Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan

City of Buckeye — Regular Council Meeting (2025-12-16)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 172838 characters

Buckeye Housing
Needs Assessment
and Action Plan

Photo Credit: Tony Webster, Wikimedia Commons

Prepared for:
Prepared by:
2020 North Central Avenue, Suite 1140
Phoenix, AZ 85004
945 N. 215th Avenue, Suite 137
Buckeye, AZ 85326

This page leR intenGonally blank.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
1
Part I: Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment ....................................................... 4
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 4
Key Demographic and Housing Findings .................................................................. 4
Core Challenges and Direction ................................................................................ 5
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................6
Methodology .......................................................................................................... 6
Community Proﬁle ........................................................................................................................ 7
Population ............................................................................................................. 7
Educational Attainment .......................................................................................... 8
Age ....................................................................................................................... 9
Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................... 11
Disability Status ................................................................................................... 12
Household Size .................................................................................................... 14
Household Income ............................................................................................... 15
Poverty ................................................................................................................ 18
Unemployment .................................................................................................... 19
Housing Market Conditions ..................................................................................................... 20
Year of Construction ............................................................................................. 20
Housing Stock Characteristics .............................................................................. 21
Ownership Rate ................................................................................................... 22
Condition of Housing Stock .................................................................................. 23
Overcrowding ...................................................................................................... 25
Vacancies ............................................................................................................ 26
Home Value ......................................................................................................... 27

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
2
Monthly Owner Costs ........................................................................................... 28
Rental Market ...................................................................................................... 31
Housing Affordability Gap Analysis ........................................................................ 34
Next Steps: Addressing Needs in Housing Types, Availability, and Affordability ...... 37
The Need for Increased Housing Options ............................................................... 37
The Need to Match Supply with Demand ................................................................ 37
The Need to Preserve and Expand Affordable Housing ............................................ 38
Part II: Buckeye Housing Action Plan .................................................................. 41
Background ................................................................................................................................... 41
Community Engagement ........................................................................................................... 41
Resident Survey ................................................................................................... 41
Community Workshop .......................................................................................... 44
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 48
Catalytic Development Areas .................................................................................................. 49
Development Incentives ........................................................................................................... 51
Enforcement and Compliance .............................................................................. 52
Development Code Updates .................................................................................................... 54
Accessory Dwelling Units ......................................................................................................... 56
Affordable Housing .................................................................................................................... 58
Workforce Housing .................................................................................................................... 58
Senior Housing ............................................................................................................................ 61
Community Services Department .......................................................................................... 62
Collaborating with Homeowners Associations .................................................................. 64
State and Federal Funding Opportunities ........................................................................... 65
Implementation Plan ................................................................................................................. 73
Periodic Updates.................................................................................................. 73
Appendix A: Resident Survey Results ................................................................. 78
Appendix B: Suitability Analysis .......................................................................... 79
Appendix C: Fast-track Permitting & Review Framework .............................. 82

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
3
Glossary ...................................................................................................................... 85
Tables
Table 1
Buckeye Population Growth, 2010 to 2025............................................................. 7
Table 2
Racial and Ethnic Composition of Buckeye’s Population, 2010 and 2020 .... 11
Table 3
Buckeye Disability Proﬁle by Disability Type, 2022 ........................................... 13
Table 4
Buckeye Disability Proﬁle by Age Group, 2022 .................................................... 13
Table 5
Households by Size, 2022 ......................................................................................... 14
Table 6
Households Income Distribution for Buckeye, 2022 ......................................... 15
Table 7
Age of Housing Stock, 2022 ..................................................................................... 20
Table 8
Buckeye’s Housing Stock by Bedroom Count, 2017 and 2022 ......................... 21
Table 9
Asking Rent Distribution for Buckeye’s Available Units, 2022 ........................ 32
Table 10
Home Value Distribution for Buckeye Owner-Occupied Homes, 2022 ......... 34
Table 11
Housing Gap Analysis (Single Family and Multi Family) ................................... 35
Table 12
Current LIHTC Properties in Buckeye ....................................................................70
Table 13
Implementation Plan ................................................................................................. 74
Figures
Figure 1
Population Educational Attainment by Region, 2017 and 2022 ........................9
Figure 2
Median Population Age by Region, 2017 and 2022 ............................................ 10
Figure 3
Real Median Household Income by Region, 2017 and 2022 ............................. 16
Figure 4
Family Poverty Rate by Region, 2017 and 2022 .................................................. 18
Figure 5
Labor Force Participation and Unemployment Rates by Region, 2022 ......... 19
Figure 6
Homeownership Rate by Region, 2017 and 2022 ................................................ 23
Figure 7
Substandard Occupied Housing Units by Region, 2022 ................................... 24
Figure 8
Rate of Overcrowding by Region, 2017 and 2022 ............................................... 25
Figure 9
Vacancy Rate by Region, 2017 and 2022 ................................................................ 27
Figure 10 Home Value Distribution in Buckeye, 2022 ......................................................... 28
Figure 11
Median Monthly Costs for Owner-Occupied Households, 2017 and 2022 ... 29
Figure 12
Homeowners With and Without Mortgages, 2017 and 2022 ........................... 30
Figure 13 Gross Rent Distribution by Region, 2022 .............................................................. 32

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
4
Part I: Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment
Executive Summary
The City of Buckeye, Arizona, has experienced extraordinary population growth over the past
decade, transforming into one of the nation’s fastest-growing cities. This rapid expansion has
created both signiﬁcant opportunities and pressing challenges, particularly regarding housing
supply, diversity, and aﬀordability. The City of Buckeye supports and encourages the
development of attainable housing that accommodates a diverse range of housing needs and
incomes. This Housing Needs Assessment provides a comprehensive analysis of Buckeye’s
current demographic trends, housing market conditions, and aﬀordability gaps, and will
ultimately inform the Housing Action Plan.
The purpose of this Housing Needs Assessment is to deliver an objective and data-driven
foundation for decision-making, enabling city leaders and stakeholders to strategically address
current and future housing needs, promote balanced community development, and create that
housing policies are responsive to the evolving demands of Buckeye’s residents.
The data and ﬁndings in this report are based on information from within the incorporated
limits of Buckeye and do not include unincorporated County islands located within the planning
boundary.
Key Demographic and Housing Findings
 Rapid Growth & Changing Demographics: Buckeye's population has more than doubled
since 2010, characterized by a relatively young population, larger-than-average household
sizes that reflect its family-oriented character, and increasing racial and ethnic diversity.
While median household incomes have risen significantly, outpacing regional growth,
educational attainment levels lag slightly behind regional averages. Disability prevalence,
particularly among seniors, highlights a growing need for accessible housing options.
 Modern but Undiversified Housing Stock: The City's housing stock is predominantly
modern, with most units built since 2000, contributing to its overall good condition and
relatively few issues related to aging infrastructure. However, the stock is heavily skewed
toward larger, single-family homes (3+ bedrooms making up 83% of units in 2022), with
limited availability of smaller units (0-1 bedrooms at 2%, 2 bedrooms at 15%). Furthermore,
there is a lack of other housing typologies such as duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, and
other "missing middle" density housing, or high-density housing.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
5
 High Homeownership & Rising Costs: Buckeye boasts an exceptionally high
homeownership rate (85% in 2022), significantly above regional averages. However, rapid
home value appreciation (with median prices exceeding $400,000) and increased median
monthly owner costs (rising to $1,680 by 2022) throughout the County present substantial
attainability and ownership barriers.
 Rental Market Pressures: While relatively more attainable than core metro Phoenix,
Buckeye's rental market faces increasing pressure. Rents have risen, particularly for mid-
tier units. A critical shortage of deeply affordable rentals (for <30% Area Median Income
(AMI) households) exists, alongside growing shortages in the market-rate and luxury
segments. However, even though there seems to be more than enough homes that are
attainable for low- to moderate-income renters (those earning 30-120% AMI), this doesn't
necessarily mean people can find the right kind of home for their needs. The issue may not
be about the total number of homes, but rather whether those homes are the right types,
sizes, or quality, and if they match what people are actually looking for.
Core Challenges and Direction
Buckeye's primary challenge is managing the tension between its successful growth and a
deepening housing aﬀordability crisis that impacts both renters and aspiring homeowners
across various income levels. Key issues include a structural mismatch between the existing
housing supply dominated by larger, expensive single-family homes and the growing
population's diverse needs, including smaller housing units, units for lower/moderate incomes,
and units that meet the speciﬁc accessibility needs of seniors. While the City has a signiﬁcant
stock of available land, current constraints related to water resources, infrastructure extension,
and environmental factors could pose potential challenges to future development.
Notably, the need for housing is changing in the City, as the population continues to grow and
the City’s young population drives demand for housing that supports families. Furthermore, as
housing prices continue to rise disproportionately to income, demand is likely to shift away from
traditional detached single-family, which is typically more cost prohibitive, and toward smaller
detached housing types, like accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and courtyard style housing, as
well attached housing types, such as townhomes, duplexes, and triplexes. These housing types
are typically cheaper and more attainable as a starter home yet still oﬀer housing that can suit
the diverse needs of Buckeye’s families, seniors, and young professionals.
Implementation
The implementation of the Housing Action Plan (HAP) will be directly guided by the ﬁndings
of the HNA. Based on the identiﬁed affordability gaps, household income trends, and
limited supply of attainable housing options, the City’s HAP establishes priority actions

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
6
focused on a structural mismatch between the existing housing supply dominated by larger,
more expensive single-family homes, the growing population's diverse needs, including smaller
housing units, units for lower/moderate incomes, and speciﬁc housing and accessibility needs
for seniors. The actions based on these strategic priorities ensure that the HAP responds
directly to demonstrated housing needs, providing a clear framework for action and
measurable progress over time.
Introduction
Located in Maricopa County, Arizona, the City of Buckeye has emerged as one of the fastest-
growing communities in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. Its strategic location along Interstate
10, expansive land availability, and growing economic opportunities have made Buckeye a
magnet for new residents and businesses.
However, this rapid expansion is creating new challenges, particularly in meeting the housing
needs of a diverse and growing population. Rising demand, evolving demographics, and the
shrinking availability of aﬀordable housing options have intensiﬁed the need for a clear
understanding of Buckeye’s current and future housing landscape.
This document is a Housing Needs Assessment for the City of Buckeye. It provides a
comprehensive analysis of demographic trends, housing market conditions, and attainability
challenges. Aﬀordable housing refers to homes priced within a household’s ﬁnancial means,
while attainable housing refers to homes that are not only aﬀordable but also available and
accessible across diﬀerent household types and life stages. The assessment is designed to
inform the City’s Housing Action Plan, guiding policy, regulatory, and programmatic solutions to
ensure that Buckeye’s housing supply meets the needs of all residents as the City continues to
grow.
Methodology
To comprehensively analyze housing conditions in Buckeye, data was collected as pertaining
to demographics, economic indicators, housing market metrics, and gaps in aﬀordability and
availability. Maricopa County, the State of Arizona, and national housing trends oﬀered
comparative benchmarks throughout the study. The analysis incorporates data from PolicyMap,
which is an interactive Geographic Information Systems (GIS) platform that consolidates federal,
state, and local datasets to assess spatial trends in housing accessibility, aﬀordability, and
demographic shifts. It visually represents how housing availability and aﬀordability vary across
Buckeye’s neighborhoods, identifying potential areas of disparity and supporting informed
analysis. PolicyMap’s main sources include the following:

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
7
 American Community Survey: The American Community Survey (ACS) is an ongoing survey
conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau that collects data continuously throughout the year
on demographic, social, economic, and housing characteristics. For the purposes of this
study, the most recent available data at the time of analysis were used. The primary source
was the 2018–2022 ﬁve-year ACS, which oﬀers the highest level of statistical reliability for
small geographic areas. In cases where longitudinal analysis was needed, the 2013–2017
ﬁve-year ACS was also used. These two ACS datasets cover non-overlapping time periods,
allowing for meaningful comparisons over time without duplication of survey years.
 Decennial Census: The decennial census is a population, demographic, and housing census
conducted by the United States Census Bureau every 10 years. For the purposes of this
study, this data was used for historical comparisons and foundational population counts.
Community Proﬁle
Population
A deﬁning characteristic of the City of Buckeye over the past 15 years has been its dramatic
and sustained population growth, in which Buckeye has evolved into one of the most rapidly
expanding cities in the United States. Table 1 illustrates the trajectory of Buckeye's population
growth over the last 15 years at approximately ﬁve-year intervals to illustrate the scale of this
expansion and establish essential context for understanding the City's housing market dynamics.
Table 1
Buckeye Population Growth, 2010 to 2025
Year
Population
Growth Since Previous
Period
Notes
2000
8,374

Baseline population
2005
19,931
+138%
Population more than doubled since 2000, based on
local estimates
2010
50,876

+155%
Explosive growth over the decade; population
continues to grow and thrive
2015
62,582
+23%
Significant growth begins; Buckeye among fastest-
growing cities
2020
91,502
+46%
Growth continues at a high rate.
2024/2025*
119,000
+30%
Population more than doubled since 2010, based on
local estimates
Source: Population figures derived from U.S. Decennial Census (2010, 2020), U.S. Special Census (2015), and City of Buckeye
estimate (2024).

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
8
Buckeye’s population has increased exponentially in recent years. The City experienced steady
growth early in the decade, with the population increasing by 23% from 50,876 in 2010 to
62,582 in 2015. Growth accelerated even more between 2015 and 2020, when Buckeye’s
population jumped by 46% to reach 91,502. This rapid expansion continued into 2024/2025,
with local estimates placing the population at 119,000 - a 134% increase since 2010. As the
population more than doubled over just 15 years, the City faces increasing demand for housing,
infrastructure, and community services to support its expanding community while maintaining
quality of life and sustainability in future development. Oﬃcial projections anticipate this
pattern of rapid expansion will persist in the coming years. The Maricopa Association of
Governments (MAG) forecasts Buckeye's population could reach as high as 193,600 by 2030.
Educational Attainment
Educational attainment shapes workforce capabilities, income and employment opportunities,
and economic mobility, all of which directly impact one’s access to stable housing. Higher
education levels are closely linked to increased earning potential, directly inﬂuencing
homeownership rates, rental attainability, and housing preferences. As Buckeye grows,
understanding the relationship between education and housing is essential to developing
policies that ensure equitable and sustainable access to housing. Interestingly, Buckeye falls
below regional averages in education levels yet still outpaces the region in terms of household
incomes. There are several possible reasons for this trend. First, Buckeye may attract residents
whose incomes come from sources other than local employment, such as retirees, remote
workers, or commuters with higher-paying jobs located elsewhere in the region. Second, the
types of jobs available in and around Buckeye (such as positions in skilled trades, logistics, and
certain manufacturing sectors) may oﬀer relatively high wages without requiring advanced
educational credentials. Finally, Buckeye’s growing population may include families with
multiple wage earners, boosting overall household income even if individual education levels
are lower. Figure 1 looks at the distribution of the population by education attainment for 2017
and 2022.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
9
12%
15%
11%
13%
11%
13%
27%
26%
22%
23%
22%
24%
38%
41%
32%
33%
32%
33%
15%
13%
22%
20%
22%
19%
8%
5%
13%
11%
13%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2022
2017
2022
2017
2022
2017
Buckeye
Maricopa County
Phoenix-Mesa-
Chandler Metro
Area
Less than high school graduate
High school graduate (includes equivalency)
Some college or associate's degree
Bachelor's degree
Graduate or professional degree

Figure 1 Population Educational Attainment by Region, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Key Findings
Recent data indicate incremental improvements in educational attainment levels in Buckeye.
The percentage of residents aged 25 and over without a high school diploma declined from 15%
in 2017 to 12% in 2022, the share of adults with bachelor’s degrees rose from 13% to 15%, and
those with a graduate or professional degrees increased from 5% to 8% of the 25-years-and-
over population segment. Buckeye still has a lower rate of higher education attainment than
Maricopa County and the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metropolitan Area as a whole, where 22% of
adults have a bachelor’s degree and 13% have a graduate or professional degree in 2022. This
educational disparity presents workforce competitiveness and economic diversiﬁcation
challenges, potentially limiting Buckeye’s ability to attract high-wage industries and workers.
Age
Data on median population age is presented in Figure 2. Population age is a critical demographic
indicator that inﬂuences the demand for housing, including housing typologies, locations, and
levels of attainability. As populations age or grow younger, housing needs to shift, requiring
policy, infrastructure, and community planning adjustments. Understanding these shifts is

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
10
essential for ensuring that the housing supply aligns with the needs of diﬀerent age groups,
from young professionals and families to retirees and seniors.

