.76 \n\n4690 Executive Drive,\nSan Diego, California1\n1999 /\n\n2025\n52,074 — %— — \n\n9455 Towne Centre Drive,\nSan Diego, California12021160,444 100.0 %7,822 48.76 \n\n9514 Towne Centre Drive,\nSan Diego, California1202370,616 100.0 %5,220 73.92 \n\nSubtotal/Weighted Average –\nSan Diego282,728,209 83.7 %$143,766 $63.32 \n\nSan Francisco Bay Area\n\n4100 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1198547,643 100.0 %$2,640 $55.41 \n\n4200 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1198743,600 69.4 %1,477 56.64 \n\n4300 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1198863,430 38.8 %1,188 48.31 \n\n4400 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1\n1988 /\n\n2025\n48,414 — %— — \n\n4500 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1199063,429 100.0 %4,074 64.23 \n\n4600 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1199048,413 100.0 %2,570 53.09 \n\n4700 Bohannon Drive,\nMenlo Park, California1198963,429 100.0 %3,513 55.39 \n\n900 Jefferson Avenue,\nRedwood City, California12015228,226 100.0 %13,468 59.01 \n\n900 Middlefield Road,\nRedwood City, California12015119,616 100.0 %10,236 85.92 \n\n1290-1300 Terra Bella Avenue,\nMountain View, California11961114,175 100.0 %7,446 65.21 \n\n680 East Middlefield Road,\nMountain View, California12014171,676 100.0 %7,763 45.22 \n\n690 East Middlefield Road,\nMountain View, California12014171,215 100.0 %7,730 45.14 \n\n1701 Page Mill Road,\nPalo Alto, California 12015128,688 100.0 %8,461 65.75 \n\n3150 Porter Drive,\nPalo Alto, California 1199836,886 100.0 %3,277 88.83 \n\n100 First Street,\nSan Francisco, California11988480,457 95.3 %31,918 72.56 \n\n36\n\nProperty LocationNo. of\nBuildingsYear Built / RenovatedRentable\nSquare Feet\nPercentage\n\nOccupied (1)\n\nAnnualized\n\nBase Rent\n\n(in thousands) (2)\n\nAnnualized Rent Per Square Foot (2)\n\n100 Hooper Street,\nSan Francisco, California12018417,914 97.4 %23,426 57.68 \n\n303 Second Street,\nSan Francisco, California11988784,658 66.1 %46,204 89.82 \n\n201 Third Street,\nSan Francisco, California11983355,960 56.0 %7,919 40.05 \n\n360 Third Street,\nSan Francisco, California12013436,357 66.6 %25,489 88.08 \n\n250 Brannan Street,\nSan Francisco, California1\n1907 /\n\n2001\n100,850 100.0 %10,323 102.36 \n\n301 Brannan Street,\nSan Francisco, California1\n1909 /\n\n1989\n82,834 100.0 %7,392 89.23 \n\n333 Brannan Street,\nSan Francisco, California12016185,602 100.0 %17,688 95.30 \n\n345 Brannan Street,\nSan Francisco, California12015110,050 99.7 %10,551 96.16 \n\n350 Mission Street,\nSan Francisco, California12016455,340 99.7 %24,117 53.18 \n\n345 Oyster Point Boulevard,\nSouth San Francisco, California1200140,410 100.0 %2,192 54.24 \n\n347 Oyster Point Boulevard,\nSouth San Francisco, California1199839,780 100.0 %2,158 54.24 \n\n349 Oyster Point Boulevard,\nSouth San Francisco, California1199965,340 — %— — \n\n350 Oyster Point Boulevard,\nSouth San Francisco, California12021234,892 100.0 %18,167 77.34 \n\n352 Oyster Point Boulevard,\nSouth San Francisco, California12021232,215 100.0 %18,062 77.78 \n\n354 Oyster Point Boulevard,\nSouth San Francisco, California12021193,472 100.0 %15,048 77.78 \n\nSubtotal/Weighted Average –\nSan Francisco305,564,971 86.2 %$334,497 $70.21 \n\nSeattle\n\n601 108th Avenue North East,\nBellevue, Washington12000490,738 87.1 %$18,052 $42.73 \n\n10900 North East 4th Street,\nBellevue, Washington11983428,557 88.6 %17,587 46.54 \n\n2001 8th Avenue,\n\nSeattle, Washington\n12009535,395 26.0 %5,598 40.52 \n\n320 Westlake Avenue North,\nSeattle, Washington12007184,644 96.1 %8,117 45.74 \n\n321 Terry Avenue North,\nSeattle, Washington12013135,755 100.0 %5,505 40.55 \n\n401 Terry Avenue North,\nSeattle, Washington12003174,530 100.0 %7,008 40.15 \n\n333 Dexter Ave North,\nSeattle, Washington12022618,766 100.0 %31,654 51.16 \n\n701 North 34th