UDR Apartments - 10-K annual report

      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 filing requirements for the past 90 days.     Yes þ          No o

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

      Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).     Yes þ          No o

      The aggregate market value of the shares of common stock held by non-affiliates on June 30, 2004 was approximately $2.4 billion. This calculation excludes shares of common stock held by the registrant’s officers and directors and each person known by the registrant to beneficially own more than 5% of the registrant’s outstanding shares, as such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status should not be deemed conclusive for any other purpose. As of March 1, 2005 there were 137,023,872 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.

      The information required by Part III of this Report, to the extent not set forth herein, is incorporated by reference from the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 3, 2005.

      United Dominion Realty Trust, Inc. is a self administered real estate investment trust, or REIT, that owns, acquires, renovates, develops, and manages middle-market apartment communities nationwide. At December 31, 2004, our apartment portfolio included 273 communities located in 43 markets, with a total of 78,855 completed apartment homes. In addition, we had three apartment communities under development.

      We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. To continue to qualify as a REIT, we must continue to meet certain tests which, among other things, generally require that our assets consist primarily of real estate, our income be derived primarily from real estate, and that we distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (other than our net capital gain) to our stockholders. As a qualified REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income taxes on our REIT taxable income to the extent we distribute such income to our stockholders. In 2004, we declared total distributions of $1.17 per share to our stockholders, which represents our 28th year of consecutive dividend increases to our stockholders.

      We were formed in 1972 as a Virginia corporation. In June 2003, we changed our state of incorporation from Virginia to Maryland. Our corporate headquarters is located at 400 East Cary Street, Richmond, Virginia. Our principal executive offices are located at 1745 Shea Center Drive, Suite 200, Highlands Ranch, Colorado. As of March 1, 2005, we had 1,943 full-time employees and 178 part-time employees.

      Our subsidiaries include two operating partnerships, Heritage Communities L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and United Dominion Realty L.P., a Delaware limited partnership. Unless the context otherwise requires, all references in this Report to “we,” “us,” “our,” “the company,” or “United Dominion” refer collectively to United Dominion Realty Trust, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

      Our principal business objective is to maximize the economic returns of our apartment communities to provide our stockholders with the greatest possible total return and value. To achieve this objective, we intend to continue to pursue the following goals and strategies:

      During 2004, using the proceeds from our disposition program, equity and debt offerings, we acquired 28 communities with 8,060 apartment homes at a total cost of approximately $1.0 billion, including the assumption of secured debt. In addition, we purchased one parcel of land for $16.3 million.

      When evaluating potential acquisitions, we consider:

      The following table summarizes our apartment acquisitions and our year-end ownership position for the past five years (dollars in thousands):

      We regularly monitor and adjust our assets to increase portfolio profitability. During 2004, we sold over 5,400 of our slower growing, non-core apartment homes while exiting some markets in an effort to

increase the quality and performance of our portfolio. Proceeds from the disposition program were used primarily to reduce debt and fund acquisitions.

      Factors we consider in deciding whether to dispose of a property include:

      At December 31, 2004, there were 12 apartment communities and one parcel of land classified as real estate held for disposition. We are in the market for replacement properties that will correspond with our expected sales activity to prevent dilution to earnings.

      During 2004, we continued to reposition properties in targeted markets where there was an opportunity to add value and achieve greater than inflationary increases in rents over the long term. In 2004, we spent $17.6 million on three development projects that are expected to be completed in the first half of 2006. In addition, revenue enhancing capital expenditures, including kitchen and bath renovations, and other extensive interior upgrades totaled $45.9 million or $599 per home for the year ended December 31, 2004.

      The following wholly-owned projects were under development as of December 31, 2004:

      In addition, we owned eight parcels of land held for future development aggregating $25.5 million at December 31, 2004. Four of the eight parcels represent additional phases to existing communities.

      As part of our plan to strengthen our capital structure, we utilized proceeds from dispositions, equity offerings and refinancings to extend maturities, pay down existing debt, and acquire apartment communities. The following is a list of our major financing activities in 2004:

      At December 31, 2004, we owned 273 apartment communities in 43 markets in 17 states. Of those markets, 25 markets, or 61%, generated positive same community net operating income growth for the

fourth quarter of 2004 when compared to the same period in the prior year. We have a geographically diverse portfolio and we believe that this diversification increases investment opportunity and decreases the risk associated with cyclical local real estate markets and economies, thereby increasing the stability and predictability of our earnings.

      We believe changing demographics will have a significant impact on the apartment industry over the next two decades. In particular, we believe the annual number of young people entering the workforce and creating households will be significantly higher over the next 10 to 15 years as compared to the number who entered the workforce over the past 10 years. The number of single people and single parent households continues to grow significantly. The immigrant population is also expected to grow at an accelerated pace. Each of these population segments has a high propensity to rent.

      Despite a strengthening United States economy, significant productivity growth has adversely affected employment growth, which is the primary driver of demand in our business. In addition, a sustained low mortgage interest rate environment, combined with government and builder incentives to first time home buyers, has further siphoned off what would traditionally be demand for apartment homes. To maintain occupancy levels during these economic conditions, we have reduced rents, increased our marketing expenses, and provided concessions to our residents.

      In most of our markets, competition for new residents is intense. Some competing communities offer features that our communities do not have. Competing communities frequently use concessions or lower rents to obtain temporary competitive advantages. Also, some competing communities are larger or newer than our communities. The competitive position of each community is different depending upon many factors including sub-market supply and demand. In addition, other real estate investors compete with us to acquire existing properties and to develop new properties. These competitors include insurance companies, pension and investment funds, developer partnerships, investment companies and other apartment REITs. This competition could increase prices for properties of the type that we would likely pursue, and our competitors may have greater resources, or lower capital costs, than we do.