Figure 2 Median Population Age by Region, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Key Findings
The data reveal that Buckeye's median age increased by roughly 1.5 years between 2017 and
2022. This change is consistent with Maricopa County and Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area,
where the median age grew from 36 to 37 over the same period. Such a rise in median age has
signiﬁcant implications for homeownership trends. As populations age, there is typically a shift
toward increased homeownership, with older residents seeking housing stability and long-term
investment security. This trend suggests a continued demand for single-family homes,
particularly those located close to grocery stores, medical services, and other essential
amenities. Notably, it is important to also provide ownership opportunities with a range of
alternative housing types, such as condominiums, cooperatives, and missing middle housing
types (such as duplexes, triplexes, and townhouses) to accommodate for diﬀering housing
preferences.
35
37
37
34
36
36
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Buckeye
Maricopa County
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
2017
2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
11
In addition, the aging population may also drive demand for housing that supports seniors, such
as homes with accessible features, age-restricted communities, and a diverse range of housing
choices. Providing options that incorporate accessibility during new construction can help
reduce the need for future retroﬁts, while also oﬀering seniors the opportunity to remain in
their homes as they age. These may include single-level homes, independent living facilities,
and specialized care settings such as assisted living and memory care. To best serve aging
residents, these housing opportunities should ideally be located within or near existing
communities where seniors already live, allowing them to remain close to family, shopping,
places of worship, and other familiar amenities.
Though Buckeye's population is aging, the City remains younger than the region as a whole,
further emphasizing the need for programs and policies that support ﬁrst-time homebuyers and
renters. Addressing the needs of both the aging population, as well Buckeye’s signiﬁcant share
of young professionals and families, is key to retaining a diverse population and sustaining the
local workforce.
Race and Ethnicity
As Buckeye continues to experience population growth and diversiﬁcation, a comprehensive
analysis of racial and ethnic distributions, as shown in Table 2, is critical to ensuring equitable
access to housing opportunities and fostering inclusive community development. This section
examines Buckeye’s racial and ethnic composition and oﬀers insights into how these
demographic shifts impact housing needs, attainability, and neighborhood development while
highlighting disparities that should be addressed through targeted policy interventions.
Table 2
Racial and Ethnic Composition of Buckeye’s Population, 2010 and 2020
Race
2010
2020
White
60.2%
56.6%
Black or African American
6.7%
7.2%
Native American and Alaska
Native
0.1%
1.9%
Asian
1.8%
1.7%
Native Hawaiian and other
Pacific Islander
1.7%
0.3%
Other
14.7%
16.2%
Two or more races
14.9%
16.1%
Source: U.S. Decennial Census, 2020

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
12
Key Findings
Buckeye’s population has become noticeably more diverse over the past decade. The
percentage of residents identifying as White declined from 60.2% in 2010 to 56.6% in 2020,
while Black, Native American, multiracial individuals (“Two or more races”), and those
identifying as “Other” increased slightly. Historically, the U.S. Census Bureau categorized
Hispanic or Latino as an ethnicity rather than a race, which is why this population isn't always
listed separately in racial breakdowns. Many Hispanic respondents typically select “Other” when
asked to identify their race.
This growing diversity implies that Buckeye must plan for a broader range of cultural, housing,
and service needs. An increasingly multi-ethnic population often creates demand for housing
that accommodates a wider variety of household sizes, as well as multigenerational living
arrangements, and more diverse housing typologies. As such, future housing strategies should
prioritize ﬂexibility in housing types, aﬀordability, and accessibility to ensure that all segments
of Buckeye’s evolving community have their needs met. Tailoring outreach and engagement to
diﬀerent cultural groups will also be vital for an equitable and inclusive housing plan.
Disability Status
Ensuring adequate housing for residents with disabilities is critical in promoting independent
living, enhancing residents’ quality of life, and accommodating the unique needs of individuals
with disabilities across diﬀerent age groups. Table 3 examines the prevalence of disabilities
within Buckeye’s population, identifying rates by disability type. Similarly, Table 4 examines the
prevalence of disabilities by age group; together, these breakdowns provide insight into speciﬁc
accessibility need by age and disability type. Notably, the total number of disabled residents by
age group is lower than the total prevalence of disabilities by disability type, due to instances of
overlap in which some residents have multiple disability types.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
13
Table 3
Buckeye Disability Profile by Disability Type, 2022
Total Residents with a Disability
Number of
Residents
Percent of Civilian
Noninstitutionalized Population
Hearing
3,507
4.0%
Vision impairment
1,996
2.3%
Cognitive*
4,488
5.1%
Ambulatory
3,786
4.3%
Self-care
1,659
1.9%
Independent living
2,589
2.9%
Total
18,025
-
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
*The US Census Bureau defines “cognitive disability” as difficulty remembering, concentrating, or making decisions
due to a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Table 4
Buckeye Disability Profile by Age Group, 2022
Total Residents with a Disability
Number of
Residents
Percent of Civilian
Noninstitutionalized Population
Residents under 18 years old
1,973
7.3%
Residents 18 to 64 years old
4,965
10.1%
Residents 65 years old and over
3,143
25.9%
Total
10,081
11.4%
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
*The US Census Bureau defines “cognitive disability” as difficulty remembering, concentrating, or making decisions
due to a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Key Findings
The data reveals that roughly 10,100 residents in Buckeye, representing 11.4% of the civilian
non-institutionalized population, report having a disability. By comparison, the countywide rate
is 11.7% and the national rate is 12.9%. Disabilities aﬀect all age groups but are most prevalent
among seniors: 25.9% of residents aged 65 and older live with a disability, compared to 10.1%
of adults aged 18 to 64 and 7.3% of children under 18. Among disability types, cognitive
disabilities were the most commonly reported, aﬀecting 4,488 residents. Ambulatory disabilities
are also signiﬁcant, aﬀecting 3,786 residents, while hearing impairments are reported by 3,507
residents. Visual impairments were the least reported but still impacted an estimated 1,996
residents. Diﬃculties with self-care (1,659 residents), which the ACS deﬁnes as residents ages 5
and over who have diﬃculty bathing or dressing oneself, and independent living (2,589
residents), deﬁned as residents aged 15 and older who have diﬃculty doing errands alone such

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
14
as visiting a doctor’s oﬃce or shopping, are also prevalent, aﬀecting some residents’ ability to
carry out daily activities and sustain stable housing.
The high percentage of Buckeye’s senior population living with disabilities underscores the
urgent need for age-friendly housing options, particularly those that are aﬀordable, given that
many seniors rely on ﬁxed incomes. As the population ages, the demand for single-story homes,
housing that meets universal design principles, and assisted living facilities is expected to
increase. Furthermore, there is an ongoing need for attainable, accessible apartments,
particularly those with proximity to healthcare, employment hubs, and public transportation.
Household Size
The composition of households, ranging from single-person units to large multigenerational
families determines the type and quantity of housing a community needs (see Table 5).
Understanding these trends allows policymakers and developers to align housing supply with
demographic shifts, ensuring that new developments cater to current and future residents.
This section analyzes Buckeye's household size distribution and examines how these trends
inﬂuence housing attainability, availability, and planning strategies.
Table 5
Households by Size, 2022
Household Size
All Households
Owner Households
Renter Households
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
One person
4,011
14%
3,312
14%
699
17%
Two persons
9,274
33%
8,439
35%
835
20%
Three persons
4,690
17%
3,873
16%
817
20%
Four persons
4,194
15%
3,661
15%
533
13%
Five persons
2,875
10%
2,268
10%
607
15%
Six persons
1,703
6%
1,281
5%
422
10%
Seven or more persons
1,358
5%
1,130
5%
228
6%
Average Household Size
3.16 persons
3.12 persons
3.4 persons
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Key Findings
While average household sizes have been declining nationally due to factors such as aging
populations and delayed family formation, Buckeye stands out with a relatively large average
household size of 3.16 persons—well above the Maricopa County average of 2.62 and the
national average of 2.50. Two-person households represent the largest segment in Buckeye at
33%, but larger households are also well-represented, with 10,130 households (36%) containing

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
15
four or more persons. Among homeowners—who make up about 85% of Buckeye’s
households—the average size is 3.12 persons. Thirty-ﬁve percent of owner-occupied households
include two people, while a nearly equal share consists of four or more people.
Renter households in Buckeye tend to be even larger, with an average size of 3.4 persons. While
two and three-person renter households are most common, a substantial amount of renter
households have four or more people, including some even with ﬁve persons or more. This data
indicates strong family-oriented housing demand, necessitating policies that ensure continued
attainability and accessibility of larger single-family residences and apartments featuring three
or more bedrooms. Relatedly, the quantity of multi-person households (especially those with
four or more individuals) is signiﬁcant, among both renter and owner-occupied units.
Multigenerational living arrangements, which are more prevalent among larger households,
also drive demand for homes with additional living space, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and
ﬂexible ﬂoor plans.
In addition, single-person households represent a substantial portion of the housing market,
reﬂecting a continued need for smaller units. Expanding the supply of smaller units, such as
studio apartments, ADUs, and bungalows, as well as high-density rental units, will be essential
for addressing this population segment.
Household Income
Household income is a fundamental determinant of housing aﬀordability, shaping
homeownership rates, rental market dynamics, and overall housing demand. Income levels
inﬂuence the ability of households to aﬀord mortgages, rental payments, and essential living
expenses while maintaining ﬁnancial stability. Table 6 and Figure 3 examine household income
trends in Buckeye, amongst both owner and renter households.
Table 6
Households Income Distribution for Buckeye, 2022
Household Income
All Households
Owner Households
Renter Households
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
$0 to $49,999
5,064
18%
3,987
17%
1,077
26%
$50,000 to $74,999
5,309
19%
4,377
18%
932
23%
>$75,000
17,732
63%
15,600
65%
2,132
51%
Median Household
Income
$94,188
$96,566
$78,348
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2018-2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
16
Figure 3 Real Median Household Income by Region, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Note: The values were adjusted for inflation to constant 2022 dollars.
Key Findings
Analysis of median household income trends from 2017 to 2022 reveals signiﬁcant growth
within Buckeye, outpacing regional averages. Buckeye's median household income rose
substantially from approximately $73,394 in 2017 (in 2022 dollars) to $94,188 in 2022, roughly
a 28% increase in real median household income. The substantial rise in Buckeye’s median
household income, outpacing that of the County and metro area, suggests signiﬁcant economic
shifts within the City. This trend likely reﬂects factors such as robust local job growth, increased
professional employment opportunities, and an inﬂux of higher-income residents.
Notably, the increasing number of households earning $100,000 or more indicates growing
economic prosperity but also contributes to rising home prices and gentriﬁcation risks. In
addition to aligning new housing production with local demand, it is crucial to expand attainable
and workforce housing production to ensure that Buckeye maintains a diverse and inclusive
housing landscape that mitigates displacement pressures driven by market appreciation and
ensures long-term community sustainability.
The data also suggests a large middle-class in Buckeye, as well as a signiﬁcant number of
households earning less than $35,000 annually. Disparities in housing accessibility by income
$94,188
$80,675
$79,935
$73,394
$69,945
$69,174
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
Buckeye
Maricopa County
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
2017
2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
17
level are evident, as owner households reported a higher median income ($96,566) compared
to renter households ($78,348). While many middle-income households can aﬀord
homeownership, rising mortgage rates and property values may create future barriers to entry.
Expanding policies that support homebuyers will be essential for maintaining housing
attainability for Buckeye’s middle class.
It is also important that aﬀordable and workforce housing be distributed geographically
throughout the city, rather than concentrated in just a few areas. Support for higher density and
aﬀordable housing can vary signiﬁcantly across diﬀerent neighborhoods and corridors, so a
thoughtful and balanced approach to geographic distribution helps promote equity, ensure
broader community buy-in, and provide all residents with access to opportunities and
amenities.
Currently, the City’s workforce is predominantly middle-income, highlighting the need for
continued investment in workforce housing. Opportunities also exist to partner with local
employers on workforce housing initiatives, such as employer-sponsored housing and rental
assistance programs. While the modest increase in bachelor's degree holders indicates a
gradual shift toward higher-income earners, this change is not yet substantial enough to create
signiﬁcant demand for high-end housing.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
18
Poverty
Poverty is a critical factor inﬂuencing housing attainability, ﬁnancial stability, and access to
essential resources within Buckeye. Figure 4 examines key poverty trends in both Buckeye and
the Greater Phoenix area and interprets their implications for housing aﬀordability and stability.
Speciﬁcally, it presents family poverty rates for 2017 and 2022.
Figure 4 Family Poverty Rate by Region, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Key Findings
The family poverty rate in Buckeye fell from 9.2% in 2017 to 6.1% in 2022 (a decline of just over
three percentage points) outpacing the reductions seen in both Maricopa County (from 11.4%
to 8.1%) and the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area (from 11.4% to 8.1%). While fewer
families live in poverty, many still face housing cost burdens and instability; continued
investment in aﬀordable housing initiatives are necessary to support lower-income residents
even amidst improved economic conditions.
6.1%
8.1%
8.1%
9.2%
11.4%
11.4%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
Buckeye
Maricopa
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
2017
2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
19
Unemployment
Labor force participation and unemployment rates are key indicators of economic stability
and household ﬁnancial well-being. Figure 5 examines Buckeye's recent employment trends,
comparing local rates with regional benchmarks to assess local economic strength and stability.
Figure 5 Labor Force Participation and Unemployment Rates by Region, 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Note: Estimated percentage of people aged 16 years or older who were in the labor force between 2018 and 2022.
Key Findings
The data reveal that Buckeye has a lower unemployment rate and a lower labor force
participation rate compared to both Maricopa County and the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro
Area. In 2022, Buckeye’s unemployment rate was 2.9%, while Maricopa County and the metro
area reported rates of 3.1%. Similarly, Buckeye’s labor force participation rate was 58.2%, which
is noticeably below Maricopa County’s 65% and the metro area’s 63.9%. These ﬁgures suggest
that a smaller proportion of Buckeye’s working-age population is either employed or actively
seeking work, while a larger share is unemployed compared to the broader region. This trend is
likely attributable to the presence of multiple age-restricted active adult communities within the
City, which include a signiﬁcant number of retirees who are not interested in rejoining the
workforce.
58.2%
65.0%
63.9%
2.9%
3.1%
3.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Buckeye
Maricopa
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
Unemployment
Labor Force

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
20
Housing Market Conditions
Year of Construction
The age of a community’s housing stock plays a signiﬁcant role in shaping housing policy,
attainability, and maintenance needs, as older units typically require substantial investments
for preservation. Understanding the age distribution of Buckeye’s housing stock, as shown in
Table 7, is critical for evaluating current and future maintenance and rehabilitation needs,
as well as ensuring the current housing stock remains safe, sustainable, and habitable.
Table 7
Age of Housing Stock, 2022
Year Built
Number Occupied
Percent Occupied
2020 or later
1,385
4.5%
2010 to 2019
12,230
39.6%
2000 to 2009
13,392
43.4%
1980 to 1999
2,428
7.8%
1960 to 1979
750
2.4%
1940 to 1959
621
2.0%
1939 or earlier
80
0.3%
Median Year Built
2009
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Key Findings
Buckeye has undergone signiﬁcant residential growth since the 1990s, with new large-scale
suburban developments driving homeownership opportunities. This pattern aligns with regional
housing trends in Maricopa County, where suburban expansion has accommodated population
growth from Phoenix’s urban core.
The data reveals that Buckeye’s housing stock is very modern; a median year built of 2009
illustrates just how rapidly Buckeye has developed to accommodate the City’s large population
growth and suburbanization trends. Approximately 43.4% of occupied homes in Buckeye were
built between 2000 and 2009, and another 39.6% were constructed from 2010 to 2019. Homes
built in 2020 or later account for an additional 4.5% of the occupied housing stock. In total,
nearly 88% of Buckeye’s occupied homes were built since 2000.
In contrast, only 7.8% of homes were built between 1980 and 1999, and just 4.7% of the
housing stock dates back to before 1980-including a mere 0.3% constructed in 1939 or

