Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies As of December 31, 2014, the Company had six non-cancelable ground leases for certain apartment communities and buildings that expire between 2027 and 2082. Ground lease payments are typically the greater of a stated minimum or a percentage of gross rents generated by these apartment communities. Total minimum lease commitments, under ground leases and operating leases, are approximately $2.5 million per year for the next five years. To the extent that an environmental matter arises or is identified in the future that has other than a remote risk of having a material impact on the financial statements, the Company will disclose the estimated range of possible outcomes, and, if an outcome is probable, accrue an appropriate liability for remediation and other potential liability. The Company will consider whether such occurrence results in an impairment of value on the affected property and, if so, impairment will be recognized. The Company has no way of determining at this time the magnitude of any potential liability to which it may be subject arising out of unknown environmental conditions or violations with respect to the communities formerly owned by the Company. No assurance can be given that existing environmental studies with respect to any of the communities reveal all environmental liabilities, that any prior owner or operator of a property did not create any material environmental condition not known to the Company, or that a material environmental condition does not otherwise exist as to any one or more of the communities. The Company has limited insurance coverage for some of the types of environmental liabilities described above. The Company has entered into transactions that may require the Company to pay the tax liabilities of the partners in the Operating Partnership or in the DownREIT entities. These transactions are within the Company’s control. Although the Company plans to hold the contributed assets or defer recognition of gain on their sale pursuant to like-kind exchange rules under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, the Company can provide no assurance that it will be able to do so and if such tax liabilities were incurred they may to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position. There have been an increasing number of lawsuits against owners and managers of apartment communities alleging personal injury and property damage caused by the presence of mold in residential real estate. Some of these lawsuits have resulted in substantial monetary judgments or settlements. The Company has been sued for mold related matters and has settled some, but not all, of such matters. Insurance carriers have reacted to mold related liability awards by excluding mold related claims from standard policies and pricing mold endorsements at prohibitively high rates. The Company has, however, purchased pollution liability insurance, which includes some coverage for mold. The Company has adopted policies to promptly address and resolve reports of mold when it is detected, and to minimize any impact mold might have on residents of the property. The Company believes its mold policies and proactive response to address any known existence, reduces its risk of loss from these cases. There can be no assurances that the Company has identified and responded to all mold occurrences, but the company promptly addresses all known reports of mold. Liabilities resulting from such mold related matters are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As of December 31, 2014, potential liabilities for mold and other environmental liabilities are not quantifiable and an estimate of possible loss cannot be made. The Company carries comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance for each of the communities. There are, however, certain types of extraordinary losses, such as, for example, losses from terrorism or earthquakes, for which the Company does not have insurance coverage. Substantially all of the communities are located in areas that are subject to earthquake activity. The Company has established a wholly owned insurance subsidiary, Pacific Western Insurance LLC (“PWI”). Through PWI, the Company is self-insured as it relates to earthquake related losses. Additionally, since January 2008, PWI has provided property and casualty insurance coverage for the first $5.0 million of the Company’s property level insurance claims per incident. As of December 31, 2014, PWI has cash and marketable securities of approximately $57.6 million. These assets are consolidated in the Company’s financial statements. Beginning in 2013, the Company has obtained limited third party seismic insurance on selected assets in which it holds an ownership interest in. The Company provided a payment guarantee to the counterparties in relation to the total return swaps entered into by the joint venture responsible for the development of The Huxley and The Dylan communities. Further the Company has guaranteed completion of development and made certain debt service guarantees for The Huxley and The Dylan. The outstanding balance for the loans was $114.4 million as of December 31, 2014. The payment guarantee is for the payment of the amounts due to the counterparty related total return swaps which are scheduled to mature in September and December 2016. The maximum exposure of the guarantee as of December 31, 2014 was $114.4 million based on the aggregate outstanding debt amount. Three putative class action and shareholder derivative actions were filed on behalf of alleged BRE stockholders and/or BRE itself in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, under the following captions: Sutton v. BRE Properties, Inc., et al., No. 24-C-13-8425, filed December 23, 2013; Applegate v. BRE Properties, Inc., et al., No. 24-C-14-2, filed December 30, 2013; and Lee v. BRE Properties, Inc., et al., No. 24-C-14-46, filed January 3, 2014. On March 18, 2014, the parties reached an agreement in principle that provided for the settlement of action on the terms and conditions set forth in a memorandum of understanding. On October 28, 2014, the Court entered an Order and Final Judgment Settlement granting final approval of the Settlement. The Order and Final Judgment Settlement included a judgment of the dismissal of all claims against BRE, Essex and the other defendants with prejudice as well as a full release of any and all claims related to the Merger. The $500,000 to be paid by BRE or its successor(s) has been paid in full by Essex. On December 19, 2014, a punitive class action was filed against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Foster v. Essex Property Trust, Inc. alleging that the Company failed to properly secure the personally-identifying information of its residents. The lawsuit seeks the recovery of unspecified damages and certain injunctive relief. This lawsuit was filed in connection with a cyber-intrusion that the Company discovered in the third quarter of 2014. At this point, the Company is unable to predict the developments in, outcome of, and/or economic and/or other consequences of this litigation or predict the developments in, outcome of, and/or other consequences arising out of any potential future litigation or government inquiries related to this matter. The Company is subject to various other legal and/or regulatory proceedings arising in the course of its business operations. We believe that, with respect to such matters that we are currently a party to, the ultimate disposition of any such matter will not result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Commitments and Contingencies

As of December 31, 2014, the Company had six non-cancelable ground leases for certain apartment communities and buildings that expire between 2027 and 2082. Ground lease payments are typically the greater of a stated minimum or a percentage of gross rents generated by these apartment communities. Total minimum lease commitments, under ground leases and operating leases, are approximately $2.5 million per year for the next five years.