      We believe that, in general, we are well-positioned to compete effectively for residents and investments. We believe our competitive advantages include:

      Moving forward, we will continue to emphasize aggressive lease management, improved expense control, increased resident retention efforts and the realignment of employee incentive plans tied to our bottom line performance. We believe this plan of operation, coupled with the portfolio’s strengths in targeting the middle-market of renters across a geographically diverse platform, should position us for continued operational improvement.

      At December 31, 2004, our apartment portfolio included 273 communities having a total of 78,855 completed apartment homes. In addition, we had three apartment communities under development. The overall quality of our portfolio has significantly improved since 2001 with the disposition of non-core apartment homes and our upgrade program. The upgrading of the portfolio provides several key benefits related to portfolio profitability. It enables us to raise rents more significantly and to attract residents with higher levels of disposable income who are more likely to accept the transfer of expenses, such as water

and sewer costs, from the landlord to the resident. In addition, it potentially reduces recurring capital expenditures per apartment home, and therefore increases cash flow.

      For 2004, same community property operating income decreased 1.2% or $3.9 million compared to 2003. The overall decrease in property operating income was primarily attributable to a 0.5% or $2.3 million increase in revenues from rental and other income that was offset by a 3.2% or $6.2 million increase in operating expenses. The increase in revenues from rental and other income was primarily driven by a 7.7% or $2.8 million decrease in vacancy loss and a 14.3% or $2.1 million increase in utility reimbursement income. These increases in income were offset by a 0.7% or $3.6 million decrease in rental rates. Physical occupancy increased 0.8% to 93.8%.

      The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven by a 5.4% or $2.8 million increase in personnel costs, a 4.7% or $1.5 million increase in repair and maintenance costs, a 3.5% or $1.1 million increase in utilities expense, and a 1.6% or $0.8 million increase in property taxes.

      We focus on the broad middle-market segment of the apartment market that generally consists of renters-by-necessity. This group includes young professionals, blue-collar families, single parent households, older singles, immigrants, non-related parties and families renting while waiting to purchase a home. We believe this segment provides the highest profit potential in terms of rent growth, stability of occupancy and investment opportunities.

      We believe there will be a significant increase in the number of younger renters over the next 10 to 15 years, and that the immigrant population will remain a significant and growing part of the renter base. Accordingly, we plan to target some of our incremental investments to communities that will be attractive to younger households or to the immigrant populations. These communities will often be located close to where these residents work, shop and play.

      We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code. To continue to qualify as a REIT, we must continue to meet certain tests that, among other things, generally require that our assets consist primarily of real estate, our income be derived primarily from real estate and that we distribute at least 90% of our taxable income (other than our net capital gain) to our stockholders. Provided we maintain our qualification as a REIT, we will generally not be subject to federal income taxes at the corporate level on our net income to the extent net income is distributed to our stockholders.

      Substantially all of our leases are for a term of one year or less, which may enable us to realize increased rents upon renewal of existing leases or the beginning of new leases. Such short-term leases generally minimize the risk to us of the adverse effects of inflation, although as a general rule these leases permit residents to leave at the end of the lease term without penalty. Short-term leases and relatively consistent demand allow rents, and therefore cash flow from the portfolio, to provide an attractive hedge against inflation.

      To date, compliance with federal, state and local environmental protection regulations has not had a material effect on our capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position. However, in the past, the issue has been raised regarding the presence of asbestos and other hazardous materials in existing real estate properties. We have a property management plan for hazardous materials. As part of the plan, Phase I environmental site investigations and reports have been completed for each property we own. In

addition, all proposed acquisitions are inspected prior to acquisition. The inspections are conducted by qualified environmental consultants, and we review the issued report prior to the purchase or development of any property. Nevertheless, it is possible that our environmental assessments will not reveal all environmental liabilities, or that some material environmental liabilities exist of which we are unaware. In some cases, we have abandoned otherwise economically attractive acquisitions because the costs of removal or control of hazardous materials have been prohibitive or we have been unwilling to accept the potential risks involved. We do not believe we will be required to engage in any large-scale abatement at any of our properties. We believe that through professional environmental inspections and testing for asbestos, lead paint and other hazardous materials, coupled with a conservative posture toward accepting known risk, we can minimize our exposure to potential liability associated with environmental hazards.

      Federal legislation requires owners and landlords of residential housing constructed prior to 1978 to disclose to potential residents or purchasers of the communities any known lead paint hazards and imposes treble damages for failure to provide such notification. In addition, lead based paint in any of the communities may result in lead poisoning in children residing in that community if chips or particles of such lead based paint are ingested, and we may be held liable under state laws for any such injuries caused by ingestion of lead based paint by children living at the communities.

      We are unaware of any environmental hazards at any of our properties that individually or in the aggregate may have a material adverse impact on our operations or financial position. We have not been notified by any governmental authority, and we are not otherwise aware, of any material non-compliance, liability, or claim relating to environmental liabilities in connection with any of our properties. We do not believe that the cost of continued compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations will have a material adverse effect on us or our financial condition or results of operations. Future environmental laws, regulations, or ordinances, however, may require additional remediation of existing conditions that are not currently actionable. Also, if more stringent requirements are imposed on us in the future, the costs of compliance could have a material adverse effect on us and our financial condition.

      We carry comprehensive general liability coverage on our communities, with limits of liability customary within the industry to insure against liability claims and related defense costs. We are also insured, in all material respects, against the risk of direct physical damage in amounts necessary to reimburse us on a replacement cost basis for costs incurred to repair or rebuild each property, including loss of rental income during the reconstruction period.

      There are many factors that affect our business and our results of operations, some of which are beyond our control. The following is a description of some of the important factors that may cause our actual results of operations in future periods to differ materially from those currently expected or desired.