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
21
earlier. This modern housing proﬁle means that aging infrastructure issues are signiﬁcantly less
pronounced than in other communities regionally with older housing stocks. However, it also
means that Buckeye has fewer historical or naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) units
than cities with a more established housing stock. This increases reliance on new construction
to meet ongoing attainable and workforce housing demands. Furthermore, this characteristic
presents challenges common to high-growth suburban areas, such as ensuring new
developments include diverse housing types beyond single-family homes, addressing
affordability pressures amidst rising property values and development costs, and adequately
managing the expansion of infrastructure required to accommodate rapid residential growth
across a wide area.
Housing Stock Characteristics
A city’s housing stock composition, measured by the distribution of homes by bedroom count,
provides insight into how well the existing housing supply accommodates diﬀerent population
segments — from single individuals to large families — and identiﬁes potential imbalances or
shortages that may require policy intervention. Table 8 assesses changes in the housing stock’s
composition over time.
Table 8
Buckeye’s Housing Stock by Bedroom Count, 2017 and 2022
Number of Bedrooms
2017
2022
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
0 or 1 Bedroom
370
2%
550
2%
Two
3,971
19%
4,647
15%
3 or more
16,474
79%
25,689
83%
Total
20,815
100%
30,886
100%
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
22
Key Findings
Buckeye’s housing stock predominantly comprises larger homes, a trend that intensiﬁed
between 2017 and 2022 with Buckeye's rapid suburban expansion and appeal to families
seeking larger residences. In comparison, the City of Goodyear had 36,560 housing units as of
2022, of which roughly 6% had 0 or 1 bedroom, 19% had 2 bedrooms, and 75% had 3 or more
bedrooms. In Maricopa County as a whole, there were roughly 1.8 million housing units, of
which 14% had 0 or 1 bedroom, 26% had 2 bedrooms, and 61% had 3 or more bedrooms. While
Buckeye’s large stock of housing units with 3+ bedrooms support homeownership, especially for
larger families, this has resulted in limited housing diversity. The relatively high share of larger
units poses attainability challenges, particularly for single individuals, lower-income households,
retirees downsizing, and families seeking entry-level homes. Such a shortage of two-bedroom,
one-bedroom, and studio units suggests a potential market mismatch, in which rent and
purchase price for these units is artiﬁcially inﬂated due to local demand exceeding availability
within such a small market segment. As regional growth continues, balancing Buckeye’s
suburban character with the need for a broader range of housing types with more modestly
sized options is crucial for maintaining a competitive and accessible housing market.
Ownership Rate
Homeownership remains a key indicator of economic stability, long-term wealth accumulation,
and community investment. Figure 6 analyzes homeownership rates in Buckeye from 2017 to
2022 as compared to the broader Maricopa County and Phoenix Metropolitan Area and
evaluates key drivers behind changes in ownership rates.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
23

Figure 6 Homeownership Rate by Region, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Key Findings
Homeownership rates in Buckeye have risen considerably in recent years, mirroring and
outpacing broader trends in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. Buckeye’s homeownership rate
jumped from 68.7% in 2017 to 85.3% in 2022, a rise of over 16 percentage points. In
comparison, Maricopa County’s rate increased from 61% to 64.3%, and the Phoenix-Mesa-
Chandler Metro Area saw a more modest rise from 61.9% to 65.6% during the same period. The
increase reﬂects strong job growth, rising household incomes, and relative attainability
compared to many other parts of the County. Between 2017 and 2022, all new housing
constructed in Buckeye consisted solely of single-family homes. While Buckeye has traditionally
maintained a high homeownership rate due to its suburban development pattern and
availability of single-family homes, rising property values and increasing mortgage interest rates
may present future barriers to entry for ﬁrst-time buyers and moderate-income households.
Limited housing diversity, including a lack of townhomes, condominiums, and other entry-level
housing options, also restricts ownership opportunities for ﬁrst-time homebuyers who cannot
aﬀord larger single-family homes.
Condition of Housing Stock
Substandard housing — units that are structurally unsound, fail to meet health and safety
standards, or lack basic infrastructure such as plumbing and kitchen facilities — can negatively
impact community well-being, property values, and long-term housing stability. As Buckeye
85.3%
64.3%
65.6%
68.7%
61.0%
61.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Buckeye
Maricopa
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
2017
2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
24
continues to expand, maintaining the integrity of its housing stock is essential to preventing
deteriorating conditions from aﬀecting vulnerable populations, including low-income renters
and homeowners who may lack the resources to maintain or rehabilitate aging units. Figure 7
depicts Buckeye’s substandard occupied housing units and compares them to other regional
numbers for comparison.
Figure 7 Substandard Occupied Housing Units by Region, 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Key Findings
Recent data reveals that Buckeye has a very low percentage of substandard housing units
compared to regional averages. In 2022, only 0.2% of Buckeye’s occupied housing units had
incomplete plumbing facilities and 0.3% had incomplete kitchen facilities, both of which are
lower than the rates in Maricopa County and the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area, where
0.4% of units had incomplete plumbing and 0.6% had incomplete kitchens. This reﬂects the
City's particularly modern housing stock, in which newer construction standards and improved
building regulations produced higher-quality housing stock. Unlike older urban areas where
aging infrastructure and deferred maintenance contribute to substandard conditions, Buckeye’s
housing remains largely modern and structurally sound. Though Buckeye’s newer housing stock
0.3%
0.6%
0.6%
0.2%
0.4%
0.4%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.3%
0.4%
0.5%
0.6%
0.7%
Buckeye
Maricopa County
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, Metro Area
Incomplete plumbing facilities
Incomplete kitchen facilities

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
25
provides an advantage in preventing widespread substandard conditions, ensuring continued
quality through continued code enforcement, expanded home improvement programs, and
increased home maintenance and renovation eﬀorts remain essential to maintaining high-
quality housing stock.
Overcrowding
Overcrowding in housing units indicates signiﬁcant housing attainability challenges, household
ﬁnancial strain, and inadequate housing supply. When multiple families or individuals share
living space beyond the recommended occupancy limits, it can contribute to increased stress,
diminished quality of life, and heightened risks related to public health and safety. Figure 8
examines the rate of overcrowding in Buckeye and surrounding regions and evaluates how
attainability and housing supply aﬀect occupancy patterns.
Figure 8 Rate of Overcrowding by Region, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
0.6%
0.8%
1.4%
1.4%
1.3%
1.3%
3.4%
2.4%
3.0%
3.1%
3.0%
3.1%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
2022
2017
2022
2017
2022
2017
Buckeye
Maricopa
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler
Metro Area
Overcrowded
Severely Overcrowded

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
26
Note: Overcrowded defined as estimated percentage of renter-occupied housing units with 1.01 to 1.5 occupants per room.
Severely Overcrowded defined as estimated percentage of renter-occupied housing units with more than 1.5 occupants per
room.
Key Findings
Buckeye has experienced a substantial increase in overcrowding, from 2.4% in 2017 to 3.4% in
2022, surpassing the rates in both Maricopa County (3.0%) and the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler
Metro Area (3.0%) in 2022. Increases in overcrowding can result from limited availability of
larger or aﬀordable homes, compounded by rapid population growth that outpaces housing
production. In contrast, severe overcrowding in Buckeye dropped slightly from 0.8% in 2017 to
0.6% in 2022, which is signiﬁcantly lower than the severely overcrowding rates in Maricopa
County (1.4%) and the metro area (1.4%) in 2022. In high-density urban areas, such as Metro
Phoenix and other parts of Maricopa County, exhibit higher overcrowding rates due to limited
rental stock, higher housing costs, and a more signiﬁcant share of multifamily housing with
smaller unit sizes. As Buckeye’s population continues to rise, it is crucial to develop a range of
housing types and sizes that meet the needs of households of all sizes in order to prevent
overcrowding issues in the future. It is critical to monitor the incidence of overcrowding, as it
can strain household well-being by increasing stress, limiting personal space, and elevating
health and safety risks.
Vacancies
Vacancy rates are a critical indicator of housing market conditions, reﬂecting the supply-demand
balance and inﬂuencing market stability and attainability. Low rates generally indicate housing
shortages and rising costs, while high rates may signal oversupply, low demand, or the
prevalence of short-term rentals or vacation homes. Figure 9 analyzes Buckeye's vacancy rate
trends and compares them to regional benchmarks and the impact on attainability.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
27
Figure 9 Vacancy Rate by Region, 2017 and 2022
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Key Findings
Buckeye has experienced a decline in its vacancy rate, signaling increased housing demand and
tightening of available housing inventory. This pattern mirrors trends observed in Maricopa
County, and the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. These ﬁndings indicate that regional housing
markets are becoming more competitive, with fewer available units relative to demand.
While lower vacancy rates typically indicate a strong housing market with stable demand, they
also pose risks if supply does not keep pace with growth. Nationally, a vacancy rate below 5%
is often considered a sign of a particularly tight housing market, which can signiﬁcantly increase
home prices and rents. While representing a substantial decline and shrinking inventory,
Buckeye’s 2022 rate of 9% remains above that tight market benchmark. However, it is essential
to note that the ACS vacancy rate includes unoccupied second homes, short-term rentals, and
other units that are not necessarily available for sale or rent; the true vacancy rate is likely
lower, necessitating continued development of all types of housing to ensure future demand is
met.
Home Value
The distribution of home values within a community provides critical insight into the character
of the housing market, overall wealth, and, crucially, the accessibility of homeownership for
residents across diﬀerent income levels. Analyzing how home values are spread across various
price brackets helps identify the predominant market segments and potential attainability
challenges. Figure 10 examines the distribution of owner-occupied housing values in Buckeye.

9.0%
8.6%
9.0%
12.9%
12.4%
13.1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
Buckeye
Maricopa County
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, Metro Area
2017
2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
28
Figure 10
Home Value Distribution in Buckeye, 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Key Findings
The 2022 home value distribution in Buckeye is heavily concentrated in the mid-range price
categories. The largest share of homes (46.5%) are valued between $300,000 and $499,999,
while 28.4% fall within the $200,000 to $299,999 range. Homes valued below $200,000 are
increasingly rare, making up just 9.5% of the market, with only 3% valued under $50,000. At the
higher end, 14.5% of homes are valued between $500,000 and $1 million, and just over one
percent (1.1%) exceeds $1 million. This distribution highlights that the majority of Buckeye’s
housing stock is concentrated in the $200,000 to $1 million range, with limited availability of
both lower-cost and high-end homes. The small share of homes valued below $200,000
throughout the valley further underscores the scarcity of entry-level or lower-cost ownership
options in the City.
Monthly Owner Costs
The ﬁnancial commitment of homeownership extends signiﬁcantly beyond the initial purchase
price. Ongoing monthly owner costs, typically encompassing mortgage principal and interest,
property taxes, homeowner's insurance, and utilities, represent a substantial and recurring
household expenditure that directly inﬂuences housing attainability and ﬁnancial stability.
3.0%
0.9%
1.1%
4.5%
28.4%
46.5%
14.5%
1.1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Less than $50,000
$50,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000 to $199,999
$200,000 to $299,999
$300,000 to $499,999
$500,000 to $999,999
$1,000,000 or more

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
29
Understanding the prevalence of mortgage debt among homeowners provides critical context,
revealing the proportion of households directly exposed to these ﬂuctuating monthly costs. This
section delves into these crucial aspects of Buckeye's housing market by analyzing recent data
on both monthly median owner costs for residents with a mortgage, and the corresponding
share of homeowners carrying mortgage debt.
Median Monthly Owner Costs
Median monthly cost is a vital indicator of the typical ﬁnancial outlay required for homeowners
actively paying a mortgage. Figure 11 presents these costs for 2017 and 2022, comparing
Buckeye to the region more broadly.
Figure 11
Median Monthly Costs for Owner-Occupied Households, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022
Note: The values were adjusted for inflation to constant 2022 dollars.
Increases across the region occurred between 2017 and 2022. However, when adjusted for
inﬂation, the median monthly owner cost only slightly increased in Buckeye, from $1,574 in
2017 (in 2022 dollars) to $1,680 in 2022, representing only a $106 increase. Despite this
increase, Buckeye's median costs in 2022 remained lower than those in Maricopa County
($1,787) and the Phoenix Metro Area ($1,757).
Buckeye’s marginal increase in ownership costs mirrored the rise seen across the region during
this period. Though the City maintains relative attainability when compared to its regional
neighbors, the $1,680 median monthly cost ($20,160 annually) still presents a potential
$1,680
$1,787
$1,757
$1,574
$1,730
$1,424
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
Buckeye
Maricopa County
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
2017
2022

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
30
attainability challenge for many households in the City. Furthermore, many of these
homeowners purchased their homes when interest rates and home prices were signiﬁcantly
lower than they are today.
Prevalence of Mortgage Debt
Beyond the cost itself, the proportion of homeowners carrying mortgage debt provides a crucial
context for understanding the widespread nature of these monthly costs. Figure 12 shows the
share of homeowners with and without mortgages in Buckeye compared to the region.
Figure 12
Homeowners With and Without Mortgages, 2017 and 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2017 & 2022

78%
78%
68%
70%
67%
69%
22%
22%
32%
30%
33%
31%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2022
2017
2022
2017
2022
2017
Buckeye
Maricopa
Phoenix-Mesa-
Chandler Metro
Area
With Mortgage
Without Mortgage

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
31
Key Findings
Buckeye displays a signiﬁcantly higher reliance on mortgage ﬁnancing compared to the region.
An estimated 78% of Buckeye homeowners held a mortgage in 2022, notably higher than the
rates in Maricopa County (68%) and the Phoenix Metro Area (67%). Correspondingly, only about
one-ﬁfth (22%) of Buckeye homeowners own their property free and clear, compared to roughly
one-third in the comparison geographies.
This high prevalence of mortgage debt is characteristic of a rapidly growing community
attracting new residents, particularly younger households and families likely purchasing homes
more recently and requiring ﬁnancing. In addition, this proportion indicates that many homes in
Buckeye were recently purchased. Though this measure signiﬁes an active real estate market,
it also highlights a potential vulnerability: a large majority of the City's homeowners are directly
impacted by monthly principal, interest, taxes, and insurance payments and are, therefore,
more sensitive to ﬂuctuations in interest rates, property taxes, and insurance costs compared
to communities with a larger share of outright owners. This dynamic may also suggest lower
aggregate household equity within Buckeye compared to more established areas.
Considering mortgage debt and monthly owner costs together highlights increasing ﬁnancial
pressure on a large segment of Buckeye homeowners, strategies are needed to address ongoing
ownership costs. Such strategies include a range of ﬁnancial incentives, including property tax
relief, energy-eﬃciency incentives, as ﬁrst-time homebuyer assistance, and down-payment
assistance).
Rental Market
An analysis of Buckeye’s rental market—including gross rents, aﬀordability metrics, and regional
rent comparisons—oﬀers valuable insights into housing accessibility and cost pressures facing
renter households. Table 9 and Figure 13 examine the distribution of gross rents for available
units in Buckeye. Table 9 evaluates rental aﬀordability and availability relative to the Area
Median Income (AMI) benchmarks of $88,000, while Figure 13 oﬀers regional context for
comparison.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
32

Table 9
Asking Rent Distribution for Buckeye’s Available Units, 2022
Rent
Available Units
Minimum Income Required
to Afford Maximum Rent
Number
Percent
Value
Percent AMI
Less than $1,000
858
21.3%
$39,960
45%
$1,000-$1,499
884
22.0%
$59,960
68%
$1,500-$1,999
1,385
34.4%
$79,960
91%
$2,000-$2,499
698
17.4%
$99,960
114%
$2,500-$2,999
196
4.9%
$119,960
136%
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022

Figure 13
Gross Rent Distribution by Region, 2022

Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Key Findings
A signiﬁcant portion of Buckeye’s available rental units exceed aﬀordability thresholds for low-
and moderate-income households, particularly those earning below 60% of AMI. High rental
costs are making it diﬃcult for these groups to secure stable housing without experiencing cost
burdens (deﬁned as spending more than 30% of one’s monthly gross income on housing costs,
43.3%
51.8%
4.9%
54.8%
39.3%
5.9%
55.1%
39.2%
5.8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Less than $1,500
$1,500 to $2,499
$2,500 or more
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metro Area
Maricopa
Buckeye

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
33
including utilities). Furthermore, as rental prices continue to rise, these households are left with
limited ﬁnancial ﬂexibility for other essential expenses such as healthcare, transportation, and
childcare, making long-term housing stability more precarious for aﬀected renters.
In addition, Buckeye has the lowest share of rental units priced below $1,500 per month among
the three geographies compared, and the highest share of units in the mid-tier range ($1,500–
$2,499). This notable disparity suggests that Buckeye's rental market is less accessible to
lower-income households than previously assumed and is increasingly concentrated in higher
rent brackets. The high percentage of mid-tier rentals reﬂects rising construction and land costs,
a shift in market orientation toward higher-income tenants, and strong in-migration from other
parts of the region. Buckeye's suburban growth pattern, which once provided cost advantages,
is now converging with broader metro-level housing pressures, diminishing its aﬀordability
buﬀer.
While some units remain attainable for households earning at or above the AMI, those earning
below 80% of AMI face increasing challenges in ﬁnding suitable rental options within their
ﬁnancial means; residents earning below 60% of the FY 2024 Area Median Income
(approximately $56,500) are likely to be priced out of the market altogether. Addressing these
challenges requires proactive policies that expand attainable rental options, enhance rental
assistance programs, and reduce housing-related cost burdens.
Owner Market
Table 10 illustrates the distribution of owner-occupied homes in Buckeye by home value
category, the number and percentage of units within each category, and the minimum income
required to aﬀord the maximum home value in the respective range. The percent AMI column
indicates the income required compared to Buckeye’s median income to aﬀord homes in each
price bracket. For example, 4% of owner-occupied homes are valued less than $99,999 and
require about 37% of AMI to aﬀord, whereas 1% of homes exceed $1 million and require more
than 374% of AMI to aﬀord.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
34
Table 10 Home Value Distribution for Buckeye Owner-Occupied Homes, 2022
Home Value