Street,\nSeattle, Washington11998143,136 64.6 %3,254 35.18 \n\n801 North 34th Street,\nSeattle, Washington11998173,615 100.0 %5,789 33.34 \n\n837 North 34th Street,\nSeattle, Washington12008112,487 71.3 %2,827 35.25 \n\nSubtotal/Weighted Average –\nSeattle102,997,623 80.0 %$105,391 $44.07 \n\nAustin\n\n200 W. 6th Street,\n\nAustin, Texas\n12023758,975 82.2 %$28,443 $46.11 \n\nSubtotal/Weighted Average -\nAustin1758,975 82.2 %$28,443 $46.11 \n\nTOTAL/WEIGHTED AVERAGE12116,292,164 81.6 %$764,608 $58.16 \n\n37\n\n____________________\n\n(1)Based on all leases at the respective properties in effect as of December 31, 2025. Includes month-to-month leases and leases with a lease term of less than one year as of December 31, 2025. Represents economic occupancy for space where we have achieved revenue recognition for the associated lease agreements.\n\n(2)Annualized base rental revenue includes the impact of straight-lining rent escalations and the amortization of free rent periods, and excludes the impact of the following: amortization of deferred revenue related to tenant-funded tenant improvements, amortization of above/below-market rent, amortization for lease incentives due under existing leases, and expense reimbursement revenue. Excludes month-to-month leases, vacant space, and leases with a lease term of less than one year, as of December 31, 2025. Includes 100% of annualized base rent of consolidated property partnerships.\n\nStabilized Redevelopment Projects\n\nDuring the year ended December 31, 2025, the following projects were added to our stabilized portfolio of operating properties:\n\nConstruction Period\n\nStabilization\n\nDate (1)\n\nRentable Square Feet\n\n% Occupied\n% Leased\n\nPROJECT\nLocation\nStart Date\n\nCompletion\n\nDate\n\n4400 Bohannon Drive\nOther Peninsula - San Francisco Bay Area\n4Q 20223Q 20243Q 202548,414 —%—%\n\n4690 Executive Drive\nUniversity Towne Center - San Diego\n1Q 20223Q 20243Q 202552,074 —%47%\n\nTOTAL:100,488 —%24%\n\n____________________\n\n(1)Represents the earlier of the date the project achieves 95% occupancy or one year from substantial completion of base building components.\n\nIn-Process Development Projects\n\n    \n\nAs of December 31, 2025, the following development project was in the tenant improvement phase:\n\nConstruction Start Date\nEstimated\n\nStabilization Date (2)\n\nEstimated Rentable\n\nSquare Feet\n\n% Occupied\n% Leased\n\nPROJECT (1)\nLocation\n\nLife Science\n\nKilroy Oyster Point - Phase 2South San Francisco2Q 20211Q 2026871,738 3%44%\n\nTOTAL:871,738 3%44%\n\n____________________\n\n(1)Includes projects that have reached “cold shell condition” and are ready for tenant improvements, which may require additional major base building construction before being placed in service.\n\n(2)Represents the earlier of the date the project achieves 95% occupancy or one year from substantial completion of base building components. For multi-phase projects, interest and carry cost capitalization may cease and recommence driven by various factors, including tenant improvement construction, other tenant related timing, or changes in project scope.\n\n38\n\nFuture Development Pipeline\n\nThe following table sets forth certain information relating to our future development pipeline as of December 31, 2025:\n\nFuture Development PipelineLocation\nApprox. Developable Square Feet /\n\nResidential Units (1)\n\nLos Angeles\n\n1633 26th Street (2)\nWest Los Angeles190,000\n\nSan Diego\n\nSanta Fe Summit (2)\n56 Corridor600,000 - 650,000\n\n2045 Pacific HighwayLittle Italy / Point Loma275,000\n\nKilroy East VillageEast Village1,100 units\n\nSan Francisco Bay Area\n\nKilroy Oyster Point - Phases 3 and 4South San Francisco875,000 - 1,000,000\n\nFlower MartSan Francisco CBD2,300,000\n\nSeattle\n\nSIX0Lake Union / Denny Regrade925,000 and 650 units\n\nAustin\n\nStadium TowerStadium District / Domain493,000\n\n____________________\n\n(1)Project scope, including the estimated developable square feet or number of residential units, could change materially from estimates provided due to one or more of the following: significant changes in the economy, market conditions, tenant requirements and demands, construction costs, new supply, regulatory and entitlement processes, or project design.