     Unfavorable Changes in Apartment Market and Economic Conditions Could Adversely Affect Occupancy Levels and Rental Rates. Market and economic conditions in the metropolitan areas in which we operate may significantly affect our occupancy levels and rental rates and, therefore, our profitability. Factors that may adversely affect these conditions include the following:

      The strength of the United States economy has become increasingly susceptible to global events and threats of terrorism. At the same time, productivity enhancements and the increased exportation of labor have resulted in limited job growth despite an improving economy. Continued weakness in job creation, or any worsening of current economic conditions, generally and in our principal market areas, could have a material adverse effect on our occupancy levels, our rental rates and our ability to strategically acquire and dispose of apartment communities. This may impair our ability to satisfy our financial obligations and pay distributions to our stockholders.

     Acquisitions or New Development May Not Achieve Anticipated Results. We intend to continue to selectively acquire apartment communities that meet our investment criteria. Our acquisition activities and their success are subject to the following risks:

     Possible Difficulty of Selling Apartment Communities Could Limit Operational and Financial Flexibility. We periodically dispose of apartment communities that no longer meet our strategic objectives, but market conditions could change and purchasers may not be willing to pay prices acceptable to us. A weak market may limit our ability to change our portfolio promptly in response to changing economic conditions. Furthermore, a significant portion of the proceeds from our overall property sales may be held by intermediaries in order for some sales to qualify as like-kind exchanges under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, so that any related capital gain can be deferred for federal income tax purposes. As a result, we may not have immediate access to all of the cash flow generated from our property sales. In addition, federal tax laws limit our ability to profit on the sale of communities that we have owned for fewer than four years, and this limitation may prevent us from selling communities when market conditions are favorable.

     Increased Competition Could Limit Our Ability to Lease Apartment Homes or Increase or Maintain Rents. Our apartment communities compete with numerous housing alternatives in attracting residents, including other apartment communities and single-family rental homes, as well as owner occupied single-and multi-family homes. Competitive housing in a particular area could adversely affect our ability to lease apartment homes and increase or maintain rents.

     Insufficient Cash Flow Could Affect Our Debt Financing and Create Refinancing Risk. We are subject to the risks normally associated with debt financing, including the risk that our operating income and cash flow will be insufficient to make required payments of principal and interest, or could restrict our borrowing capacity under our line of credit due to debt covenant restraints. We cannot assure you that sufficient cash flow will be available to make all required principal payments and still satisfy our distribution requirements to maintain our status as a REIT, nor can we assure you that the full limits of our line of credit will be available to us if our operating performance falls outside the constraints of our debt covenants. Additionally, we are likely to need to refinance substantially all of our outstanding debt as it matures. We may not be able to refinance existing debt, or the terms of any refinancing may not be as favorable as the terms of the existing debt, which could create pressures to sell assets or to issue additional equity when we would otherwise not choose to do so.

     Failure to Generate Sufficient Revenue Could Impair Debt Service Payments and Distributions to Stockholders. If our apartment communities do not generate sufficient net rental income to meet rental expenses, our ability to make required payments of interest and principal on our debt securities and to pay distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected. The following factors, among others, may affect the net rental income generated by our apartment communities:

      Expenses associated with our investment in a community, such as debt service, real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in rental income from that community. If a community is mortgaged to secure payment of debt and we are unable to make the mortgage payments, we could sustain a loss as a result of foreclosure on the community or the exercise of other remedies by the mortgage holder.

     Debt Level May Be Increased. Our current debt policy does not contain any limitations on the level of debt that we may incur, although our ability to incur debt is limited by covenants in our bank and other credit agreements. We manage our debt to be in compliance with these debt covenants, but subject to compliance with these covenants, we may increase the amount of our debt at any time without a concurrent improvement in our ability to service the additional debt.

     Financing May Not Be Available and Could be Dilutive. Our ability to execute our business strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, including unsecured lines of credit and other forms of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, including common and preferred equity. Debt or equity financing may not be available in sufficient amounts, or on favorable terms or at all. If we issue additional equity securities to finance developments and acquisitions instead of incurring debt, the interests of our existing stockholders could be diluted.

     Development and Construction Risks Could Impact Our Profitability. We intend to continue to develop and construct apartment communities. Development activities may be conducted through wholly-owned affiliated companies or through joint ventures with unaffiliated parties. Our development and construction activities may be exposed to the following risks:

      Construction costs have been increasing in our existing markets, and the costs of upgrading acquired communities have, in some cases, exceeded our original estimates. We may experience similar cost increases in the future. Our inability to charge rents that will be sufficient to offset the effects of any increases in these costs may impair our profitability.

     Failure to Succeed in New Markets May Limit Our Growth.We may from time to time make acquisitions outside of our existing market areas if appropriate opportunities arise. We may be exposed to a variety of risks if we choose to enter new markets, and we may not be able to operate successfully in new markets. These risks include, among others:

     Changing Interest Rates Could Increase Interest Costs and Could Affect the Market Price of Our Securities. We currently have, and expect to incur in the future, interest-bearing debt at rates that vary with market interest rates. Therefore, if interest rates increase, our interest costs will rise to the extent our variable rate debt is not hedged effectively. In addition, an increase in market interest rates may lead our security holders to demand a higher annual yield, which could adversely affect the market price of our common and preferred stock and debt securities.

     Limited Investment Opportunities Could Adversely Affect Our Growth. We expect that other real estate investors will compete with us to acquire existing properties and to develop new properties. These competitors include insurance companies, pension and investment funds, developer partnerships, investment companies and other apartment REITs. This competition could increase prices for properties of the type that we would likely pursue, and our competitors may have greater resources than we do. As a result, we may not be able to make attractive investments on favorable terms, which could adversely affect our growth.