Owner-Occupied Units
Minimum Income Required to
Afford Maximum Home Value
Number
Percent
Income
Percent AMI
Less than 99,999
937
4%
$33,000
37%
100,00 to 249,99
4,363
18%
$82,500
94%
250,00 to 399,999
10,728
45%
$132,000
150%
400,00 to 499,999
4,204
18%
$165,000
187%
500,00 to 749,999
3,107
13%
$247,500
281%
750,00 to 999,999
372
2%
$330,000
374%
Greater than
1,000,000
253
1%
$330,000
374%
Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2022
Housing Affordability Gap Analysis
The availability of housing that aligns with household income levels is essential for maintaining a
healthy and sustainable housing market. When demand for housing outstrips supply, housing
instability and cost burdens increase, particularly among low- and moderate-income
households. There is also growing demand for attainable housing across the 80-120% AMI
range. Understanding the housing gap in Buckeye provides key insights into where supply
shortages exist and how targeted housing policy can address these disparities.
Table 11 identiﬁes the housing gap in Buckeye by AMI level, highlighting mismatches between
household income and available housing options. The table illustrates the estimated shortage of
housing units by aﬀordability tier in 2024, and projects the estimated shortage of housing units
by aﬀordability in 2029.
Estimated housing need in 2024 is calculated by identifying deﬁciencies in the current housing
supply using indicators such as suboptimal vacancy rates and overcrowding, then allocating the
resulting countywide shortfall to municipalities based on their share of household population,
housing growth since 2010, and workforce presence. Future housing needs are projected by
estimating population and employment growth through 2029, applying headship rates
(measured as the proportion of the population aged 15 and older who are householders) to
translate population into household demand, adding a vacancy buﬀer to support a healthy
housing market, and distributing the resulting unit need across HUD-deﬁned income tiers using
Comprehensive Housing Aﬀordability Strategy (CHAS) data. This methodology was developed by

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
35
the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, and the City provided these ﬁgures to the Arizona
Department of Housing to comply with SB 1162.
Table 11
Housing Gap Analysis (Single Family and Multi Family)
Affordability Tier
2024 Housing Units
Deficiency
2029 Housing Units
Needed
Households making less than 30% Area
Median Income
170
720
Households making 30 to 50% Area
Median Income
210
890
Households making 50 to 80% Area
Median Income
490
2,020
Households making 80 to 100% Area
Median Income
390
1,590
Households making more than 100%
Area Median Income
1,580
6,520
TOTAL
2,840
11,730
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Arizona State Demographer's Office, Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG),
Central Arizona Governments (CAG), Pima Association of Governments (PAG), League of AZ Cities and Towns
Note: Rounded to the nearest ten. Totals may not add due to rounding. HUD Area Median Family Income (AMI) from
2021 HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
Key Findings
Currently, Buckeye faces signiﬁcant housing shortages that impact aﬀordability and accessibility
across all household income levels, limiting opportunities for stable housing across multiple
demographics. As the City experiences continued population growth and economic expansion,
the demand for aﬀordable and workforce housing has outpaced supply, exacerbating cost
burdens and displacement risks for vulnerable populations.
As of 2024, Buckeye faces a shortage of 2,840 housing units across all levels of aﬀordability.
This need is projected to grow to 11,730 additional units by 2029. The greatest deﬁciencies and
future needs are concentrated in homes aﬀordable to households earning above 100% of the
AMI, indicating a current and projected future shortage in market-rate housing units. Notably,
there are also substantial gaps for those in the 50–80% AMI range and the 80–100% AMI range,
initiating a lack of current and projected future workforce housing in Buckeye. Though the
lowest-income tiers (30–50% AMI and below 30% AMI) have the smallest number of units
needed, these residents are the most vulnerable to housing insecurity and displacement.
This pattern shows that Buckeye’s housing market is under strain across every income level.
As Buckeye continues to grow, addressing these shortages will require a comprehensive
approach, including expanding the supply of both aﬀordable and market-rate housing, making

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
36
sure that new developments match the needs of local households in terms of size and quality,
and prioritizing deeply aﬀordable options for the most vulnerable.
Analysis of Housing Gaps and Market Imbalances
Affordable Housing Shortages (Less than 50% AMI)
Buckeye faces a shortage of deeply aﬀordable housing for its lowest-income residents. By 2029,
a projected 720 units will be needed for households earning less than 30% of the AMI. The need
for aﬀordable housing extends into the 30–50% AMI range, with projected deﬁcits of 890 units
by 2029. These gaps aﬀect the City’s most vulnerable populations, such as seniors, people with
disabilities, and families who face a heightened risk of overcrowding and unstable housing
without access to aﬀordable options. It is crucial to expand housing opportunities for these
populations to prevent displacement and housing instability.
Moderate-Income and Workforce Housing (50-100% AMI)
The need for increased housing opportunities continues into the 50–80% AMI and 80-100%
AMI ranges, with projected deﬁcits of 2,020 and 1,590 units by 2029, respectively. While these
shortages are not as severe as those at the highest income tier, they still represent a substantial
barrier for many working families and individuals who may be unable to ﬁnd appropriately
priced housing. Such a lack of workforce housing indicates that even moderate-income workers
such as teachers, healthcare staﬀ, and public safety personnel will be unable to aﬀord to live in
the City, ultimately harming workforce retention.
Market-Rate and Higher-Income Housing (More than 100% AMI)
The largest projected shortfall is in the market-rate and higher-income segments. By 2029,
Buckeye will need 6,520 additional housing units for households earning more than 100% of
AMI. This reﬂects the City’s rapid population growth and signals that even those with incomes
above the median will face increasing diﬃculty securing suitable housing unless new units are
added to the market, which will likely further increase rents and home prices across all income
tiers.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
37
Next Steps: Addressing Needs in Housing Types, Availability, and
Affordability
This Housing Needs Assessment oﬀers a comprehensive analysis of current demographic trends,
housing market conditions, current and future aﬀordability gaps, and related challenges. This
assessment will serve as the foundation for the City’s Housing Action Plan, which will translate
the data and ﬁndings into implementable policy, regulatory, and programmatic actions. The
ﬁndings of this assessment illustrate the need for increased housing options, the need to align
housing supplies with current and future housing demand, and the need to preserve and
expand aﬀordable housing.
The Need for Increased Housing Options
A healthy housing market should provide a diverse range of housing options, including single-
family housing of varying bedroom sizes, ADUs, bungalows, manufactured/modular houses,
higher-density housing options, and “missing middle” housing choices. Currently, the vast
majority of land in Buckeye permits residential in some capacity, whether established through a
speciﬁc residential zoning category or as a permitted use in some commercial districts. While
this oﬀers plenty of space for developable land, much of the residential product is approved
through a Community Master Plan (CMP). While these predominantly feature single-family
product, some multi-family product is approved as a part of these plans. It is recommended that
the City continue to work with the development community and encourage diverse housing
products through the CMPs. Through a mix of zoning and land use reform, streamlining
permitting and review processes, and oﬀering technical assistance and incentives for developers
to ease barriers to construction, the City can enable a wider range of housing options, greatly
strengthening the local housing market and accommodating the evolving needs of Buckeye’s
residents.
The Need to Match Supply with Demand
The identiﬁed data on community preferences, housing supplies, and the existing and future
demand for housing provide the opportunity to align housing production with housing demand.
There is an illustrated need for increased housing suitable for residents across all income levels,
as well as accessible housing for seniors and individuals with disabilities, and workforce housing
for middle-income professionals.
The increasing demand for housing in Buckeye has left many residents struggling to ﬁnd suitable
accommodations within their ﬁnancial means, regardless of household income. Housing
shortages are signiﬁcantly pronounced even for those making at or above the City’s median
income, resulting in many higher-income residents occupying cheaper naturally occurring

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
38
aﬀordable units. This further displaces lower-income residents, who are often forced into
overcrowded or substandard housing conditions or displaced from Buckeye entirely.
Beyond aﬀordability concerns, Buckeye’s housing market also lacks suﬃcient housing for seniors
and individuals with disabilities. The City's aging population requires an expanded supply of
age-friendly housing, including single-story homes, independent living communities, and
assisted living facilities. Without these options, many seniors may be forced to leave the City or
remain in homes that no longer meet their mobility and accessibility needs. Similarly,
individuals with disabilities struggle to ﬁnd appropriate rental housing that meets their speciﬁc
requirements, particularly in terms of aﬀordability, accessibility, and proximity to
essential services.
Lastly, the City’s middle-income professionals, such as those in education, healthcare, and law
enforcement, face signiﬁcant challenges in securing aﬀordable housing within Buckeye. Rising
home prices have made it increasingly diﬃcult for this demographic to transition into
homeownership, while rental rates for market-rate apartments have climbed beyond the
aﬀordability thresholds of many workforce households. As a result, many middle-income
workers are forced to seek housing further from their places of employment, increasing
commute times and reducing their overall quality of life. The limited availability of workforce
housing near employment centers has broader implications for the City’s economic stability,
as a lack of housing options for the essential workforce impacts labor retention and job market
competitiveness. If housing aﬀordability concerns continue, Buckeye may struggle to attract
and retain a stable workforce, which is essential for sustaining long-term economic growth.
By working with local developers, nonproﬁts, and other housing providers, and by driving
development toward targeted areas, typologies, and income groups, Buckeye can ensure that
the housing needs of all residents are met.
The Need to Preserve and Expand Affordable Housing
The data highlights a widening aﬀordability gap in Buckeye, particularly for low- and moderate-
income households. While Buckeye has seen strong income growth, it has not kept pace with
the rapid increase in home values and rental rates. As part of the ongoing Housing Action Plan,
the City should explore the use of a number of incentives that can be oﬀered to developers to
encourage and facilitate the creation of new aﬀordable housing units. Incentives such as density
bonuses, land donations, and expedited reviews and permitting greatly helps to reduce
regulatory and administrative barriers, speed up timelines, and lower the cost of development,
ultimately increasing the feasibility of projects with a set-aside of aﬀordable units. In addition,

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
39
the City should explore partnership opportunities, such as those with nonproﬁts, community
organizations and land trusts, and private developers. Such partnerships can help to align goals
and eﬀorts and can ensure that resources are pooled eﬀectively.
Implementation of these strategies should occur in coordination with the City’s broader
infrastructure and resource planning eﬀorts. Given Buckeye’s rapid growth, limited water
supplies, and infrastructure constraints, the City’s approach to housing expansion must align
with the Buckeye Water Resources Master Plan to ensure that housing production goals are
supported by sustainable water management and infrastructure capacity planning. Coordinated
planning between the HAP and the Water Resources Master Plan will help ensure that new
development is both aﬀordable and resilient, aligning housing supply needs with responsible
land and resource stewardship.
By taking a proactive and integrated approach to preserving and expanding aﬀordable housing,
through inﬁll incentives, adaptive reuse, and the strategic use of CDBG and LIHTC funding, the
City can strengthen housing opportunities across all income levels. Buckeye can prevent
displacement, retain its workforce, and ensure inclusive growth through these eﬀorts, helping
to stabilize rents, protect vulnerable populations, and align growth with long-term water and
infrastructure sustainability goals.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
40

This page left intentionally blank.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
41

Part II: Buckeye Housing Action Plan
Background
This Housing Action Plan (HAP) is a plan, mandated by the state, which oﬀers strategic policy
guidance to address current and future housing needs within the City. Its core aim is to promote
greater housing diversity, aﬀordability, and attainability for Buckeye residents across all income
levels.
This HAP follows the completion of the City’s Housing Needs Assessment (HNA), which is a
study to better understand the types of housing available, challenges with aﬀordability, and
gaps in housing supply. This Plan complies with the requirements of ARS 9-469, as approved by
SB1162. It incorporates input from local residents and stakeholders, recommends policy
changes, updates regulations, and identiﬁes programmatic investments to support the City’s
housing goals. The Plan also provides an implementation framework to guide future growth and
development.
Community Engagement
Community engagement shaped this assessment by incorporating residents’ lived experiences
into the process and grounding the analysis in local perspectives. Matrix developed a bilingual
community survey, which the City distributed. The survey received strong participation from
residents and oﬀered insight into housing experiences and concerns. In addition to the survey,
Matrix facilitated a community meeting at the City oﬃces, and the City hosted a second event
with seniors at the Buckeye Senior Center. Community input is reﬂected throughout the report’s
ﬁndings and recommendations.
Resident Survey
In collaboration with City staﬀ, Matrix developed a resident survey covering a wide range of
housing-related topics. The survey was available in both English and Spanish and remained open
for approximately four months, from February to May 2025. It was promoted through multiple
channels, including social media, and hard copies were distributed at the senior center, City-led
events, and community meetings. In total, 617 responses were collected, providing meaningful
input on housing needs, challenges, and preferences. A summary of the full results is included
at the end of this report.
The survey was an opt-in eﬀort, meaning participants were not randomly selected but chose to
respond voluntarily. While most surveys rely on some level of voluntary participation,

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
42
statistically representative eﬀorts, like the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey,
use random sampling and apply weighting to better reﬂect the broader population. This survey,
by contrast, was open to any interested residents and may reﬂect some degree of self-selection
bias, with certain groups overrepresented and others underrepresented. Speciﬁcally, the survey
included proportionately more responses from Buckeye’s senior population and may not
adequately reﬂect the housing perspectives of the City’s broader demographics. Future
engagement eﬀorts should aim to gather input from the City’s young families, renters, and
workforce-age residents, to better inform housing needs and priorities. Its ﬁndings should be
viewed as a complement to the more representative data sources presented earlier in the
report, oﬀering additional and more recent insight into the experiences and perspectives of
those who participated.
Key Findings
 Residency and Demographics
 57% have resided in Buckeye for more than 10 years.
 80% of respondents are aged 65 or older, indicating a large senior population.
 41% of households consist of just one person; 28% have two people.
 Income and Affordability
 38% of respondents’ households earned less than $30,390 in the past year; a significant
portion (21%) were unsure about their income.
 23% of respondents have limited consumption of food, medicine, or other essentials to
cover housing costs.
 59% feel their current housing is affordable based on their household income, but 23%
do not.
 29% have found it difficult to save for emergencies due to housing costs.
 Housing Tenure and Satisfaction
 54% own their home or live in a home owned by someone in their household; 21% rent.
 69% found it not difficult at all to locate housing in Buckeye.
 57% are very satisfied with their current housing situation; only 10% are dissatisfied or
very dissatisfied.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
43
 81% rate the condition of
their current housing as
excellent or good.
 Housing Types and Priorities
 77% want Buckeye to
prioritize senior living
facilities.
 34% want more apartments,
32% want traditional single-
family homes, and 20% want
duplexes, triplexes, or
townhomes.
 36% feel a senior living
facility best fits their
household’s needs; 53%
prefer a single-family home.
 Key Housing Challenges
 65% see inadequate senior housing as a pressing issue.
 63% say rent is unaffordable.
 52% say younger people cannot afford to buy homes.
 59% are concerned about rising utility costs.
 21% say both single-family homes and apartments are in short supply.
 Community Growth and Development
 61% think it is very important for Buckeye to offer a wider variety of housing options.
 42% prefer new housing development in downtown Buckeye; 45% near schools or retail
centers.
 81% are concerned about increasing traffic and congestion due to growth.
 69% are concerned about strain on water or utility resources.
 Policy and Services

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
44
 62% (combined strongly agree/agree) support city incentives for developers to build
affordable housing.
 87% want senior expanded services from the new Human Services Department.
 56% want housing assistance.
 79% say better public transportation is very important.
All survey responses are detailed in Appendix A: Resident Survey Results.
Community Workshop
On May 12, 2025, the City of Buckeye hosted a community workshop at Buckeye City Hall East
at the Landing to involve residents in the development of this report. The event served two
main purposes: to share information about the project’s goals and to gather input on the most
pressing housing challenges and opportunities facing Buckeye. The workshop featured a mix of
informational and interactive materials, creating a space for participants to learn, share their
experiences, and contribute ideas for the future of housing in their community.
Following this workshop, City staﬀ hosted a second event at the senior center on May 28, 2025.
This session included the same activities and discussion prompts but focused on gathering
additional input from a broader and more diverse group of residents.
Meeting Materials
Meeting materials included the following informational and interactive materials and are
visualized on the following pages.
 Educational and Housing Data Boards
 What is a Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan?
 Rapid Growth and Changing Demographics
 High Rental Costs and Affordability Concerns
 High Rates and Costs of Ownership
 Interactive Boards
 Visual Preference - What Types of Housing Would Work in Buckeye?
 Agree/Disagree - Housing Perspectives

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
45
 Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan Fact Sheet
 Resident Survey

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
46

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
47
May 12, 2025 - Community Meeting

