County hears plan to preserve 87 affordable units at Ninth Street; decision deferred

Los Alamos County staff and a private development partner introduced a plan on March 11 to preserve 87 small rental units on Ninth and Eleventh streets under a 20‑year deed restriction intended to keep rents affordable for households at or below 45% of the area median income (AMI).

Housing Special Projects Manager Dan Osborne summarized the proposal for the Aspen Studio Apartments and Thunderbird Apartments, saying the two property groups total 87 studio units built in the 1940s and that the county’s affordable housing strategy favors preserving existing units because acquisition and deed‑restriction is faster and cheaper than building new apartments.

Osborne said the developer would contribute nearly $5 million in private capital while the county would provide two affordable housing grants: $3,480,000 to buy down long‑term rents (deed restriction) and $520,000 for capital improvements and rehabilitation. Total project uses were described as roughly $8.44 million, with acquisition at about $6.13 million and $2.3 million in rehabilitation costs. Osborne presented a rent schedule: units would start at about $900 a month in year one and increase incrementally through year seven; from years eight through 20, qualifying tenants would pay 30% of qualifying income capped to the 45% AMI formula outlined in the staff presentation. Existing tenants would be limited to a 7% year‑to‑year increase when they transition to the long‑term rent schedule, and any tenant who exceeded 80% AMI for two consecutive years would not have their lease renewed at the end of that period.

Russell Bratt, managing partner of Ninth Street Apartments LLC, described planned capital work including ADA upgrades to ground‑floor units, roof and parking repairs, and phased heating and cooling system upgrades. He said the mini‑split electric heating/cooling conversion would remove most building gas usage but some gas water heaters would remain.

Council members asked about likely tenant savings, the mechanical and electrical upgrades, and how the deed restriction and income verification would be enforced. Osborne said the county’s participation equates to about $166 per unit per month spread across the 20‑year restriction (expressed as a program‑level amortized figure), and that capital‑improvement reimbursements would be made after work is completed and inspected. Public comment included a brief statement of support from David Hampton, who said the proposal would “chip away” at local housing shortages.

The council did not vote on the proposal on March 11. Staff said the item will return to the council agenda for formal action on March 25 with a draft land development agreement, deed restriction language and implementation schedule.

Osborne and the developer said tenants would not be involuntarily displaced as part of the rehabilitation, that rehabilitation milestones must be completed within three years to receive the capital‑improvement reimbursement, and that the deed restriction would require annual reporting and allow county inspections during the 20‑year term.

The presentation cited several local housing demand metrics: long waiting lists for subsidized properties and housing choice vouchers, and local market rents for studio and one‑bedroom units ranging broadly but often above what many local workers can afford. County staff described this preservation project as targeted to households most likely to be priced out of currently available market or new units.

The council’s next review will include the draft legal documents and specific performance milestones for the rehabilitation and deed restriction.