     Failure to Integrate Acquired Communities and New Personnel Could Create Inefficiencies. To grow successfully, we must be able to apply our experience in managing our existing portfolio of apartment communities to a larger number of properties. In addition, we must be able to integrate new management and operations personnel as our organization grows in size and complexity. Failures in either area will result in inefficiencies that could adversely affect our expected return on our investments and our overall profitability.

     Interest Rate Hedging Contracts May Be Ineffective and May Result in Material Charges. From time to time when we anticipate issuing debt securities, we may seek to limit our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates during the period prior to the pricing of the securities by entering into interest rate hedging contracts. We may do this to increase the predictability of our financing costs. Also, from time to time we may rely on interest rate hedging contracts to limit our exposure under variable rate debt to unfavorable changes in market interest rates. If the terms of new debt securities are not within the parameters of, or market interest rates fall below that which we incur under a particular interest rate hedging contract, the contract is ineffective. Furthermore, the settlement of interest rate hedging contracts has involved and may in the future involve material charges.

     Potential Liability for Environmental Contamination Could Result in Substantial Costs. Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, as a current or former owner or operator of real estate, we could be required to investigate and remediate the effects of contamination of currently or formerly owned real estate by hazardous or toxic substances, often regardless of our knowledge of or responsibility

for the contamination and solely by virtue of our current or former ownership or operation of the real estate. In addition, we could be held liable to a governmental authority or to third parties for property damage and for investigation and clean-up costs incurred in connection with the contamination. These costs could be substantial, and in many cases environmental laws create liens in favor of governmental authorities to secure their payment. The presence of such substances or a failure to properly remediate any resulting contamination could materially and adversely affect our ability to borrow against, sell or rent an affected property.

     We are Subject to Certain Tax Risks. We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code. Our qualification as a REIT requires us to satisfy numerous requirements (some on an annual and quarterly basis) established under highly technical and complex Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations, and involves the determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control. We intend that our current organization and method of operation enable us to qualify as a REIT, but we may not so qualify or we may not be able to remain so qualified in the future. In addition, U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs and other corporations and the administrative interpretations of those laws may be amended at any time, potentially with retroactive effect. Future legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT or adversely affect our stockholders.

      If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to federal income tax (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) on our taxable income at corporate rates, and would not be allowed to deduct dividends paid to our stockholders in computing our taxable income. We may also be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year in which we failed to qualify. The additional tax liability would reduce our net earnings available for investment or distribution to stockholders. In addition, we would no longer be required to make distributions to our stockholders. Even if we continue to qualify as a REIT, we will continue to be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property.

     We May Conduct a Portion of Our Business Through Taxable REIT Subsidiaries, Which Could Have Adverse Tax Consequences. We have established several taxable REIT subsidiaries. Despite our qualification as a REIT, our taxable REIT subsidiaries must pay federal income tax on their taxable income. In addition, we must comply with various tests to continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, and our income from and investments in our taxable REIT subsidiaries generally do not constitute permissible income and investments for these tests. While we will attempt to ensure that our dealings with our taxable REIT subsidiaries will not adversely affect our REIT qualification, we cannot provide assurance that we will successfully achieve that result. Furthermore, we may be subject to a 100% penalty tax, or we may jeopardize our ability to retain future gains on real property sales, or our taxable REIT subsidiaries may be denied deductions, to the extent our dealings with our taxable REIT subsidiaries are not deemed to be arm’s length in nature.

     Certain Property Transfers May Generate Prohibited Transaction Income, Resulting in a Penalty Tax on Gain Attributable to the Transaction. From time to time, we may transfer or otherwise dispose of some of our properties. Under the Internal Revenue Code, any gain resulting from transfers of properties that we hold as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business would be treated as income from a prohibited transaction subject to a 100% penalty tax. Since we acquire properties for investment purposes, we do not believe that our occasional transfers or disposals of property are prohibited transactions. However, whether property is held for investment purposes is a question of fact that depends on all the facts and circumstances surrounding the particular transaction. The Internal Revenue Service may contend that certain transfers or disposals of properties by us are prohibited transactions. If the Internal Revenue Service were to argue successfully that a transfer or disposition of property constituted a prohibited transaction, then we would be required to pay a 100% penalty tax on any gain allocable to us from the prohibited transaction and we may jeopardize our ability to retain future gains on real property sales. In addition, income from a prohibited transaction might adversely affect our ability to satisfy the income tests for qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.

     Maryland Law May Limit the Ability of a Third Party to Acquire Control of Us, Which May Not be in Our Stockholders’ Best Interests. Maryland business statutes may limit the ability of a third party to acquire control of us. As a Maryland corporation, we are subject to various Maryland laws which may have the effect of discouraging offers to acquire our company and of increasing the difficulty of consummating any such offers, even if our acquisition would be in our stockholders’ best interests. The Maryland General Corporation Law restricts mergers and other business combination transactions between us and any person who acquires beneficial ownership of shares of our stock representing 10% or more of the voting power without our board of directors’ prior approval. Any such business combination transaction could not be completed until five years after the person acquired such voting power, and generally only with the approval of stockholders representing 80% of all votes entitled to be cast and 66²/3% of the votes entitled to be cast, excluding the interested stockholder, or upon payment of a fair price. Maryland law also provides generally that a person who acquires shares of our equity stock that represent 10% (and certain higher levels) of the voting power in electing directors will have no voting rights unless approved by a vote of two-thirds of the shares eligible to vote.

     Limitations on Share Ownership and Limitations on the Ability of Our Stockholders to Effect a Change in Control of Our Company May Prevent Takeovers That are Beneficial to Our Stockholders. One of the requirements for maintenance of our qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes is that no more than 50% in value of our outstanding capital stock may be owned by five or fewer individuals, including entities specified in the Internal Revenue Code, during the last half of any taxable year. Our amended and restated articles of incorporation contain ownership and transfer restrictions relating to our stock primarily to assist us in complying with this requirement. These restrictions include a provision that generally limits a person from beneficially owning or constructively owning shares of our outstanding equity stock in excess of a 9.9% ownership interest, unless our board of directors exempts the person from such ownership limitation, provided that any such exemption shall not allow the person to exceed 13% of the value of our outstanding equity stock. These provisions may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing someone from taking control of us, even though a change of control might involve a premium price for our stockholders or might otherwise be in our stockholders’ best interests.