May 28, 2025 - Community Meeting

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
48
Engagement Impact
The resident and stakeholder input, including data collected by the survey, through the
community workshops at City Hall and the senior center, and online feedback collected
throughout, was vital for shaping key priorities and goals. For example, the community survey
revealed that senior housing is a pressing issue, highlighting a critical need for age-appropriate
housing options. Furthermore, the survey revealed widespread aﬀordability challenges, with
the majority of respondents noting that rent is unaﬀordable and that younger people cannot
aﬀord to buy homes. The community meetings illustrated the desire for diverse housing types,
such as townhomes, cottage courts, and ADUs, and emphasized the need for more aﬀordable
and workforce housing. This feedback was integral in creating the policy and programmatic
recommendations contained within the Housing Action Plan, and prioritizing City actions as part
of the Implementation Plan.
Introduction
As of 2025, the City of Buckeye has an estimated population of roughly 125,000 residents, and
encompasses approximately 640 square acres of Planning Area, and 400 square acres of
property within the City’s jurisdiction. Due largely in part to the City’s explosive population
growth, rising home costs are presenting challenges for both renting and ownership, placing
economic pressure on low-, moderate-, and even higher-income residents. Furthermore, the
vast majority of Buckeye’s housing consists of larger, single-family homes, with very limited
smaller units or "missing middle" options (duplexes, townhomes, etc.), which can oﬀer
residents more aﬀordable options.
Without intervention, the city risks exacerbating aﬀordability challenges, overcrowding, and
diminishing quality of life for current and future residents; addressing Buckeye’s challenges
around housing diversity and attainability will require a combination of strategies, including
promoting more eﬃcient land use, expanding housing options, updating policies and
regulations, and identifying eﬀective funding sources. Together, these strategies support greater
housing accessibility and aﬀordability for all residents. Because no single solution can meet the
full range of housing needs, a multi-faceted approach is essential to respond to both current
conditions and future demands.
As of July 2025, the City is in the process of updating its Development Code, with goals to revise
development standards, design standards, and the use table to enable and address emerging
product types, such as missing middle housing options (in accordance with HB2721, which
applies to all Arizona municipalities with populations of 75,000 or more). Many of the

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
49
recommendations in this report align with and support the priorities developing through that
update.
Catalytic Development Areas
The City’s rapid growth is evident in a wave of projects that are reshaping the City’s landscape
and broadening housing options for residents. Throughout the City, development and
redevelopment opportunities abound, particularly in catalytic areas such as Downtown Buckeye
and The Landing, both primed for investment and new growth. These locations, guided by
Community Master Plans, oﬀer the City a strong foundation to support attainable housing
through a range of housing options, from mixed-use multifamily developments to “missing
middle” housing. These eﬀorts have helped Buckeye to successfully begin addressing the
community’s evolving housing needs and adapt to changing market conditions.
Downtown Buckeye recently completed a Speciﬁc Area Plan that promotes an ambitious, multi-
phased approach aimed at transforming downtown Buckeye into a vibrant, walkable, and
economically robust center for both residents and visitors. The City's ongoing revitalization
eﬀorts should prioritize mixed-use projects that blend residential, commercial, and public uses,
as well as medium density housing types such as townhomes, multiplexes, and mid-rise
apartment buildings. Furthermore, Buckeye's Downtown Plan emphasizes the adaptive reuse of
historic buildings, transforming spaces into unique residential units that preserve the City's
heritage while adding much-needed housing stock. This area presents a unique opportunity to
promote live-work spaces that cater to entrepreneurs, artists, and small businesses, creating
housing solutions for this specialized workforce.
The Landing is a transformative, large-scale mixed-use project, shaped by a Speciﬁc Area Plan
that presents signiﬁcant opportunities to boost housing supply and drive economic vitality for
Buckeye. Multifamily
projects and new housing
units are already underway,
highlighting The Landing’s
role as an important
opportunity area for diverse
housing options. The vision
for this area includes dense,
mixed-use multi-family
developments while
encouraging missing middle
housing options to provide
residents with a broader

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
50
range of housing choices. However, density restrictions inﬂuenced by Luke Air Force Base’s
graduated density policy currently limit the number of units that can be built in this area. Where
safety and feasibility allow, the City should pursue renegotiation or increased ﬂexibility in
density policies to enable more housing units within The Landing’s core, while continuing to
respect Luke AFB’s operational needs. Initiating direct discussions with base leadership, the City
can present a data-driven proposal that balances community housing demands with base safety.
Together, both parties can explore alternative mitigation strategies and, if consensus is reached,
formalize any changes through a memorandum of understanding or intergovernmental
agreement.
In both areas, implementing a
mixed-use density bonus policy
would be especially eﬀective,
incentivizing developers to
create projects that integrate
housing, commercial, and
community uses. To
successfully implement this
policy, Buckeye should establish
clear base zoning parameters
with bonus allowances typically
ranging from 10-25% density
increases, along with
corresponding height and unit
count adjustments. The policy
should deﬁne qualifying mixed-
use requirements, including minimum percentages of residential versus commercial space,
required ground-ﬂoor commercial or community uses, and integration of missing middle
housing types.
A tiered incentive structure would maximize eﬀectiveness, oﬀering a basic 10-15% density
bonus for projects that meet fundamental mixed-use and missing middle housing requirements,
while providing enhanced bonuses of 20-25% for developments that include designated
aﬀordable units or signiﬁcant community beneﬁts such as active public spaces or covered bike
parking. To encourage participation, the City should streamline the administrative process
through fast-track review and permitting for qualifying projects, with clear application criteria
Source: City of Buckeye, AZ
This configuration shows how the built environment in downtown Buckeye is being
transformed into a more pedestrian friendly area that complements mixed-use
development.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
51
and a desired review time of 10 days, and a desired total turnaround time of less than 30 days.
Such a framework for a fast-track permitting and review process can be found in Appendix C:
Fast-track Permitting & Review Framework. The implementation should also address
infrastructure considerations and establish design standards that ensure mixed-use
developments integrate well with surrounding neighborhoods while meeting traﬃc, parking,
and utility capacity needs. Currently, the code allows for up to a 15% parking reduction for
mixed-use developments, helping to lower development costs and promote walkability and the
use of alternative modes of transportation. However, the City should explore increasing the
applicable parking reduction to up to 25% for mixed-use developments receiving any density
bonuses outside the downtown area, as such a density bonus would otherwise increase overall
parking requirements and development costs, potentially acting as a disincentive for such a
bonus.
The City of Buckeye, AZ currently oﬀers several downtown development incentive programs
designed to encourage investment and revitalization. These include the Catalyst Program, which
provides up to $50,000 in reimbursable funding to assist with building rehabilitation, as well as
general economic incentives such as tax breaks and expedited permitting processes that help
reduce upfront costs for qualifying projects. The city also employs downtown-speciﬁc zoning
overlays and regularly updates its Development Code to increase regulatory ﬂexibility and
expedite approvals, all aligned with the goals outlined in the recently adopted Downtown
Speciﬁc Area Plan (DSAP), which guides land use, design, transportation, and economic
strategies. Robust community engagement ensures these programs remain responsive to public
input.
To enhance these eﬀorts, Buckeye could consider expanding funding caps or tiering the Catalyst
Program to better support larger or phased projects, introducing dedicated façade improvement
grants to encourage visual enhancements, and explicitly incentivizing aﬀordable housing and
mixed-use developments to promote inclusive, pedestrian-friendly growth. Additionally,
measuring and publicizing program outcomes regularly would allow for data-driven reﬁnement,
while increasing technical assistance through workshops and design support could help more
property owners and businesses successfully navigate the process. Finally, leveraging state and
federal funding opportunities alongside local incentives could signiﬁcantly boost the overall
resources available for downtown revitalization. By continuously reviewing and adapting these
strategies based on market trends and community feedback, Buckeye can maintain momentum
toward a vibrant, thriving downtown district.
Development Incentives
Development incentives are powerful tools for streamlining aﬀordable housing production,
supporting economic growth, and encouraging a diverse and resilient housing market. These

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
52
incentives are strategically designed to leverage private investment while minimizing the need
for direct public funding. These incentives can be strategically utilized for speciﬁc projects that
the City is actively trying to attract, such as senior housing developments that serve Buckeye's
aging population or projects that demonstrate they are providing critical housing for low-to-
moderate income individuals who are essential to the community's workforce and economic
vitality. To address Buckeye's urgent need for attainable housing, the City should implement a
targeted set of development incentives that increase development feasibility and lower
potential regulatory and administrative barriers to housing production.
Enforcement and Compliance
Notably, to ensure the savings from development incentives are passed along to buyers and
renters of aﬀordable housing, Buckeye should include enforceable contract terms requiring
maintained aﬀordability for a set time period (of at least 20 years), clawback provisions to
recover funds if unmet, and regular reporting for transparency. The City can explore the use of a
monitoring agent to ensure the designated units are aﬀordable, in good condition, and
otherwise in compliance with the stipulations of the development agreement.
Due Diligence Assistance: Providing due diligence support helps developers access critical
data and information on developable parcels that are well-suited for residential projects.
This assistance, which includes resources such as the Site Suitability Analysis in Appendix B:
Suitability Analysis, helps developers to identify properties with the highest potential for
successful housing development. By reducing upfront risk and uncertainty, the City makes
it more attractive for developers to invest in these projects. Lowering the likelihood of
costly delays or unforeseen site issues helps ensure that viable projects move forward
efficiently. This proactive assistance demonstrates the City's commitment to facilitating
attainable housing development, which can attract developers who might otherwise be
hesitant to navigate complex regulatory environments or uncertain market conditions, such
as smaller development firms. The City benefits significantly from this approach as it
accelerates the delivery of much-needed housing inventory, generates increased property
tax revenue from developed parcels, stimulates local economic activity through
construction jobs and related services, and helps fulfill municipal housing goals more
efficiently than traditional market-driven approaches. Additionally, by streamlining the
development process and reducing developer costs, the City indirectly helps keep housing
prices more affordable for residents while building stronger partnerships with the
development community that can lead to future collaborative projects.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
53
Density Incentives: Granting density bonuses for projects that include a designated
percentage of desired housing types, such as senior housing or affordable and workforce
housing, allows developers to maximize the use of available land while offsetting the
financial challenges of serving specific community needs. This approach helps to increase
the total number of housing units and promotes more efficient land use. For the City,
density incentives create substantial benefits by generating higher property tax revenues
per acre due to increased unit counts, reducing infrastructure costs per unit by maximizing
the utility of existing or planned infrastructure investments, and helping the City meet its
housing diversity goals without depleting municipal budgets through direct subsidies.
Waiver or Reduction of Development-Related Fees: Waiving or reducing building permit
fees, plan review fees, and utility connection fees for housing projects directly lowers
project costs. Strategic fee reductions represent a calculated investment that yields
multiple returns: accelerated project timelines that bring housing to market faster,
increased development activity that stimulates construction employment and related
economic activity, and the ability to compete effectively with neighboring jurisdictions for
high-quality development projects. The ability to grant fee waivers also provides the City
with negotiation leverage to secure specific community benefits, design standards, or
amenities that might otherwise be cost-prohibitive for developers to include. By reducing
upfront capital requirements, the City can require developers to allocate resources toward
higher-quality construction, innovative design features, or additional community-serving
elements that enhance neighborhood value. Ultimately, these measures are not just a
short-term incentive but a prudent fiscal decision. The City reduces its long-term reliance
on public subsidies and infrastructure interventions by stimulating new development and
expanding the tax base. The resulting increase in property values and economic activity
generates ongoing municipal revenues that far exceed the initial investment in fee relief.
This approach aligns with sound financial management by leveraging limited resources to
maximize long-term returns for the City and its residents.
Reimbursement of Development Impact Fees: Reimbursing development impact fees for
housing projects reduces the financial burden on developers. By easing the upfront costs
associated with these fees, the City can encourage more projects to break ground, resulting
in a greater supply of attainable housing. For the City, impact fee reimbursement programs
create a unique opportunity to strategically direct development toward priority areas or
housing types while maintaining the revenue stream necessary for infrastructure
improvements. Impact fee reimbursement also enables the City to establish performance-

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
54
based incentives, where reimbursements are tied to specific outcomes such as construction
timelines, occupancy targets, or ongoing affordability commitments. By reducing
developers' carrying costs and cash flow pressures during the critical pre-construction
phase, the City helps ensure that viable projects can secure financing and move forward
even in challenging market conditions. This incentive is especially important in a
competitive real estate market, where even small financial barriers can deter investment in
specialized housing types that serve important community needs.
Development Code Updates
At the time of this report, the City of Buckeye is undertaking a comprehensive update to its
Development Code. Many of the housing policy recommendations and incentives outlined in
this action plan are anticipated to be incorporated into the ongoing code revision process,
reﬂecting the City's aspirations for a more ﬂexible, eﬃcient, and responsive approach to
development. These proactive changes are intended to streamline processes, reduce barriers to
housing production, and support Buckeye's evolving growth and housing needs. While the
current code update addresses immediate priorities, additional recommendations are included
here to accommodate future needs and evolving development patterns. These considerations
are intended to inform future amendments to the Development Code as Buckeye's landscape
and housing demands continue to shift.
Administrative and By-Approval Processes:
Lengthy and unpredictable approval processes
represent significant barriers to attainable housing
development. Administrative delays translate
directly into increased development costs through
extended financing periods, inflation impacts on
materials and labor, and opportunity costs for
developers and landowners. These expenses are
ultimately passed on to homebuyers and renters.
Streamlined processes benefit both the
development community and City staff by creating
more predictable workloads and clearer
expectations. The City of Buckeye's Development
Code Amendments ensure compliance with state
Goodyear, Arizona recently adopted
design standards that include special
exemptions aimed at increasing
housing affordability. During the design
review process, applicants seeking to
enhance affordability can request
exceptions to any “shall” guidelines,
provided the project continues to align
with the overarching design principles.
These exceptions can be
administratively approved by the
Development Services Department
director or a designee and may include
additional conditions.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
55
legislation, including SB 1162, which establishes streamlined approval requirements for
housing development. Beyond meeting these state mandates, the City can integrate
flexibility in design requirements and development guidelines into existing Alternative
Equivalent Compliance processes, encouraging creative and unique designs of desired
housing types, while still ensuring development meets the underlying intent of City
regulations. Lastly, the City can explore the provision of additional expedited review
benefits and development incentives for projects that specifically demonstrate they are
providing specialized housing types, such as senior housing, affordable housing, and
workforce housing. By granting projects that meet specific affordability or community
benefit criteria with expedited permitting and review processes, the City not only
incentives desired housing types, but it brings these projects to the market quicker,
benefiting Buckeye residents. A sample framework of a streamlined development process
is included in Appendix C: Fast-track Permitting & Review Framework.
Permitted Uses: Buckeye has improved its permitted use table to allow diverse housing
types by right, eliminating costly and uncertain discretionary review processes. This
approach supports missing middle housing as a bridge between single-family homes and
large apartments, offering attainable homeownership and rental options while preserving
neighborhood character. These smaller, lower-maintenance units suit young professionals,
seniors downsizing, and students. City-backed pre-approved design guidelines for these
types of housing help speed approvals while maintaining quality and community standards,
resulting in a more diverse, stable housing stock amid economic changes.
To enhance streamlining further, Buckeye could consider:
Developing consolidated checklists or flowcharts to reduce permitting steps.
Minimizing discretionary reviews by shifting approvals to administrative permits.
Standalone guidelines for standardized design and development standards.
Density Standards: Increasing allowable density represents one of the most impactful tools
for expanding attainable housing options. Higher density development spreads land costs
across more units, reducing per-unit expenses and making housing more accessible to low
and moderate-income households. Strategic density increases in appropriate locations,
particularly near catalyst development areas, employment centers, and Interstate-10,
maximize the efficiency of public investments and help reduce sprawl-related costs for
both the City and residents. Density bonuses tied to affordability requirements create

