Articles and Updates
Census Finds Over 16% of Arizona's Housing Units Vacant
March 14, 2011
The U. S. Census Bureau found 463,536 vacant housing units statewide as of April 2010. That’s 16.3% of the housing stock. Highest vacancy rates were found in La Paz County at 42.7%, followed by Navajo 37.4%, Gila 32.7%, and Apache 30.0%. Pima County recorded the lowest at 11.9%. Maricopa County was 13.9% and Pinal 21.1% (see Table 1).
Almost half of the vacant units (227,000) were in Maricopa County. Pima County had 52,249, and Pinal County 33,632.
During the past decade, Arizona’s housing stock grew by more than 655,000 units, a percentage increase of nearly 30%. The three “Sun Corridor” counties accounted for 82.6% of the new units. Maricopa County added 389,048, Pinal County 78,068, and Pima County 74,172.
The Census found three times the number of vacant units than reported by HUD, which bases its estimates on U. S. Postal Service surveys. The USPS counts a housing unit as vacant if no mail has been delivered in the past 90 days (the unit must also have been lived in and must be habitable). This survey recorded roughly 130,000 vacant units in Arizona’s six metro areas, compared to over 401,000 counted by the Census (see Table 2 below).
Table 1: Vacant Housing Units, U.S. Census, 2000 and 2010
| 2000 | 2010 | 2000 | 2010 | 2000 | 2010 | |
| Total Housing Units | Total Housing Units | Vacant Units | Vacant Units | % Vacant | % Vacant | |
| Arizona | 2,189,189 | 2,844,526 | 287,862 | 463,536 | 15.1 | 16.3 |
| Apache | 31,621 | 32,514 | 11,650 | 9,743 | 58.3 | 30.0 |
| Cochise | 51,126 | 59,041 | 7,233 | 8,176 | 16.5 | 13.8 |
| Coconino | 53,443 | 63,321 | 12,995 | 16,610 | 32.1 | 26.2 |
| Gila | 28,189 | 32,698 | 8,049 | 10,698 | 40.0 | 32.7 |
| Graham | 11,430 | 12,980 | 1,314 | 1,860 | 13.0 | 14.3 |
| Greenlee | 3,744 | 4,372 | 627 | 1,184 | 20.1 | 27.1 |
| La Paz | 15,133 | 16,049 | 6,771 | 6,851 | 81.0 | 42.7 |
| Maricopa | 1,250,231 | 1,639,279 | 117,345 | 227,696 | 10.4 | 13.9 |
| Mohave | 80,062 | 110,911 | 17,253 | 28,372 | 27.5 | 25.6 |
| Navajo | 47,413 | 56,938 | 17,370 | 21,280 | 57.8 | 37.4 |
| Pima | 366,737 | 440,909 | 34,387 | 52,249 | 10.3 | 11.9 |
| Pinal | 81,154 | 159,222 | 19,790 | 33,632 | 32.3 | 21.1 |
| Santa Cruz | 13,036 | 18,010 | 1,227 | 2,573 | 10.4 | 14.3 |
| Yavapai | 81,730 | 110,432 | 11,559 | 19,529 | 16.5 | 17.7 |
| Yuma | 74,140 | 87,850 | 20,292 | 23,083 | 37.7 | 26.3 |
Table 2: Metro Residential Vacancy Counts, Census and HUD/USPS Compared
| MSA | Total Addresses | |||||
| HUD/USPS | Census 2010 | difference | ||||
| Flagstaff | 47,006 | 63,321 | (16,315) |
|
||
| Lake Havasu City-Kingman | 99,884 | 110,911 | (11,027) | |||
| Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale | 1,861,080 | 1,798,501 | 62,579 | |||
| Prescott | 97,076 | 110,432 | (13,356) | |||
| Tucson | 454,038 | 440,909 | 13,129 | |||
| Yuma | 69,618 | 87,850 | (18,232) | |||
| AZ Metros | 2,628,702 | 2,611,924 | 16,778 | |||
| MSA | Vacant Addresses | |||||
| HUD/USPS | Census 2010 | difference | ||||
| Flagstaff | 841 | 16,610 | (15,769) |
|
||
| Lake Havasu City-Kingman | 7,067 | 28,372 | (21,305) | |||
| Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale | 91,805 | 261,328 | (169,523) | |||
| Prescott | 1,386 | 19,529 | (18,143) | |||
| Tucson | 26,861 | 52,249 | (25,388) | |||
| Yuma | 1,944 | 23,083 | (21,139) | |||
| AZ Metros | 129,904 | 401,171 | (271,267) | |||
| MSA | Vacancy Rate | |||||
| HUD/USPS | Census 2010 | difference | ||||
| Flagstaff | 1.79% | 26.20% | -24.41% |
|
||
| Lake Havasu City-Kingman | 7.08% | 25.58% | -18.51% | |||
| Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale | 4.93% | 14.53% | -9.60% | |||
| Prescott | 1.43% | 17.68% | -16.26% | |||
| Tucson | 5.92% | 11.85% | -5.93% | |||
| Yuma | 2.79% | 26.28% | -23.48% | |||
| AZ Metros | 4.94% | 15.36% | -10.42% | |||
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) based on U.S. Postal Service data (USPS), U.S. Census Bureau, and the Economic and Business Research Center in the Eller College of Management.
For additional information, please contact us.