      Under the terms of our shareholder rights plan, our board of directors can, in effect, prevent a person or group from acquiring more than 15% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Unless our board of directors approves the person’s purchase, after that person acquires more than 15% of our outstanding common stock, all other stockholders will have the right to purchase securities from us at a price that is less than their then fair market value. Purchases by other stockholders would substantially reduce the value and influence of the shares of our common stock owned by the acquiring person. Our board of directors, however, can prevent the shareholder rights plan from operating in this manner. This gives our board of directors significant discretion to approve or disapprove a person’s efforts to acquire a large interest in us.

      The following table sets forth information about our executive officers as of March 1, 2005. The executive officers listed below serve in their respective capacities at the discretion of the board of directors.

      Set forth below is certain biographical information about each of our executive officers.

      Mr. Toomey joined us as Chief Executive Officer, President and a director in February 2001. Prior to joining us, Mr. Toomey was with Apartment Investment and Management Company, or AIMCO, a publicly traded real estate investment trust, where he served as Chief Operating Officer for two years and Chief Financial Officer for four years. During his tenure at AIMCO, Mr. Toomey was instrumental in the growth of AIMCO from 34,000 apartment units to 360,000 units. He has also served as a Senior Vice President at Lincoln Property Company, a national real estate development, property management and real estate consulting company, from 1990 to 1995. He currently serves as a member of the board of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts and the National MultiHousing Council and he serves as Co-Chairman of the Homeland Security Task Force of the Real Estate Roundtable.

      Mr. Wallis joined us in March 2001 as Senior Executive Vice President responsible for legal, acquisitions, dispositions, and development. Prior to joining us, Mr. Wallis was the President of Golden Living Communities, a company he established in 1995, involved in the development of assisted and independent living communities. Prior to founding Golden Living, Mr. Wallis was Executive Vice President of Finance and Administration of Lincoln Property Company.

      Mr. Genry joined us in March 2001 as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Genry had been Chief Financial Officer of Centex Construction Group, a $1 billion subsidiary of the New York Stock Exchange listed Centex Corporation. As Chief Financial Officer, he provided strategic leadership in the development and management of all financial and information systems, the redesign and oversight of internal audit functions, and the identification and evaluation of acquisition opportunities. Prior to joining Centex, he was with Arthur Andersen & Co. in Dallas.

      Mr. Giannotti joined us as Director of Development and Construction in September 1985. He was elected Assistant Vice President in 1988, Vice President in 1989, and Senior Vice President in 1996. In 1998, Mr. Giannotti was elected Director of Development-East, and was promoted to Executive Vice President — Asset Quality in 2003.

      Ms. Carlin joined us in March 2001 as a Senior Vice President responsible for operational efficiencies and revenue enhancement and was promoted to Senior Vice President, Director of Property Operations in 2004. Ms. Carlin was previously Senior Vice President of Operations for opsXchange, Inc., a real estate procurement technology developer. Previously, she served as Senior Vice President of Ancillary Services at AIMCO and as a member of Arthur Andersen’s Real Estate Services Group.

      Mr. Boeckel joined us in July 2001 as Vice President of Dispositions and Acquisitions and was promoted to Senior Vice President in February 2002. Prior to joining United Dominion, Mr. Boeckel was the Senior Vice President of Asset Management at AIMCO. Before becoming the Senior Vice President of Asset Management, Mr. Boeckel was a Regional Vice President with operating responsibility for a portfolio of 12,000 apartment homes. Prior to joining AIMCO, Mr. Boeckel had over ten years of real estate experience with various firms including a regional investment banking firm, a regional financial planning firm, and a national apartment syndication firm.

      Mr. Gregory joined us in 1997 as Vice President and Chief Information Officer and was promoted to Senior Vice President in 1999. From 1976 to 1997, Mr. Gregory was employed by Crestar Bank as a New Technology Analyst.

      Mr. Kelly joined us in 2003 as Senior Vice President — Acquisitions. Prior to joining United Dominion, Mr. Kelly was Senior Vice President in charge of national apartment acquisitions for Urdang & Associates, a Philadelphia based pension fund advisor. During his tenure he purchased over 4,100 units. Prior to Urdang, Mr. Kelly was a Principal with Lend Lease focusing on national apartment acquisitions. From 1993 to 1998, Mr. Kelly was Vice President and part owner of Apartment Realty Advisors, an apartment brokerage company.

      Mr. Neuheardt joined us in June 2001 as Vice President, Finance and was promoted to Senior Vice President, Finance in February 2003, and Treasurer in 2004. Prior to joining us, Mr. Neuheardt was Controller and Treasurer of Sunrise Housing, Ltd., a privately owned apartment development company that manufactures modular units for the construction of affordable apartment communities. Previously, Mr. Neuheardt served as controller of several private energy companies, including Continental Emsco Company. Prior to that, Mr. Neuheardt was a Senior Manager in KPMG, LLP’s audit practice.

      Mr. Shanaberger joined us in 1994 as an Accounting Manager and was promoted to Assistant Vice President and Assistant Treasurer in 1997. In 2000, Mr. Shanaberger was promoted to Vice President Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer and was promoted to Senior Vice President in 2002. Prior to joining United Dominion, Mr. Shanaberger was employed by Ernst & Young LLP.