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
56
powerful incentives for developers to include attainable units while maintaining project
viability.
Parking Requirements: Excessive parking requirements artificially inflate housing costs by
mandating expensive infrastructure that may not reflect actual usage patterns, particularly
in walkable areas or developments serving car-light households. Reducing parking
minimums for attainable housing allows those savings to be passed through to residents
while supporting more compact development patterns. Flexible parking standards that
consider location, transit access, and demographic factors enable more responsive
development that matches community needs. This is particularly important for missing
middle housing types, where traditional suburban parking standards may not align with the
urban or transitional contexts where these housing types are most appropriate and
needed. Robust parking reductions may be more feasible in the future, as transit service is
expanded in Buckeye.
Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are
self-contained living spaces on the
same property as a primary residence,
oﬀering independent living, sleeping,
and sanitation facilities. They can be
detached structures (like granny ﬂats)
or attached to the primary home. ADUs
serve as a strategic tool to address
housing needs while supporting
multigenerational living arrangements
that are increasingly important to
families seeking to care for aging
parents, providing housing for young adults, or accommodating changing household dynamics.
ADUs provide naturally occurring aﬀordable housing by utilizing existing infrastructure and
neighborhood amenities while typically providing smaller unit sizes and cheaper rental and
ownership costs. In addition, ADUs oﬀer the potential to generate supplemental rental income
for property owners, which is particularly valuable for seniors and others on ﬁxed incomes.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
57
While the City of Buckeye is already in compliance with HB 2720 ADU requirements, creating a
comprehensive pre-approved ADU program can signiﬁcantly expand housing options within
existing neighborhoods.
A pre-approved ADU program requires upfront time and capacity
investments by the City but delivers substantial long-term
beneﬁts to residents and the community. The program involves
creating a library of standardized architectural designs that have
already undergone complete plan review, structural engineering
analysis, and code compliance veriﬁcation. Such designs should
include a range of ADUs, with varying numbers of bedrooms, unit
sizes, architectural styles, and building footprints. This
comprehensive process includes coordinating with local utilities
to ensure designs accommodate standard service connections,
working with ﬁre departments to verify safety requirements, and
conducting thorough reviews of accessibility standards and
building code compliance. The City's investment in this process
means that residents purchasing these standard plans receive
fully vetted designs that eliminate months of back-and-forth plan
review, costly design revisions, and uncertainty about approval
outcomes. Each pre-approved design includes detailed construction drawings, materials
speciﬁcations, and step-by-step permitting guidance, eﬀectively providing residents with a
turnkey development pathway.
This approach makes ADUs accessible to lower- and middle-income homeowners who might
otherwise ﬁnd the development process prohibitively expensive or
complicated. Traditional custom ADU development can require
$5,000-$15,000 in architectural and engineering fees before
construction even begins, not including potential revision costs and
extended timeline expenses. Pre-approved plans typically cost a
fraction of custom design fees while providing residents with
conﬁdence that their project will meet all regulatory requirements.
The program simultaneously gives the City greater control over
ensuring high-quality design standards that complement and blend in
with existing neighborhoods. By curating designs that meet aesthetic
and functional criteria, the City can ensure ADUs enhance rather than
detract from neighborhood character while maintaining consistent
standards for materials, proportions, and site integration.
With 84% of Buckeye’s
housing being 3+
bedroom single-family
homes and only 8%
offering 0-1 bedrooms,
there is a significant
mismatch between
available housing and
the needs of smaller
households, workers,
and seniors, leading to
affordability issues that
threaten workforce
retention and
community diversity.
Tucson, Arizona
Tucson’s “Casita Model Plan
Library” offers homeowners
currently 6 pre-approved
ADU designs, allowing for
faster permitting and
reduced design costs. The
program streamlines the
process of building casitas,
helping to increase the city’s
housing options and expand
affordability. Since its
launch, the library has led to
a rise in casita interest and
permitting activity.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
58
Affordable Housing
Aﬀordable housing ensures that individuals and families with low or moderate incomes,
typically under 80% of the area median income, can access safe and stable homes without
spending a disproportionate share of their earnings. This category includes seniors on ﬁxed
incomes, people with disabilities, households experiencing economic hardship, and many
working families. In Buckeye, with median monthly owner costs at $1,680, many residents are
at risk of being priced out. This can lead to longer commutes, fragmented community ties, and
increased strain on social services. Aﬀordable housing initiatives protect housing stability across
a wide income spectrum, reduce displacement, and promote stronger and more resilient
neighborhoods where everyone has the opportunity to thrive.
Workforce Housing
Workforce housing is designed to serve moderate-income households and individuals, often
earning between 80% and 120% of the area median income. These residents are vital to the
local economy but are increasingly priced out of living in the communities where they work.
This group includes teachers, ﬁrst responders, healthcare workers, municipal employees, and
service industry staﬀ. In Buckeye, where median monthly owner costs have reached $1,680,
many in this income range face growing challenges ﬁnding attainable homes nearby. When
these workers have to commute long distances, local businesses experience higher turnover
and rising recruitment costs, and community stability is weakened. Creating housing options
that align with workforce incomes helps keep essential workers rooted in the community,
strengthens the local economy, and preserves its quality of life.
Community Land Trust
A community land trust (CLT) works through a nonproﬁt organization that owns land on behalf
of a community and leases it long-term to homeowners, enabling aﬀordable homeownership by
separating land ownership from building ownership and ensuring the property remains
aﬀordable through resale restrictions. CLTs are a powerful tool for maintaining aﬀordability in
perpetuity. While community land trusts are typically rooted in grassroots eﬀorts, Buckeye can
help by providing funding, discounted or publicly donated land, technical assistance, and policy
support to bolster their eﬀorts. Unlike traditional aﬀordable housing programs that may lose
their aﬀordability requirements over time, CLTs ensure that housing remains accessible to low-
and moderate-income families for generations. This model allows the City to make a one-time
investment that continues paying dividends indeﬁnitely, protecting against displacement while
keeping homeownership opportunities within reach for working families. By pairing the CLT

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
59
model with a 99-year ground lease, residents gain inﬂuence over neighborhood development
and functional ownership, all while substantially reducing homeownership costs.
Collaborating with Local Employers
Data sharing between the City and major
local employers can help to determine
speciﬁc housing needs. The City can share
available housing opportunities and planned
growth areas, and employers can share
what types and sizes of housing their
employees need, as well as preferred
locations for new housing. Furthermore,
the City should promote employer-assisted
housing programs, which often provide
direct ﬁnancial support through down
payment assistance, rent subsides, and low-
interest or deferred payment loans, among
other forms of support. Communities can
support private employer participation
through matching fund programs, in which a
City matches employer contributions for
rental or downpayment subsidy, as well as
tax credit programs, allowing businesses to
reduce their tax liability in return for
qualifying housing contributions.
Fee Transparency
Buckeye can further encourage workforce housing development by working directly with the
development community. Administrative fees can represent an initial barrier when calculating
total project costs and are widely recognized as a barrier to attainable housing production. By
restructuring fee schedules for aﬀordable and attainable housing projects, Buckeye can directly
reduce housing production costs without compromising quality standards. Additionally,
collaborating with developers to identify suitable development areas through the
comprehensive site suitability analysis referenced in Appendix B: Suitability Analysis ensures
that workforce housing is built in locations with appropriate infrastructure, transportation
access, and community amenities. The City can further enhance this by creating an interactive
dashboard to update the analysis routinely based on evolving community conditions.
Flagstaff, Arizona:
The City of Flagstaff’s Employer Assisted Housing
Program provides up to $20,000 in down payment
and closing cost assistance to eligible City employees
purchasing homes within the Flagstaff Metropolitan
Planning Organization boundary. This interest-free,
deferred payment loan is structured as a 2-to-1
matching program, where the City matches the
employee’s contribution up to $10,000 with up to
$20,000 in assistance. The loan is secured by a
promissory note and deed of trust, with up to
$10,000 forgiven on a pro rata basis over ten years
of continued employment and owner occupancy.
The remaining balance is repaid if the home is sold,
refinanced for cash out, employment with the City
ends, or owner occupancy ceases. This initiative
helps Flagstaff retain employees and improve
housing affordability by reducing upfront
homebuying costs for City staff. The partially
forgivable loan encourages long-term employment
and residency, supporting community stability and
lowering turnover.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
60
Workforce Housing Trust Fund
A Workforce Housing Trust Fund is a dedicated source of local
funding that can be used to address a variety of housing needs.
Buckeye should establish such a fund to provide gap ﬁnancing
for aﬀordable housing developments, funding for the
maintenance and preservation of current housing, rental or
down payment assistance, and support for rent to
downpayment program to promote housing attainability.
Buckeye should establish a workforce housing trust fund using a
combination of local and external funding sources. The City can
allocate a portion of its general fund or create a dedicated
budget line to seed the fund. By investing the principal in
interest-bearing accounts or other low-risk ﬁnancial
instruments, the fund can grow over time as earned interest is
reinvested, providing a sustainable revenue source for future
housing initiatives. Additional funding may come from developer
fees, state and federal grants, low-interest loans, philanthropic
contributions, and voluntary donations from local employers or
developers. Managing the fund locally will enable Buckeye to
respond quickly and ﬂexibly to evolving housing challenges.
Having a local trust fund gives Buckeye greater control and ﬂexibility over its housing initiatives.
It allows the City to ﬁll funding gaps that state and federal programs may not address annually
and to prioritize projects that are most urgent or impactful for the community. Furthermore, a
trust fund can also be used to leverage additional private or public investment. Leveraging
matching funds from state or federal programs means using local dollars from a housing trust
fund to unlock additional funding from higher levels of government, eﬀectively multiplying the
impact of the City's initial investment.
Integrating Housing with Commercial Development
Integrating housing within commercial or oﬃce development not only creates new housing
opportunities, but it allows residents to live near employment opportunities. Beyond traditional
mixed-use districts (such as the City’s Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMU), Community Mixed Use
(CMU), Regional Mixed Use (RMU), Industrial Mixed Use (IMU), and Planned Mixed Residential
districts), the City should explore allowing certain housing types, such as apartments,
townhouses, and multiplexes, in additional commercial zones. Such commercial zones that can
Tempe, Arizona:
The “Home in Five” program
provides down payment and
closing cost assistance of up
to 6% of the home’s purchase
price, with an extra 1%
available for teachers and first
responders, making
homeownership more
attainable for these essential
workers. These loans are
funded through the state and
administered through
Maricopa County.
Eligible buyers must complete
an approved homebuyer
education course and meet
credit and income
requirements in order to
qualify and be eligible for the
loan to be forgiven.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
61
potentially support housing include C-1, C-2, and C-3 zones, as well as several of the City’s
specialized commercial districts, including Downtown Commercial (DC), Professional Oﬃce (PO),
Commercial Center (CC), and General Commerce (GC).
Furthermore, the City can explore allowing low-density, neighborhood-scale commercial within
current districts zoned solely for residential development; such neighborhood commercial uses
can help serve the daily needs of surrounding residential areas with small-scale, low-intensity
retail and service establishments, like small grocery stores, coﬀee shops, and professional
oﬃces.
Lastly, the city can explore enabling Accessory Commercial Units (ACUs). Similar in concept to
ADUs, ACUs allow a resident to operate a commercial space as a secondary use on their
residential property while maintaining the primarily residential character of neighborhoods.
Importantly, such ACUs should maintain subordinate appearance to the primary residential use
and should only allow low-intensity uses (like personal services, retail, and dining
establishments) during limited hours of operation. By integrating residential uses within
primarily commercial districts, and commercial uses within primarily residential districts, the
City can enable new housing close to places of employment, promoting walkable, vibrant
neighborhoods.
Senior Housing
Buckeye's aging population faces a critical housing shortage,
with only 2.1% of current housing units meeting accessibility
standards. This gap aﬀects seniors and individuals with
disabilities across all income levels, requiring targeted strategies
that address accessibility, aﬀordability, and diverse care needs.
The City can leverage established funding programs like Section
811 to connect seniors with resources for home accessibility
upgrades while simultaneously developing a comprehensive
Universal Design checklist to ensure consistent accessibility
implementation across new developments for residents 55+
years old or for a speciﬁc percentage of all new developments.
This tool serves dual purposes: establishing clear development
standards while educating builders and designers about features
that support independent living.
Currently, a signiﬁcant gap exists between publicly funded and private senior living facilities,
with seniors needing diverse options ranging from age-restricted neighborhoods to memory
What are Universal Design
principles?
These principles guide the
development of housing that
is accessible and comfortable
for people of all ages and
abilities. Key features include
zero-step entrances, lever-
style door handles, wider
doorways, and accessible
bathrooms. This helps homes
adapt to changing needs and
support residents.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
62
care and skilled nursing facilities. Buckeye can address this by
partnering with nonproﬁt housing partners, such as Habitat
for Humanity, Housing for Hope, the Foundation for Senior
Living, and LifeStream Complete Senior Living, regional
community development organizations like Trellis and
Chicanos Por la Causa, and ﬁnancial partners like Western
Alliance Bank and FirstBank to create mixed-income, age-
restricted communities that serve various care needs. These
partnerships allow the City to combine public resources with
private development expertise, accessing diverse funding
streams while leveraging additional knowledge and capital to
create aﬀordable communities oﬀering a mix of housing types,
including independent living apartments and supportive
housing units that provide a continuum of care options.
To encourage senior housing development, Buckeye should
implement targeted incentives that make these projects
ﬁnancially viable. Density bonuses, allowing up to 30%
increased unit counts for projects including age-restricted
senior housing with accessible housing components, provide
strong ﬁnancial motivation for developers. Additional senior
housing bonuses such as reduced fees, expedited permitting,
or expanded development rights further enhance project
attractiveness, while parking requirement reductions for
senior developments recognize this population's typically
lower vehicle ownership rates, reducing development costs while maintaining appropriate
parking levels. This comprehensive approach creates a continuum of care options while making
senior housing development ﬁnancially attractive to the development community.
Community Services Department
Buckeye’s existing Human Services Division within the Community Services Department delivers
valuable resources and information on housing assistance, shelter, and homeless services, laying
a strong foundation for expanding the Community Services Department to address the City’s
growing housing challenges. To build the division eﬀectively, the city should leverage
partnerships with other service providers and non-proﬁts to cover prevention, intervention, and
education for diverse vulnerable populations. A robust Human Services Division serves as the
Case Studies: Senior Housing
Senior Bridge, Phoenix
A city-backed project using
repurposed shipping containers
offers 40 transitional units and
65 permanent affordable
apartments for low-income
seniors (55+). It features
universal design, 24-hour
supervision, and easy access to
transit, combining public
resources and private
partnership for accessible,
affordable living.
Casa Azure, Phoenix
Developed by Dominium, Casa
Azure provides 189 affordable,
age-restricted senior
apartments. The community is
adjacent to family housing,
supports mixed incomes, and
demonstrates the use of Low
Income Housing Tax Credits to
create accessible units that
foster intergenerational
community.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
63
backbone of Buckeye’s attainable housing strategy, connecting housing needs with holistic
support systems that promote housing stability and success. Stable, aﬀordable, and accessible
housing is a crucial determinant of health and well-being, making the integration of human
services essential for any eﬀective housing initiative.
The expanded division should prioritize homelessness prevention by strengthening rental
assistance and eviction prevention programs and oﬀering comprehensive case management
services. By partnering with regional agencies such as Maricopa County, neighboring cities, and
other service providers, Buckeye can tap into additional funding and coordinate with existing
Continuum of Care networks to improve service delivery, data collection, and access to federal
funding for homeless services. These partnerships help the City provide emergency rental
assistance, security deposit support, legal support, and eviction prevention services, keeping
families housed during crises while leveraging regional expertise, collaboration, and resources.
Support for seniors and individuals with disabilities represents another area for divisional
growth. As the division grows, it could provide accessible housing navigation services as well as
establish partnerships with disability advocacy organizations to deliver comprehensive support
for these groups. Additionally, the division should oﬀer one-on-one assistance for all residents
seeking housing, including help referring applicants to providers and where appropriate
assistance with applications for aﬀordable rentals, housing vouchers, and homeownership
programs. This creates a centralized resource that streamlines access to housing opportunities.
This approach is particularly essential because housing challenges rarely exist in isolation and
require wraparound services to achieve lasting solutions. Housing instability in any form, such as
diﬃculty paying rent, spending signiﬁcant portions of household income on housing,
overcrowded living conditions, frequent moves, eviction, unsafe housing, or homelessness, can
signiﬁcantly impact the well-being of youth and families in both the short- and long-term.
Community education and outreach initiatives will amplify the department’s impact, including
workshops on tenant rights, fair housing, homeownership, and ﬁnancial literacy. Regular
resource fairs connecting residents to local nonproﬁts, social services, and employment
resources build a strong support network that addresses the interconnected challenges of
housing stability. Incorporating tenant and landlord rights education into these programs
promotes fair housing practices and helps prevent disputes that could lead to housing
instability. Local housing strategies provide a framework to unite various funding sources and
policy strands into a coordinated approach for tackling local housing challenges, with human
services departments uniquely positioned to serve as this coordinating hub.
The division’s role in data collection and outcome tracking is also vital for long-term housing
strategy success. By monitoring housing stability outcomes, evaluating program eﬀectiveness,
and identifying emerging needs, the human services division supplies the evidence base