\n\n(2)Subject to signed agreements and non-refundable deposits as of the date of this filing. Both development sites are anticipated to close upon receipt of residential entitlements and permits, which is expected to occur in phases beginning in late 2026.\n\n39\n\nSignificant Tenants\n\nThe following table sets forth information about our 20 largest tenants based upon annualized base rental revenues, as defined below, as of December 31, 2025:\n\nTenant Name (1)\nRegion\nAnnualized \n\nBase Rental\n\nRevenue\n\n(in thousands) (2)\n\nRentable\n\nSquare\n\nFeet\n\nPercentage\n\n of Total\n\nAnnualized\n\nBase\n\nRental\n\nRevenue (2)\n\nPercentage\n\n of Total\n\nRentable\n\nSquare\n\nFeet\n\nYear(s) of\n\nSignificant\n\nLease \n\nExpiration(s) (3)\n\nWeighted\n\nAverage Remaining\n\nLease\n\nTerm\n\n(Years)\n\n1Global technology companySeattle / San Diego$44,696 849,826 5.9%5.2%2032 - 2033 / 20377.6\n\n2Cruise LLCSan Francisco Bay Area35,449 374,618 4.6%2.3%20315.9\n\n3Stripe, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area33,110 425,687 4.3%2.6%20348.5\n\n4Adobe Systems, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area / Seattle27,897 537,799 3.7%3.3%\n2027 (4) / 2031\n5.4\n\n5Salesforce, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area / Seattle24,706 472,988 3.2%2.9%2029 - 2030 / 20324.4\n\n6\nOkta, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area24,206 293,001 3.2%1.8%20282.8\n\n7\nDoorDash, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area23,842 236,759 3.1%1.5%20326.1\n\n8\nNetflix, Inc.Los Angeles21,854 361,388 2.9%2.2%20326.6\n\n9\nCytokinetics, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area18,167 234,892 2.4%1.4%20337.8\n\n10\nBox, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area16,853 287,680 2.2%1.8%20282.5\n\n11\nDIRECTV, LLCLos Angeles16,085 532,956 2.1%3.3%\n2026 - 2027 (5)\n1.7\n\n12\nTandem Diabetes Care, Inc.San Diego 15,884 181,949 2.1%1.1%20359.3\n\n13\nSynopsys, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area15,492 342,891 2.0%2.1%20304.7\n\n14\nNeurocrine Biosciences, Inc.San Diego 14,397 273,021 1.9%1.7%2029 / 20315.2\n\n15\nViacom International, Inc.Los Angeles13,718 220,330 1.8%1.4%20283.0\n\n16\nIndeed, Inc. Austin CBD13,430 330,394 1.8%2.0%20349.0\n\n17\nSony Group CorporationSan Francisco Bay Area / Los Angeles13,382 131,642 1.8%0.8%20304.2\n\n18\nAmazon.comSeattle12,921 284,307 1.7%1.7%20304.1\n\n19\nNektar Therapeutics, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area12,297 135,974 1.6%0.8%20304.1\n\n20Splunk, Inc.San Francisco Bay Area10,323 100,850 1.4%0.6%20315.9\n\nTotal$408,709 6,608,952 53.7%40.5%5.5\n\n_____________________\n\n(1)Includes subsidiaries of tenant listed. Excludes tenants at properties classified as held for sale.\n\n(2)Annualized base rental revenue is calculated as the annualized monthly contractual rents from existing tenants in occupancy, including the impact of straight-lined rent escalations and the amortization of free rent periods and excluding the impact of the following: amortization of deferred revenue related to tenant-funded tenant improvements, amortization of above/below-market rents, amortization for lease incentives due under existing leases, and expense reimbursement revenue. Includes 100% of the annualized base rental revenues of consolidated property partnerships.\n\n(3)Significant lease expirations include those greater than 25,000 rentable square feet.