      Mr. Spangler joined us as Assistant Vice President, Operational Planning and Asset Management in August 1998 and was promoted to Vice President, Director of Operational Planning and Asset Management that same year. Mr. Spangler was promoted to Senior Vice President — Business Development in February 2003, and Chief Risk Officer in September 2003. Prior to joining United Dominion, Mr. Spangler was an Asset Manager for Summit Enterprises, Inc. of Virginia, a private investment management firm for nine years.

      Mr. Vela joined us as Senior Vice President, Multicultural Strategy in February 2005. Prior to joining us, Mr. Vela served as executive director of the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals and as president of Diverse Directions LLC, a consulting firm that he established in 2000. At Diverse Directions, he advised clients on marketing strategies, government issues and media relations targeting the Hispanic community. From 2002 to 2004, Mr. Vela was of counsel at the law firm of Hebson, Liddon & Slate, P.C. in Birmingham, Alabama.

      Mr. Wood joined us as Vice President of Construction in connection with the merger of SouthWest in 1996. He was promoted to Senior Vice President and Director of Development — West in 2000.

      Ms. Norwood joined us in 2001 as Vice President — Legal Administration and Secretary. Prior to joining us, Ms. Norwood was employed by Centex Corporation for 15 years, most recently as its Legal Administrator. Centex is a New York Stock Exchange listed company that operates in the home building,

financial services, construction products, construction services, and investment real estate business segments.

      We file electronically with the Securities and Exchange Commission our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K, pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. You may obtain a free copy of our annual reports on Form  10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports on the day of filing with the SEC on our website at www.udrt.com, or by sending an e-mail message to ir@udrt.com.

      We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. We cannot determine the ultimate liability with respect to such legal proceedings and claims at this time. We believe that such liability, to the extent not provided for through insurance or otherwise, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flow.

      No matters were submitted to a vote of our security holders during the fourth quarter of the year ended December 31, 2004.

      Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “UDR.” The following tables set forth the quarterly high and low sale prices per common share reported on the NYSE for each quarter of the last two years. Distribution information for common stock reflects distributions declared per share for each calendar quarter and paid at the end of the following month.

      On March 1, 2005, the closing sale price of our common stock was $22.35 per share on the NYSE and there were 6,779 holders of record of the 137,023,872 outstanding shares of our common stock.

      We have determined that, for federal income tax purposes, approximately 66% of the distributions for each of the four quarters of 2004 represented ordinary income, 17% represented long-term capital gain, 7% represented unrecaptured section 1250 gain, and 10% represented return of capital to our stockholders.

      We pay regular quarterly distributions to holders of shares of our common stock. Future distributions will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our actual funds from operations, financial condition and capital requirements, the annual distribution requirements under the REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, and other factors. The annual distribution payment for calendar year 2004 necessary for us to maintain our status as a REIT was approximately $0.69 per share. We declared total distributions of $1.17 per share of common stock for 2004.

      A covenant in our $500 million unsecured revolving credit facility prohibits the payment of dividends and distributions on our common stock in excess of 95% of our “Funds From Operations,” as defined in the credit facility, during any period of four consecutive fiscal quarters. Despite this covenant but except as provided in the following sentence, we may pay dividends required to maintain our qualification as a REIT

under the Internal Revenue Code. However, if certain defaults or events of default exist under such facility, this covenant prohibits the payment of dividends and distributions in all circumstances.

      The Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock has no stated par value and a liquidation preference of $25 per share. The Series B has no voting rights except as required by law. The Series B has no stated maturity and is not subject to any sinking fund or mandatory redemption and is not convertible into any of our other securities. The Series B is not redeemable prior to May 29, 2007. On or after this date, the Series B may be redeemed for cash at our option, in whole or in part, at a redemption price of $25 per share plus accrued and unpaid dividends. The redemption price is payable solely out of the sale proceeds of our other capital stock. All dividends due and payable on the Series B have been accrued or paid as of the end of each fiscal year.

      Distributions declared on the Series B in 2004 were $2.15 per share or $0.5375 per quarter. The Series B is listed on the NYSE under the symbol “UDRpb.” At December 31, 2004, a total of 5,416,009 shares of the Series B were outstanding.

      All of the remaining outstanding shares of our Series D Cumulative Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock have been converted by the holder into shares of our common stock. The Series D had no stated maturity, no stated par value, no voting rights except as required by law, and a liquidation preference of $25 per share. The Series D was convertible at any time into 1.5385 shares of common stock, subject to certain adjustments, at the option of the holder of the Series D. We had the option to redeem at any time all or part of the Series D at a price per share of $25, payable in cash, plus all accrued and unpaid dividends, provided that the current market price of our common stock was at least equal to the conversion price, initially set at $16.25 per share.

      In 2004, we exercised our right to redeem the remaining 2 million shares of our Series D that were outstanding. Upon receipt of our redemption notice, the shares to be redeemed were converted by the holder into 3,076,769 shares of common stock at a price of $16.25 per share. In 2003, we exercised our right to redeem 6 million shares of our Series D. Upon receipt of our redemption notice, the 6 million shares to be redeemed were converted by the holder into 9,230,923 shares of common stock at a price of $16.25 per share. Because the shares of common stock that were issued upon conversion of the Series D were issued in transactions not involving a public offering, the transactions are exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in accordance with Section 4(2) of the Securities Act.

      Distributions declared on the Series D in 2004 were $2.09 per share or $0.5223 per quarter. The Series D was not listed on any exchange. At December 31, 2004, there were no outstanding shares of the Series D.

      The Series E Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock has no stated par value and a liquidation preference of $16.61 per share. Subject to certain adjustments and conditions, each share of the Series E is convertible at any time and from time to time at the holder’s option into one share of our common stock. The holders of the Series E are entitled to vote on an as-converted basis as a single class in combination with the holders of common stock at any meeting of our stockholders for the election of directors or for any other purpose on which the holders of common stock are entitled to vote. The Series E has no stated maturity and is not subject to any sinking fund or any mandatory redemption.