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
64
necessary for policy adjustments and continued funding justiﬁcation. This approach makes
Buckeye’s housing investments measurable and builds the community partnerships and trust
needed for sustained progress.
Collaborating with Homeowners Associations
Many Buckeye subdivisions operate under covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) that
explicitly prohibit ADUs, duplexes, triplexes, and other "missing middle" housing types, creating
signiﬁcant barriers to housing diversity and aﬀordability within established neighborhoods.
These restrictions, often written when housing needs and market conditions diﬀered
substantially from today's challenges, eﬀectively limit the City's ability to implement
comprehensive housing strategies even when zoning changes would otherwise permit diverse
housing options. Additionally, homeowners and HOA boards may resist new housing types due
to common concerns about property values, neighborhood character, parking availability, and
the impacts of increased density on community infrastructure and quality of life.
Educational outreach functions as an essential component of this collaborative strategy; the City
can explore oﬀering regular workshops for HOA boards, property managers, and residents that
focus on the demonstrated beneﬁts of diverse housing types, updates on relevant state and
local housing laws, and clear explanations of how Buckeye's housing goals align with community
interests. These sessions should address common misconceptions about density and housing
diversity while providing concrete examples of successful implementations in similar
communities, emphasizing how thoughtful housing diversity can enhance rather than detract
from neighborhood stability and property values.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
65
State and Federal Funding Opportunities
State and federal subsidies are an important way to increase a project’s viability and scale. By
lowering the overall cost of development, a project becomes much more feasible. Subsidies can
help to attract investment to underserved areas and can support projects that provide greater
levels of aﬀordability than would otherwise be possible. In addition, subsidies can often be tied
to long-term aﬀordability requirements, ensuring that housing remains aﬀordable for future
generations.
Notably, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Arizona
Department of Housing (ADOH) oﬀer several funding programs that Buckeye can leverage to
address its housing challenges. These programs were selected based on gaps identiﬁed in the
City’s housing stock through market analysis and community input. Some are available only to
local governments, while others are open to nonproﬁts and other housing partners.
To make the most of these resources, Buckeye can focus on raising awareness of various local,
state, and federal funding sources among residents, developers, and community organizations.
Hosting informational workshops, developing funding resource guides, and strengthening
partnerships with housing providers can increase participation and help maximize the impact of
available funding. Aligning local eﬀorts with these established programs will support the
development of more aﬀordable and workforce housing that supports the City’s economic
development initiatives.
Government Property Lease Excise Tax
The Government Property Lease Excise Tax (GPLET) is a tax established by the state of Arizona as
a redevelopment tool that replaces traditional property tax with an excise tax for certain
properties. When a government entity (such as a city or county) owns property and leases it to
a private party for commercial, industrial, or residential rental use, the lessee pays an excise tax
based on the square footage and use type of the building, rather than paying a property tax
based on its value. This tax structure can provide signiﬁcant property tax relief to qualifying
projects, lowering development and operating costs, and stimulating private investment.
Furthermore, Buckeye can structure their local GPLET policies to require an aﬀordable or
workforce housing set-aside for mixed-use or residential projects, supporting the ﬂexible
development of mixed-income housing options.
Community Development Block Grants
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program is a federal program administered
by HUD that provides annual grants to states, cities, and counties to support a wide range of
community development activities, including housing initiatives, particularly for low- and
moderate-income individuals and households. This program is administered through the ADOH.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
66
CDBG funds can support a wide range of housing activities, such as housing rehabilitation,
homeownership assistance, site acquisition and predevelopment activities, and infrastructure
improvements. However, the funds
cannot be used directly for the
construction of new housing. This
program mandates that at least
70% of CDBG funds be used for
activities that support the low- and
moderate-income population; the
program’s ﬂexibility and emphasis
on lower-income populations make
it well-suited for promoting
aﬀordable housing projects.
Section 108 Loan-Guarantee Program
The Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program is a HUD program that allows CDBG recipients to
leverage their annual grant allocations for ﬂexible ﬁnancing for economic development,
infrastructure, and housing projects. Housing-related activities that can qualify include housing
rehabilitation and aﬀordable housing construction.
Self-Help Ownership Program
Authorized by the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996, the Self-Help
Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP) provides funding to assist nonproﬁt organizations
and consortia in creating aﬀordable homeownership opportunities for low-income families. The
program speciﬁcally supports the purchase of home sites and the development of infrastructure
for homes built or rehabilitated through sweat equity and homeowner participation.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
67
Notably, this program can only be used for single-family detached structures, and not for single-
family attached structures (such as duplexes, triplexes, or quadplexes) or multi-family
developments. Eligible expenses under SHOP are limited to land acquisition, infrastructure
improvements, and related
administrative costs necessary for
these activities. The funds cannot
be used for actual construction. All
projects must directly beneﬁt low-
income households, enabling
families who might not otherwise
achieve homeownership to do so.
Additionally, the average combined
cost of land acquisition and
infrastructure improvements for
each unit must not exceed $25,000.
HOME Investment Partnerships Program
The Arizona Department of Housing administers the Home Investment Partnership (HOME)
program, which was created by the National Aﬀordable Housing Act of 1990. This federal
program, allocated through the HUD, aims to increase the number of families served with
decent, safe, sanitary, and aﬀordable housing while expanding the long-term supply of
aﬀordable housing throughout Arizona.
ADOH's Community Development and Revitalization division utilizes HOME funds to provide
grants for owner-occupied housing rehabilitation projects. These grants are available to towns,
counties, and non-proﬁt entities across the state. ADOH publishes an annual Notice of Funding
Availability for HOME-funded owner-occupied housing rehabilitation programs, allowing eligible
organizations to apply for funding to improve and preserve aﬀordable housing stock.
The HOME Consortium membership is made up of Maricopa County (Lead Agency) and the City
of Avondale, City of Chandler, Town of Gilbert, City of Glendale, City of Peoria, City of Scottsdale,
City of Surprise, City of Tempe and unincorporated Maricopa County. Though the consortium
does not currently include the City of Buckeye, the City should join the consortium to tap into
this funding source.
Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities Program
The Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities Program provides funding to
develop and subsidize rental housing with supportive services for very low-income adults with
disabilities. This program enables individuals with disabilities to live independently while

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
68
receiving the assistance they need to thrive. Section 811 funds can be used for the construction,
rehabilitation, or acquisition of aﬀordable housing units and include rental subsidies to ensure
aﬀordability for residents. For a community like Buckeye, the program could address gaps in
attainable housing for individuals with disabilities. By partnering with nonproﬁts or housing
authorities experienced in serving this population, Buckeye could help direct funding toward the
creation of supportive housing options, thereby enhancing inclusivity and quality of life for
residents with disabilities.
Mortgage Assistance Program
The City should explore funding streams to create a mortgage assistance program to support
ﬁrst-time homebuyers in purchasing properties, including single-family residences, one-to-four-
unit dwellings, condos, and townhomes. Furthermore, ADOH plans to allocate $1.5 million to
one or more Industrial Development Authorities to implement or support existing Mortgage
Assistance Programs. The program
builds upon previous eﬀorts, which
have already provided $10 million
from the State Housing Trust Fund
and $3 million in ARPA funding to
assist eligible individuals and families
with incomes up to 120% of AMI.
These programs are greatly beneﬁcial
to the City economically, as they
provide essential workforce housing
options.
Downpayment Assistance Programs and Partnering Organizations
While Buckeye does not currently administer its own down payment assistance program, it
could improve access to homeownership by partnering with regional and nonproﬁt
organizations that operate such initiatives. Groups such as Trellis, Newtown Community
Development Corporation, and Chicanos Por La Causa (CPLC) offer down payment and
closing cost assistance, homebuyer education, and ﬁnancial counseling that support ﬁrst-
time homebuyers across the region. Additional opportunities include coordination with
the Arizona Department of Housing’s HOME Plus program and Maricopa County’s Home in
Five Advantage program, both of which provide grants or forgivable loans to help qualiﬁed
buyers bridge ﬁnancing gaps.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
69
Residential Loan Servicing
The Arizona Department of
Housing provides Residential Loan
Servicing for homeowners with
liens recorded against their
properties by various state
entities, including the Arizona
Department of Housing, Arizona
Housing Finance Authority,
Arizona Department of
Commerce, and the Arizona
Home Foreclosure Prevention Funding Corporation. These liens secure loans of state or federal
funds provided as assistance to homeowners. ADOH's Residential Loan Servicing staﬀ oﬀers
services related to these loans, including requesting subordination agreements, obtaining loan
payoﬀ statements, and processing short sale payoﬀs. These services help homeowners manage
their obligations and navigate property ownership or ﬁnancing changes. Many of these loans,
such as those from the Save Our Home AZ Program, may have speciﬁc terms and conditions,
including zero percent interest, no monthly payments, and potential forgiveness after a set
period. Homeowners with liens from these programs can contact ADOH's Residential Loan
Servicing staﬀ for assistance and should review their speciﬁc loan documents or contact ADOH
directly for detailed information about their particular loan terms and available services.
Emergency Solutions Grant Program
The Emergency Solutions Grant Program is a HUD program that awards grants to communities
to assist people with obtaining and maintaining permanent housing. The program funds various
eligible activities, including outreach to those experiencing homelessness, homelessness
prevention eﬀorts, rapid re-housing assistance, improving emergency shelter conditions, and
implementing Homeless Management Information Systems.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
70
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) is the main federal program meant to incentivize
ﬁnancing for the rehabilitation or construction of very low and low-income rental housing.
LIHTC is funded and allocated at the federal level but is administered by the Arizona
Department of Housing. Developers must set aside a minimum percentage of units to be
aﬀordable to very low- and low-income renters for at least 30 years in exchange for a reduction
in federal tax liability over ten consecutive years. There are non-competitive credits (4%) meant
to subsidize 30% of the low-income unit costs and competitive credits (9%) meant to subsidize
70% of the low-income unit
costs. Competitive credits are
often awarded to developments
with a higher percentage of set-
aside low-income units. They are
also often reserved for more
pressing projects that address
housing for speciﬁc vulnerable
groups, such as homeless
individuals or people with
special needs. Table 12
illustrates all the currently
operational LIHTC properties in
Buckeye, including an estimated 681 current income-restricted LIHTC units:
Table 12
Current LIHTC Properties in Buckeye
Development
Name
Address
Year Constructed
Total Units
Income
Restrictions
Unit Mix
Buckeye
Villa/AZ3
Portfolio
300 S 9th St
1982/Current
Acquisition and
Rehab
170 LIHTC
60% AMI
2, 3, and 4-
bedroom
Sierra Verde
Apartments
150 N Apache
Rd
1989
40 LIHTC
Not specified
Not specified

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
71
Development
Name
Address
Year Constructed
Total Units
Income
Restrictions
Unit Mix
Buckeye Senior
Apartments
605 S Fourth
St
1990
40 LIHTC
30% AMI
Not specified
(Senior)
Cholla Ranch
Apartments
316 N Miller
Rd / 7400 S
Miller Rd
2001
132 (124 LIHTC) 30%, 40%,
50%, 60% AMI
2 and 3-
bedroom
Riverwood
Apartments
25157 W
Beloat Rd
2002
148 (88 LIHTC)
Not specified
Not specified
Smoketree
Apartments
902 E Centre
Ave
2004
24 (19 LIHTC)
70% AMI
Not specified
Solana Villas
21699 W
Yuma Rd
2024
200 LIHTC
60% AMI
1, 2, and 3-
bedroom
Watson Homes
415 S 5th
Street
Application (2023)
52 LIHTC
Not specified
Not specified
Sidney Village
1485 S
Apache Rd
Under development
200 LIHTC
60% AMI
3 and 4-
bedroom
(townhome)
Monte Verde
Parcel 1.11(a)
Lower
Buckeye &
Apache Rd
Proposed
280
(Unspecified
LIHTC)
Not specified
Not specified
Sundance @
Buckeye
Yuma &
Apache Rd
Planned
394
(Unspecified
LIHTC)
Not specified
Not specified

Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing
Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing is an annual federal grant administered by HUD to
support communities that are actively taking steps to remove barriers to aﬀordable housing

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
72
production and preservation. Grants of up to $10 million can be awarded to local governments
for actions to further develop and implement housing policy plans, to improve housing
strategies, and to facilitate housing production and preservation. The grant can fund
amendments to current policies and codes, education and outreach activities, and
demonstration projects, among other related activities.
Private Activity Bonds
Private Activity Bonds (PABs) are tax-exempt municipal bonds which enable state and local
governments to leverage private capital for public beneﬁt projects, with aﬀordable housing
comprising over 90% of PAB utilization nationwide. States receive their federal allocation and
subdivide it between state agencies (50%) and local governments (50%), typically using
population-based formulas. The most powerful aspect of PAB ﬁnancing for aﬀordable housing
lies in its automatic qualiﬁcation for 4% LIHTC when bonds ﬁnance at least 50% of project
development costs, resulting in PABs being used as the primary vehicle for accessing these
credits.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
73
Implementation Plan
This implementation plan provides Buckeye with a clear, actionable framework for moving its
housing strategies forward as part of the City’s ﬁrst Housing Action Plan. It translates broad
goals and strategies into speciﬁc steps with timelines, measurable outcomes, and assigned
responsibilities. With this structure in place, City staﬀ, leaders, and partners can better
coordinate eﬀorts, allocate resources, and track progress on key initiatives. The plan also serves
as a communication tool, helping the City convey its housing priorities and actions to residents,
developers, and other stakeholders.
Implementation priorities were determined based on the ﬁndings of the Housing Needs
Assessment. The Needs Assessment found that the core housing challenge for the City is
managing the tension between its successful growth and a deepening housing aﬀordability
crisis that impacts both renters and aspiring homeowners across various income levels. Key
issues include a structural mismatch between the existing housing supply dominated by larger,
expensive single-family homes and the growing population's diverse needs, including smaller
housing units, units for lower/moderate incomes, and speciﬁc housing and accessibility needs
for seniors. These prioritized strategies in the implementation matrix represent important steps
toward addressing Buckeye’s housing needs, but their implementation will require further
discussion and formal approval by City Council.
Periodic Updates
The Housing Action Plan is intended to be a living document, in which policies and procedures
are routinely updated to match the City’s current housing needs and goals. Though the state
mandate requires an update to the Plan every ﬁve years, the City may choose to update the
Plan more frequently; such regular review is encouraged to assess progress, identify what’s
working, and adjust as the City’s needs evolve. Furthermore, though City Council approval may
not be required for all plan updates or amendments, it is recommended to still seek formal
council adoption, particularly if the City is pursuing federal funding or implementing signiﬁcant
policy changes. Not only does this provide political legitimacy and democratic endorsement of
housing priorities, but this grants the implementation authority necessary for larger scale
regulatory changes and funding allocations.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
74
The following pages outline a suggested implementation plan for the City, organized by
strategy, timeline, performance metrics, intended impact, and responsible department(s) to
lead various strategies of the Action Plan.

Table 13
Implementation Plan
Strategy
Timeline
Performance
Metrics
Intended Impact
Responsible
Department(s)
Council
Workshop(s) on
Housing Strategies

Workshop(s)
completion;
implementation
consensus
To explore
housing
strategies and
evaluate
timelines
City Council;
Planning &
Zoning
Density Bonus
Policy

Number of projects
using density
bonuses; new units
created
Increase housing
supply,
particularly for
workforce and
senior housing
Planning &
Zoning;
Development
Services
Waiver/Reduction
of Development-
related Fees

Number of projects
receiving fee
waivers; reduction
in development
costs
Lower barriers
to aﬀordable
housing
development

Development
Services; Finance

Streamlined
Administrative &
Approval Processes

Average project
approval time;
number of fast-
tracked projects
Reduce
development
timelines and
costs
Development
Services;
Planning &
Zoning
Development Code
Updates

Code amendments
adopted; time to
adoption
Modernize
regulations to
support housing
goals
Planning &
Zoning

0-3 years
3-5 years
5-10 years
Ongoing

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
75
Strategy
Timeline
Performance
Metrics
Intended Impact
Responsible
Department(s)
Streamline
Permitted Uses

Reduction in permit
processing time;
number of uses
streamlined
Simplify zoning
allowed uses to
speed
development
approvals
City Council;
Planning &
Zoning
Density Standard
Updates

Increase in
allowable density;
number of units
enabled
Enable more
housing units
per site to
increase supply
City Council;
Planning &
Zoning
Review and update
Parking
Requirements

Adjusted parking
ratios; improved
site ﬂexibility
Reduce parking
requirements to
lower
development
costs and
support transit
use
City Council;
Planning &
Zoning;
Development
Services
Site Suitability
Dashboard

Number of suitable
sites identiﬁed
resulting in
construction;
frequency of
analysis updates
Reduce due
diligence costs
for residential
development.
Planning &
Zoning; GIS/IT (if
applicable for
maintenance)
Reimbursement of
Development
Impact Fees

Number of
developments
receiving
reimbursements;
amounts
reimbursed
Incentivize
residential
development
through fee
reimbursement
programs
City Council;
Planning &
Zoning;
Development
Services
Senior Housing
Incentives &
Universal Design
Standards

Number of
senior/accessible
units created;
percent of housing
meeting
accessibility
standards
Address the
senior housing
shortage and
improve
accessibility
Planning &
Zoning;
Development
Services; Human
Services Division
Pre-Approved ADU
Program

Number of ADUs
permitted; average
permit processing
time
Provide a cost-
eﬀective housing
option for
residents
Planning &
Zoning;
Development
Services

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
76
Strategy
Timeline
Performance
Metrics
Intended Impact
Responsible
Department(s)
Mixed-Use &
Missing Middle
Housing
Development
Incentives

Number of mixed-
use/missing middle
projects approved;
percent increase in
housing diversity
Increase housing
diversity,
promote
attainability for
homeowners
and renters
Planning &
Zoning;
Development
Services
Establish a
Community Land
Trust

Number of land
trust properties
established;
number of
aﬀordable homes
preserved/created
Preserve long-
term
aﬀordability and
community
control of land
Development
Services;
Planning &
Zoning; Finance
Collaborate with
Local Employers

Number of
employer
partnerships
formed; number of
employees
beneﬁting from
housing initiatives
Increase
aﬀordable
housing options
for working
families
Development
Services;
Planning &
Zoning
Collaborating with
Homeowners
Associations

HOA agreements
supporting
diverse/inclusive
housing; policy
modiﬁcations
implemented
Reduce barriers
to missing
middle and
aﬀordable
housing within
HOA
communities
Development
Services;
Planning &
Zoning
Encourage Fee
Transparency

Availability of clear
fee schedules;
developers’
satisfaction surveys
Increase
predictability
and fairness in
development
fees and charges
Development
Services;
Planning &
Zoning; Finance
Establish a
Workforce Housing
Trust Fund

Amount of funds
collected and
distributed; number
of workforce
housing units
assisted
Create dedicated
funding for
workforce
housing
development
and preservation
Development
Services;
Planning &
Zoning; Finance

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
77
Strategy
Timeline
Performance
Metrics
Intended Impact
Responsible
Department(s)
Human Services
Division Expansion

Number of
residents served;
percent reduction
in housing
instability
Connect
residents to
housing
assistance and
wraparound
services
Human
Resources;
Human Services
Division

State & Federal
Funding
Applications
(Reference State and
Federal Funding
Opportunities
Section within the
HAP)

Number of grants
awarded; funding
leveraged
Maximize
external
resources for
housing
initiatives
City Manager’s
Oﬃce; Planning
& Zoning;
Development
Services; Human
Services;
Government
Aﬀairs
Community
Engagement &
Education
(workshops, focus
groups, community
meetings,
educational
materials, etc.)