\n\n(4)The 2027 lease expiration represents 31,840 rentable square feet that expires on June 30, 2027.\n\n(5)The 2026 lease expiration represents 49,255 rentable square feet that expires on September 30, 2026, and the 2027 expiration represents the remaining 483,701 square feet that expires on September 30, 2027.\n\n40\n\nThe following pie chart sets forth the composition of our tenant base by industry as a percentage of our annualized base rental revenue for our occupied square footage (excluding month-to-month and intercompany leases) based on the North American Industry Classification System as of December 31, 2025:\n\nOur markets are dynamic and populated with innovative and creative tenants, including, but not limited to, technology, life science and healthcare, and media companies. While technology companies comprise 51% of our office portfolio base rent, technology is a broad concept that encompasses diverse industries, including software, social media, hardware, cloud computing, internet media, and technology services.\n\n41\n\nLease Expirations\n\nThe following table sets forth a summary of our lease expirations for our stabilized portfolio, excluding our residential properties, for each of the next ten years beginning with 2026, assuming that none of the tenants exercise renewal options or termination rights. See further discussion of our lease expirations under “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations —Factors that May Influence Future Results of Operations”:\n\nLease Expirations (1) (2)\n\nYear of Lease\nExpiration\nNumber of Expiring Leases\nTotal Square Feet% of Total Leased\nSquare Feet\nAnnualized \n\nBase Rent\n\n(in thousands) (3)\n\n% of Total\n\nAnnualized\n\nBase Rent (3)\n\nAnnualized Base\n\nRent per\n\nSquare Foot (3)\n\nMonth-to-Month\n26 27,459 N/AN/AN/AN/A\n\n202669 1,049,430 8.0 %$49,033 6.4 %$46.72 \n\n202767 1,011,066 7.7 %37,598 4.9 %37.19 \n\n202870 1,244,652 9.4 %77,264 10.1 %62.08 \n\n202960 1,420,631 10.8 %74,160 9.7 %52.20 \n\n203067 1,718,698 13.1 %103,707 13.6 %60.34 \n\n203164 2,437,547 18.5 %154,798 20.2 %63.51 \n\n203219 1,253,284 9.5 %83,313 10.9 %66.48 \n\n203319 1,164,020 8.9 %69,117 9.0 %59.38 \n\n203418 683,426 5.2 %45,643 6.0 %66.79 \n\n203517 637,974 4.9 %36,991 4.8 %57.98 \n\n2036 and beyond18 525,833 4.0 %32,984 4.4 %62.73 \n\nTotal / Average\n488 13,146,561 100.0 %$764,608 100.0 %$58.16 \n\n____________________\n\n(1)Represents all in-place leases as of December 31, 2025, excluding intercompany leases.\n\n(2)Includes 100% of annualized base rent of consolidated property partnerships.\n\n(3)Represents annualized monthly contractual rents from existing tenants in occupancy, including the impact of straight-lined rent escalations and the amortization of free rent periods and excluding the impact of the following: amortization of deferred revenue related to tenant-funded tenant improvements, amortization of above/below-market rents, amortization for lease incentives due under existing leases, and expense reimbursement revenue. Additionally, the underlying leases contain various expense structures including full service gross, modified gross, and triple net. Amounts represent percentage of total portfolio annualized contractual base rental revenue. Total is presented on a weighted average basis.\n\nSecured Debt\n\nAs of December 31, 2025, the Operating Partnership had three outstanding mortgage notes payable which were secured by certain of our properties. Our secured debt represents an aggregate principal indebtedness of approximately $600.4 million. See additional information regarding our secured debt in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Liquidity Sources,” Notes 7 and 8 to our consolidated financial statements, and “Schedule III—Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation,” included in this report."}