      In 2004, Series E holders converted a total of 621,405 shares of Series E into 621,405 shares of our common stock. Because the shares of common stock that were issued upon conversion of the Series E were issued in transactions not involving a public offering, the transactions are exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in accordance with Section 4(2) of the Securities Act.

      Distributions declared on the Series E in 2004 were $1.33 per share or $0.3322 per quarter. The Series E is not listed on any exchange. At December 31, 2004 a total of 2,803,812 shares of the Series E were outstanding.

      We have a Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan under which holders of our common stock and our Series B preferred stock may elect to automatically reinvest their distributions and make additional cash payments to acquire additional shares of our common stock. Stockholders who do not participate in the plan continue to receive dividends as declared. As of March 1, 2005, there were 3,749 participants in the plan.

      From time to time we issue shares of our common stock in exchange for operating partnership units, or OP Units, tendered to our operating partnerships, United Dominion Realty, L.P. and Heritage Communities L.P., for redemption in accordance with the provisions of their respective partnership agreements. At December 31, 2004, there were 10,024,380 OP Units (of which 1,791,329 and 0 are owned by the holders of the Series A OPPS and the Series B OPPS, respectively (see Notes 1 and 9 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements)) and 355,255 OP Units in United Dominion Realty, L.P. and Heritage Communities L.P., respectively, that were owned by limited partners. The holder of the OP Units has the right to require United Dominion Realty, L.P. to redeem all or a portion of the OP Units held by the holder in exchange for a cash payment based on the market value of our common stock at the time of redemption. However, United Dominion Realty, L.P.’s obligation to pay the cash amount is subject to the prior right of the company to acquire such OP Units in exchange for either the cash amount or shares of our common stock. Heritage Communities L.P. OP Units are convertible into common stock in lieu of cash, at our option, once the holder elects to convert, at an exchange ratio of 1.575 shares for each OP Unit. During 2004, we issued a total of 170,209 shares of common stock in exchange for OP Units.

      On June 3, 1999, our board of directors authorized the repurchase in open market transactions, in block transactions, or otherwise, of up to 5.5 million shares of common stock. On December 5, 2000, our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to an additional 5.5 million shares of common stock in open market transactions, in block purchases or otherwise. As of December 31, 2004, we have repurchased a total of 8,749,763 shares of common stock under this program. As disclosed in the table below, we did not purchase any shares of our common stock during the quarter ended December 31, 2004.

      This Report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such forward-looking statements include, without limitation, statements concerning property acquisitions and dispositions, development activity and capital expenditures, capital raising activities, rent growth, occupancy, and rental expense growth. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates,” and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Such statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of United Dominion Realty Trust, Inc. to be materially different from the results of operations or plans expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among other things, unanticipated adverse business developments affecting us, or our properties, adverse changes in the real estate markets and general and local economies and business conditions. Although we believe that the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements contained herein are reasonable, any of the assumptions could be inaccurate, and therefore such statements included in this Report may not prove to be accurate. In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that the results or conditions described in such statements or our objectives and plans will be achieved.

      We are a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that owns, acquires, renovates, develops, and manages middle-market apartment communities nationwide. We were formed in 1972 as a Virginia corporation. In June 2003, we changed our state of incorporation from Virginia to Maryland. Our subsidiaries include two operating partnerships, Heritage Communities L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and United Dominion Realty, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership. Unless the context otherwise requires, all references in this Report to “we,” “us,” “our,” “the company,” or “United Dominion” refer collectively to United Dominion Realty Trust, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

      At December 31, 2004, our portfolio included 273 communities with 78,855 apartment homes nationwide. The following table summarizes our market information by major geographic markets

(includes real estate held for disposition, real estate under development, and land, but excludes commercial properties):

      Liquidity is the ability to meet present and future financial obligations either through operating cash flows, the sale or maturity of existing assets, or by the acquisition of additional funds through capital management. Both the coordination of asset and liability maturities and effective capital management are important to the maintenance of liquidity. Our primary source of liquidity is our cash flow from operations as determined by rental rates, occupancy levels, and operating expenses related to our portfolio of apartment homes. We routinely use our unsecured bank credit facility to temporarily fund certain investing and financing activities prior to arranging for longer-term financing. During the past several years, proceeds from the sale of real estate have been used for both investing and financing activities.

      We expect to meet our short-term liquidity requirements generally through net cash provided by operations and borrowings under credit arrangements. We expect to meet certain long-term liquidity requirements such as scheduled debt maturities, the repayment of financing on development activities, and potential property acquisitions, through long-term secured and unsecured borrowings, the disposition of properties, and the issuance of additional debt or equity securities. We believe that our net cash provided by operations will continue to be adequate to meet both operating requirements and the payment of dividends by the company in accordance with REIT requirements in both the short- and long-term. Likewise, the budgeted expenditures for improvements and renovations of certain properties are expected to be funded from property operations.

      We have a shelf registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission which provides for the issuance of up to an aggregate of $1.5 billion in common shares, preferred shares, and debt securities to facilitate future financing activities in the public capital markets. This shelf registration statement replaces our previous $1.0 billion shelf registration statement and includes $331.3 million of unissued securities carried forward from the previous $1.0 billion shelf registration statement. Throughout 2004, we completed various financing activities under our $1.5 billion shelf registration statement. These activities are summarized in the section titled “Financing Activities” that follows. As of December 31, 2004, approximately $1.1 billion of equity and debt securities remained available for use under the shelf registration statement. Access to capital markets is dependent on market conditions at the time of issuance.

      In July 2004, Moody’s Investors Service upgraded our rating on our senior unsecured debt to Baa2 from Baa3 and our preferred stock to Baa3 from Ba1 with a stable outlook.