Number of
workshops/events;
resident
participation rates
Build support for
housing
initiatives and
inform residents
of supportive
programing and
ﬁnancial
assistance
Community
Services;
Communications
and Government
Aﬀairs;
Partnering
Municipalities
and
Organizations

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
78
Appendix A: Resident Survey Results
The Resident Survey Results and tallied table start on the next page.

Housing Action Plan

1. Do you
currently
live in
Buckeye?
Yes
(91.9%)
No
(8.1%)

2. How
long have
you
resided in
Buckeye?
Less
than
one year
(1%)
1 to 3
years
(8%)
4 to 6 years
(15%)
7 to 10
years
(14%)
More
than 10
years
(57%)

3. What is
your age?
Under
18 (0%)
18-24
(0%)
25-34 (0%)
35-44
(4%)
45-54
(4%)
55-64
(12%)
65+ (80%)

4. Within
the past
year, how
much has
your
entire
household
earned in
income?
Less
than
$30,390
(38%)
$30,391
to
$50,650
(10%)
$50,651 to
$81,040
(10%)
$81,041
to
$101,300
(6%)
$101,301
to
$121,560
(2%)
$121,561
to
$151,950
(3%)
$151,951
to
$182,340
(6%)
$182,341
to
$202,600
(2%)
More
than
$202,6
01
(3%)
Not
sure
(21%)

5. How
many
people
One
(41%)
Two
(28%)
Three (18%) Four (6%) Five (4%) Six (1%)
Seven
(1%)
Eight or
more (0%)

Housing Action Plan
live in
your
household
(including
you)?
6. Do you
own or
rent your
home?
I rent my
home or
live in a
home
rented
by
another
member
of my
househo
ld.
(21%)
I own my
home or
live in a
home
owned by
another
member
of my
househol
d. (54%)
Other) (24%)

7. If you
are
currently
renting
your
home, do
you plan
to buy a
home in
Yes, I
plan to
buy a
home in
Buckeye
within
the next
two
Yes, I
plan to
buy a
home in
Buckeye
within the
next
three to
ﬁve
Yes, I plan to
buy a home
in Buckeye at
some point,
but I am not
sure when.
(2%)
No, I plan
to buy a
home
outside of
Buckeye.
(3%)
No, I plan
to
continue
to rent
indeﬁnite
ly, either
in
Buckeye
or
I am not a
renter.
(56%)

Housing Action Plan
Buckeye
in the
future?
years.
(2%)
years.
(2%)
elsewher
e. (35%)
8. Why do
you
choose to
live in
Buckeye?
(Check all
that
apply)
I grew
up here
and
conside
r
Buckeye
home.
(9%)
To live
near
family or
friends.
(35%)
To be close
to work. (8%)
Affordabil
ity of
housing.
(24%)
Quality
of
housing.
(7%)
Access to
job
opportuni
ties. (0%)
Quality of
schools.
(3%)
Safe
neighborho
ods. (20%)
Other
(23%)

9. How
long have
you lived
in your
current
housing?
Less
than a
year
(4%)
1 to 3
years
(18%)
4 to 6 years
(25%)
7 to 10
years
(14%)
More
than 10
years
(39%)

10. How
conﬁdent
are you
that you
(or
someone
else in
your
Very
conﬁde
nt (65%)
Somewh
at
conﬁdent
(10%)
Not so
conﬁdent
(3%)
Not at all
conﬁdent
(6%)
Unsure/d
oes not
apply to
me
(17%)

Housing Action Plan
household
) will be
able to
cover your
upcoming
housing
payment
on time?
11. How
difficult
was it for
you to
locate
housing in
Buckeye?
Very
difficult
(9%)
Difficult
(7%)
Somewhat
difficult
(15%)
Not
difficult at
all (69%)

12. How
satisﬁed
are you
with your
current
housing
situation?
Very
satisﬁed
(57%)
Satisﬁed
(19%)
Neither
satisﬁed nor
dissatisﬁed
(14%)
Dissatisﬁ
ed (6%)
Very
dissatisﬁ
ed (4%)

13. How
would you
rate the
Excellen
t (44%)
Good
(37%)
Fair (15%)
Poor (1%) Very poor
(3%)

Housing Action Plan
condition
of your
current
housing?
14. How
satisﬁed
are you
with the
overall
affordabili
ty and
availabilit
y of
housing in
Buckeye?
Very
satisﬁed
(13%)
Satisﬁed
(28%)
Neither
satisﬁed nor
dissatisﬁed
(28%)
Dissatisﬁ
ed (20%)
Very
dissatisﬁ
ed (11%)

15. Within
the past
year, have
you
limited
your
consumpt
ion of
food,
medicine,
or other
Yes
(23%)
No (77%)

Housing Action Plan
essential
goods to
help cover
housing
costs?
16. Have
housing
costs
signiﬁcant
ly
hindered
your
ability to
do any of
the
following
(Check all
that
apply)?
Pay off
non-
housing
debt
(e.g.,
credit
cards or
student
loans)
(14%)
Save for
retiremen
t (22%)
Save for
emergencies
(29%)
Pay for
medical
care (7%)
Pay for
educatio
n (1%)
Pay for
childcare
(0%)
Pay for
transporta
tion (12%)
None of the
above
(57%)
Other
(6%)

17. How
important
is it for
Buckeye
to offer a
wider
variety of
Very
importa
nt (61%)
Importan
t (13%)
Somewhat
important
(17%)
Not
important
at all
(10%)

Housing Action Plan
housing
options?
18. Which
of the
following
housing
types
would you
like to see
Buckeye
prioritize
going
forward?
Select up
to 3.
Apartme
nts
(34%)
Condos
(14%)
Traditional
single-family
homes
(32%)
Duplexes,
triplexes,
and
townhom
es (20%)
Senior
living
facilities
(77%)
Other
(8%)

19. What
do you see
as
Buckeye’s
most
pressing
housing
issues?
Select up
to 5.
There is
inadequ
ate
senior
housing
(65%)
Younger
people
cannot
afford to
buy
homes
(52%)
Rent is
unaffordable
(63%)
There is
inadequat
e
workforce
housing
(6%)
There are
too many
short-
term
rentals
(e.g.,
Airbnb's
and
Vrbo's)
(11%)
Single-
family
homes
are in
short
supply
(21%)
There are
not
enough
apartment
s (21%)
More
affordable
townhome
s and
condos are
needed for
purchase
(17%)
Rising
costs
of
utility
servic
es
(59%)
Afforda
ble
homes
are far
from
work,
school,
or retail
centers
(13%)
There
are
not
curren
tly any
pressi
ng
issues
(1%)
Oth
er
(6%
)

Housing Action Plan
20. Should
the City
offer
incentives
to
developer
s seeking
to build
affordable
housing?
Strongly
agree
(38%)
Agree
(24%)
Neither agree
or disagree
(25%)
Disagree
(1%)
Strongly
disagree
(7%)
Unsure
(4%)

21. The
City of
Buckeye is
establishi
ng a
Human
Services
Departme
nt. Which
of the
following
services
would you
like to see
provided
by this
Senior
services
(87%)
Youth
program
ming
(25%)
Job training
and
employment
services
(28%)
Housing
assistanc
e (56%)
Counseli
ng and
referrals
for the
unhouse
d (38%)
Health
services
and/or
mental
health
referral
navigation
(59%)
Other
(3%)

Housing Action Plan
departme
nt?
(Select all
that
apply)
22. What
areas of
Buckeye
would you
prefer to
see new
housing
developm
ent?
(Please
check all
that
apply)
North
buckeye
(North
of the I-
10)
(30%)
South
Buckeye
(South of
the I-10)
(31%)
Downtown
Buckeye
(42%)
Near
schools
or retail
centers
(45%)
Other
(5%)

23. How
important
is it for
Buckeye
to have
better
public
transporta
Very
importa
nt (79%)
Importan
t (15%)
Somewhat
important
(3%)
Not
important
at all
(0%)
Not sure
(3%)

Housing Action Plan
tion
options
for
residents?

24. Do you
feel that
your
current
housing is
affordable
based on
your
household
income?
Yes
(59%)
No (23%) Not sure
(17%)

25. What
type of
housing
do you
feel best
ﬁts your
household
's needs?
Single-
family
home
(53%)
Townhom
e or
duplex
(3%)
Apartment/C
ondo (17%)
Senior
living
facility
(36%)
Multi-
generatio
nal
housing
(12%)
Other
(3%)

Housing Action Plan
26. What
concerns
do you
have
about
growth in
Buckeye?
(Check all
that
apply)
Increasi
ng traffic
and
congesti
on
(81%)
Strain on
public
services
(police,
ﬁre, etc.)
(39%)
Lack of green
space or
parks (39%)
Overcrow
ding in
schools
(39%)
Strain on
water or
utility
resource
s (69%)
Other
(12%)

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
79
Appendix B: Suitability Analysis
A site suitability analysis evaluates potential locations for new residential development by
integrating geographic data to identify parcels best suited for aﬀordable housing, senior
housing, or multi-family projects. Using GIS, this analysis weights various data layers based on
their importance to housing objectives, then scores and ranks sites to create a suitability map.
This provides the City and development community with data-driven insights to identify optimal
construction sites. The evaluation criteria include Access to Existing Infrastructure, Education,
Economic Health, Assessed Value per Acre, Transit, Parks and Open Space, Grocery Stores,
Medical Centers, and Zoning. The suitability analysis table can be found on the next page.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
80
Category
Scoring
Maximum Score
Access to Existing
Infrastructure
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 1 mile = 3
Within 3 miles = 1
3+ miles = 0
5
Education
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 1 mile = 3
Within 3 miles = 1
3+ miles = 0
5
Economic Health
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 1 mile = 3
Within 3 miles = 1
3+ miles = 0
5
Assessed Value per Acre
<= $80,186 = 5
>$80,186 and <= $193,575 = 4
> $193,575 and <= $386,142 = 3
> $386,142 and <= $727,642 = 2
> $727,642 and <=$2,187,305 = 1
5
Transit
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 3 miles = 3
Within 5 miles = 1
5+ miles = 0
5
Parks and Open Space
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 1 mile = 3
Within 3 miles = 1
3+ miles = 0
5
Grocery Stores
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 1 mile = 3
Within 3 miles = 1
3+ miles = 0
5
Medical Centers
Within 1/2 mile = 5
Within 3 miles = 3
Within 5 miles = 1
5+ miles = 0
5
Zoning
Residential = 5
Other = 0
5

Total Score: 45

Ji
mm
ie Wash
Ent
e
rp
r
is
e
Ca
n
al
B
ox Wash
Wagne
r
Wash
Winters
W
as
h
B
P
o
wer
l
ine
W
a
sh
Wi
n
ters Wash
A
Mill W
a
sh
F
ourm
i
le
W
ash
Star
W
as
h
Rai
n
bow Wash
Trilby Wash
Waterma
n Wash
Beardsl
ey Ca
n
al
Da
ggs
W
as
h
Ja
ckra
b
b
i
t W
a
sh
A
Buckeye C
anal
H
assa
y
amp
a
River
Gila Rive
r
Sun Valley Pkwy
SouthernAve
Tonopah Salome Hwy
Hazen Rd
Miller Rd
Baseline Rd
OLD US Highway80
Palo Verde Rd
Wintersburg Rd
Beloat Rd
Apache Rd
Salome Hwy
339Th Ave
US Highway 85
MC 85
State Route 85
I-10
N 365Th Ave
Eliot Rd
Cotton Ln
Yuma Rd
County Road 85
Estrell
a Pkwy
Grand Ave
Loop 303
Sun Valley Pkwy
OLD
US Hi
ghway
8
0
Indian School
Rd
Northern Pkwy
Camelback Rd
Bell Rd
S Rainbow Valley Rd
Watson Rd
Rainbow Rd
Dean Rd
Verrado Way
Jackrabbit Trl
Perryville Rd
Estrella Pkwy
Johnson Rd
McDowell Rd
Van Buren Rd
rx
85
Thomas Rd
rx
303
Broadway Rd
10
Suitability Score (out of 45)
<16
16 - 23
24 - 29
30 - 36
37 - 45
City of Buckeye
Interstate
US/State Highway
Major Road
Stream
Housing Suitability Analysis
Buckeye, Arizona
0
2
4
Miles
Path: Z:\gis_projects\MAG_HOME\City_of_Buckeye\active\apps\Buckeye_Housing_2025.aprx
60

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
82
Appendix C: Fast-track Permitting & Review
Framework
A suggested framework for fast-track review and permitting is outlined on the next page.

Preapplication
Meeting
Early Assistance
Development
Review
Compliance and
Enforcement
Fast-Track Development Framework
1
2
3
4
•
City ombudsman
assigned
•
Meeting to
determine eligibility
and explore
incentives and
funding sources
•
Fast-track permitting
can be granted to
projects meeting
specific affordability
or community
benefit criteria
•
Ombudsman
schedules Preapp
meeting upon
applicant’s request.
•
City convenes staff
from relevant
departments
(Planning, Building,
and Permitting,
Public Works, ED,
etc.)
•
Completeness
Review conducted by
staff; applicant
addresses identified
issues.
•
Development review
occurs, and
designations are
issued upon
approval.
•
Initial determination
issued within 10
days.
•
Affidavits,
monitoring, and
inspections ensure
the project remains
in compliance with
the agreed upon
stipulations.
•
Ex. - Affordable units
are inspected and
registered, and must
remain for at least 20
years.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
85
Glossary
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU): An ancillary or secondary living unit that has a separate kitchen
with a cooking stove, bathroom, and sleeping area, existing either within the same structure, or
on the same lot, as the primary dwelling unit. These uses are sometimes referred to as “garage
apartments”, “granny ﬂats”, “mother-in-law apartments”, and/or “carriage houses”.
Aﬀordable: The monthly rents or monthly mortgage payment, including taxes and insurance, do
not exceed 30% of the median annual gross income level for households at that income level.
Area Median Income (AMI): The midpoint of the county’s income, in which half of the families
in the county earn more than the median and half earn less than the median. AMI is based on
annual estimates from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of the
median family income for the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).
Attainable Housing: Attainable Housing refers to a range of housing options that are aﬀordable
to households across various income levels, particularly those who earn too much to qualify for
traditional aﬀordable housing programs but still struggle to ﬁnd housing within their means.
Attainable housing supports the local workforce—such as teachers, healthcare workers, ﬁrst
responders, and service employees—by providing quality, safe, and reasonably priced homes
that align with household incomes and market conditions in Buckeye.
Low Income: Greater than 50% and up to 80% of the AMI.
Market Rate Units: Housing that is based on existing area market values and demand rather
than a reduced or subsidized price.
Middle Income/Workforce Housing: Housing that is aﬀordable to households earning
approximately 60% to 120% of the AMI.
Missing Middle Housing: A range of multi-unit or clustered housing types, ranging in size and
density between larger single-family detached homes and a mid-rise (usually 5+ stories)
apartment building. Such housing types typically include duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes,
courtyard apartments, bungalow courts, townhomes, multiplexes, and live-work units.

Buckeye Housing Needs Assessment and Action Plan
86
Moderate Income: Greater than 80% and up to 120% of the AMI.
Very Low Income: 50% or less of the AMI.