To the extent that an environmental matter arises or is identified in the future that has other than a remote risk of having a material impact on the financial statements, the Company will disclose the estimated range of possible outcomes, and, if an outcome is probable, accrue an appropriate liability for remediation and other potential liability. The Company will consider whether such occurrence results in an impairment of value on the affected property and, if so, impairment will be recognized.

The Company has no way of determining at this time the magnitude of any potential liability to which it may be subject arising out of unknown environmental conditions or violations with respect to the communities formerly owned by the Company. No assurance can be given that existing environmental studies with respect to any of the communities reveal all environmental liabilities, that any prior owner or operator of a property did not create any material environmental condition not known to the Company, or that a material environmental condition does not otherwise exist as to any one or more of the communities. The Company has limited insurance coverage for some of the types of environmental liabilities described above.

The Company has entered into transactions that may require the Company to pay the tax liabilities of the partners in the Operating Partnership or in the DownREIT entities. These transactions are within the Company’s control. Although the Company plans to hold the contributed assets or defer recognition of gain on their sale pursuant to like-kind exchange rules under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, the Company can provide no assurance that it will be able to do so and if such tax liabilities were incurred they may to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position.

There have been an increasing number of lawsuits against owners and managers of apartment communities alleging personal injury and property damage caused by the presence of mold in residential real estate. Some of these lawsuits have resulted in substantial monetary judgments or settlements. The Company has been sued for mold related matters and has settled some, but not all, of such matters. Insurance carriers have reacted to mold related liability awards by excluding mold related claims from standard policies and pricing mold endorsements at prohibitively high rates. The Company has, however, purchased pollution liability insurance, which includes some coverage for mold. The Company has adopted policies to promptly address and resolve reports of mold when it is detected, and to minimize any impact mold might have on residents of the property. The Company believes its mold policies and proactive response to address any known existence, reduces its risk of loss from these cases. There can be no assurances that the Company has identified and responded to all mold occurrences, but the company promptly addresses all known reports of mold. Liabilities resulting from such mold related matters are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As of December 31, 2014, potential liabilities for mold and other environmental liabilities are not quantifiable and an estimate of possible loss cannot be made.

The Company carries comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance for each of the communities. There are, however, certain types of extraordinary losses, such as, for example, losses from terrorism or earthquakes, for which the Company does not have insurance coverage. Substantially all of the communities are located in areas that are subject to earthquake activity. The Company has established a wholly owned insurance subsidiary, Pacific Western Insurance LLC (“PWI”). Through PWI, the Company is self-insured as it relates to earthquake related losses. Additionally, since January 2008, PWI has provided property and casualty insurance coverage for the first $5.0 million of the Company’s property level insurance claims per incident. As of December 31, 2014, PWI has cash and marketable securities of approximately $57.6 million. These assets are consolidated in the Company’s financial statements. Beginning in 2013, the Company has obtained limited third party seismic insurance on selected assets in which it holds an ownership interest in.

The Company provided a payment guarantee to the counterparties in relation to the total return swaps entered into by the joint venture responsible for the development of The Huxley and The Dylan communities. Further the Company has guaranteed completion of development and made certain debt service guarantees for The Huxley and The Dylan. The outstanding balance for the loans was $114.4 million as of December 31, 2014. The payment guarantee is for the payment of the amounts due to the counterparty related total return swaps which are scheduled to mature in September and December 2016. The maximum exposure of the guarantee as of December 31, 2014 was $114.4 million based on the aggregate outstanding debt amount.

Three putative class action and shareholder derivative actions were filed on behalf of alleged BRE stockholders and/or BRE itself in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, under the following captions: Sutton v. BRE Properties, Inc., et al., No. 24-C-13-8425, filed December 23, 2013; Applegate v. BRE Properties, Inc., et al., No. 24-C-14-2, filed December 30, 2013; and Lee v. BRE Properties, Inc., et al., No. 24-C-14-46, filed January 3, 2014. On March 18, 2014, the parties reached an agreement in principle that provided for the settlement of action on the terms and conditions set forth in a memorandum of understanding. On October 28, 2014, the Court entered an Order and Final Judgment Settlement granting final approval of the Settlement. The Order and Final Judgment Settlement included a judgment of the dismissal of all claims against BRE, Essex and the other defendants with prejudice as well as a full release of any and all claims related to the Merger. The $500,000 to be paid by BRE or its successor(s) has been paid in full by Essex.

On December 19, 2014, a punitive class action was filed against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Foster v. Essex Property Trust, Inc. alleging that the Company failed to properly secure the personally-identifying information of its residents. The lawsuit seeks the recovery of unspecified damages and certain injunctive relief. This lawsuit was filed in connection with a cyber-intrusion that the Company discovered in the third quarter of 2014. At this point, the Company is unable to predict the developments in, outcome of, and/or economic and/or other consequences of this litigation or predict the developments in, outcome of, and/or other consequences arising out of any potential future litigation or government inquiries related to this matter.

The Company is subject to various other legal and/or regulatory proceedings arising in the course of its business operations. We believe that, with respect to such matters that we are currently a party to, the ultimate disposition of any such matter will not result in a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.