      In October 2004, we filed a prospectus supplement under the Securities Act of 1933 relating to the offering of up to 5 million shares of our common stock that we may issue and sell through an agent from time to time in “at the market offerings,” as defined in Rule 415 of the Securities Act of 1933. Any sales of these shares will be made under our $1.5 billion shelf registration statement pursuant to a sales agreement that we entered into with the agent in July 2003. The sales price of the common stock that may be sold under the sales agreement will be no lower than the minimum price designated by us prior to the sale. As of December 31, 2004, we have sold a total of 472,000 shares of common stock pursuant to the sales agreement at a weighted average sales price of $20.36, for net proceeds to us of approximately $9.4 million.

      Future development expenditures are expected to be funded primarily through joint ventures, with proceeds from the sale of property, with construction loans and, to a lesser extent, with cash flows provided by operating activities. Acquisition activity in strategic markets is expected to be largely financed through the issuance of equity and debt securities, the issuance of operating partnership units, the assumption or placement of secured and/or unsecured debt, and by the reinvestment of proceeds from the sale of properties.

      During 2005, we have approximately $27.9 million of secured debt and $71.1 million of unsecured debt maturing and we anticipate repaying that debt with proceeds from borrowings under our secured or unsecured credit facilities, or the issuance of new unsecured debt securities or equity.

      Our critical accounting policies are those having the most impact on the reporting of our financial condition and results and those requiring significant judgments and estimates. These policies include those related to (1) capital expenditures, (2) impairment of long-lived assets, and (3) real estate investment properties. With respect to these critical accounting policies, we believe that the application of judgments and assessments is consistently applied and produces financial information that fairly depicts the results of operations for all periods presented.

      In conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, we capitalize those expenditures related to acquiring new assets, materially enhancing the value of an existing asset, or substantially extending the useful life of an existing asset. Expenditures necessary to maintain an existing property in ordinary operating condition are expensed as incurred.

      During 2004, $82.4 million or $1,075 per home was spent on capital expenditures for all of our communities, excluding development. These capital improvements included turnover related expenditures for floor coverings and appliances, other recurring capital expenditures such as HVAC equipment, roofs, siding, parking lots, and other non-revenue enhancing capital expenditures, which aggregated $36.3 million or $473 per home. In addition, revenue enhancing capital expenditures, kitchen and bath upgrades, and other extensive interior upgrades totaled $45.9 million or $599 per home, and major renovations totaled $0.2 million or $3 per home for the year ended December 31, 2004.

      The following table outlines capital expenditures and repair and maintenance costs for all of our communities, excluding real estate under development for the periods presented:

      Total capital improvements increased $29.2 million or $361 per home in 2004 compared to 2003. We will continue to selectively add revenue enhancing improvements which we believe will provide a return on investment substantially in excess of our cost of capital. Recurring capital expenditures during 2005 are currently expected to be approximately $510 per home.

      We record impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by the future operation and disposition of those assets are less than the net book value of those assets. Our cash flow estimates are based upon historical results adjusted to reflect our best estimate of future market

and operating conditions and our estimated holding periods. The net book value of impaired assets is reduced to fair market value. Our estimates of fair market value represent our best estimate based upon industry trends and reference to market rates and transactions.

      We purchase real estate investment properties from time to time and allocate the purchase price to various components, such as land, buildings, and intangibles related to in-place leases in accordance with FASB Statement No. 141, “Business Combinations.” The purchase price is allocated based on the relative fair value of each component. The fair value of buildings is determined as if the buildings were vacant upon acquisition and subsequently leased at market rental rates. As such, the determination of fair value considers the present value of all cash flows expected to be generated from the property including an initial lease up period. We determine the fair value of in-place leases by assessing the net effective rent and remaining term of the lease relative to market terms for similar leases at acquisition. In addition, we consider the cost of acquiring similar leases, the foregone rents associated with the lease-up period, and the carrying costs associated with the lease-up period. The fair value of in-place leases is recorded and amortized as amortization expense over the remaining contractual lease period.

      The following discussion explains the changes in net cash provided by operating and financing activities and net cash used in investing activities that are presented in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

      For the year ended December 31, 2004, our net cash flow provided by operating activities was $251.7 million compared to $234.9 million for 2003. During 2004, the increase in cash flow from operating activities resulted primarily from an increase in property operating income due to the overall increase in our apartment community portfolio (see discussion under “Apartment Community Operations”).

      For the year ended December 31, 2004, net cash used in investing activities was $596.0 million compared to $304.2 million for 2003. Changes in the level of investing activities from period to period reflects our strategy as it relates to our acquisition, capital expenditure, development, and disposition programs, as well as the impact of the capital market environment on these activities, all of which are discussed in further detail below.

      For the year ended December 31, 2004, we acquired 28 apartment communities with 8,060 apartment homes for an aggregate consideration of $1.0 billion and one parcel of land for $16.3 million. In 2003, we acquired 3,514 apartment homes in 11 communities for an aggregate consideration of $347.7 million and one parcel of land for $3.1 million. In addition, we purchased the remaining 47% joint venture partners’ ownership interest in nine communities with 1,706 apartment homes in Salinas and Pacific Grove, California, for $76.0 million in June 2003.

      Our long-term strategic plan is to achieve greater operating efficiencies by investing in fewer, more concentrated markets. As a result, we have been expanding our interests in the fast growing Southern California, Florida, and Metropolitan DC markets over the past two years. During 2005, we plan to continue to channel new investments into those markets we believe will provide the best investment returns. Markets will be targeted based upon defined criteria including past performance, expected job growth, current and anticipated housing supply and demand, and the ability to attract and support household formation.

      Development activity is focused in core markets in which we have strong operations in place. For the year ended December 31, 2004, we invested approximately $19.1 million in development projects, an increase of $5.5 million from our 2003 level of $13.6 million.

      The following projects were under development as of December 31, 2004: