Map: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. © 2026 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. Published for news reporting under the Newsroom’s media-use terms.

The planned Queen Creek Arizona Temple has a location: the southeast corner of Ryan Road and Euell Drive, between Meridian Road and Ironwood Road.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced the site on August 31, 2026. Plans call for an 82,000-square-foot temple on 15.5 acres, with a meetinghouse and an ancillary building on the property, according to the Church’s announcement.

For residents, the announcement puts a specific place behind a project first announced in October 2024. For anyone considering nearby land, it raises a different question: how much should a future temple affect what a buyer is willing to pay?

What is confirmed, and what is still ahead

As of September 7, 2026, the independent temple-tracking website’s Queen Creek project status page lists the project in the planning and approval phase, with no groundbreaking date announced and no official exterior rendering released. ChurchofJesusChristTemples.org is not affiliated with the Church.

The August 31 Church release identifies the location and planned size but does not give a Queen Creek construction start or opening date. The map accompanying this story is the Church’s location illustration; it is not a rendering of the future building or a parcel survey.

The planned meetinghouse and temple serve different purposes. The Church describes meetinghouses as places for Sunday worship open to everyone, while temples are used by eligible members for sacred religious ceremonies.

Which existing homes and communities are nearby?

This is already a residential part of Queen Creek, with occupied neighborhoods as well as continuing construction. Three communities in the surrounding Queen Creek Road corridor give buyers different kinds of housing to compare. These are neighborhood-level reference points, not a claim that every home is adjacent to the temple or within walking distance of a future entrance.

  • Barney Farms: Fulton Homes’ community near Queen Creek and Signal Butte roads combines existing residents with ongoing new phases. The homeowners association documents its operating lake, parks and resident activities, while Fulton’s community page continues to advertise new homes. Buyers should distinguish a completed resale home from a builder’s proposed floor plan or unfinished home. Our Barney Farms guide covers the neighborhood’s amenities.

  • Ironwood Crossing: This established community in the Meridian–Ironwood corridor has 2,147 single-family homes, according to its community association. Its housing predates the temple announcement: for example, a public property listing on Lyle Avenue describes a two-story Fulton home built in 2008. That illustrates the older, already-built housing available to evaluate in this area; it is not a statement that the individual home remains for sale.

  • Madera: South of Queen Creek Road, between Signal Butte and Meridian roads, Madera includes newer completed homes and continued builder sales. One public property record on 226th Place identifies a four-bedroom, 2,694-square-foot house built in 2022. Ashton Woods documents its Marquis and Sultana neighborhoods, while Lennar continues marketing homes at Madera. An existing home here can therefore compete with new construction, not just other resales.

For a completed house, compare age, condition, floor plan, lot, HOA obligations and the actual route to the proposed site. A view, a short drive and frontage on a busier access road are different attributes. No final entrance layout or parcel-by-parcel proximity premium is established in this story.

What has happened to home values near other temples?

The historical research does not show a consistent price jump that buyers can safely add to every nearby property. Results differ by location and, especially, by how researchers separate the temple from the neighborhood’s existing characteristics.

Orlando, Boston and Raleigh: mixed early findings

Steven J. Danderson’s 2003 analysis examined 207 homes within two miles of temples in those three metropolitan areas. It reported a positive association near Orlando, an inconclusive result for Boston because of limited observations, and no statistically significant effect for Raleigh.

The paper was published by FAIR, a Latter-day Saint apologetics organization, and sought to test claims that temples made nearby homes unmarketable. Its small samples and acknowledged lack of analysis of local real-estate cycles limit its use as an investment forecast. Even this frequently cited favorable study did not find that every temple raised home values.

Omaha: a premium that was already there

Eric Thompson, Roger Butters and Benjamin Schmitz studied the Winter Quarters temple in Omaha, announced in 1999 and completed in 2001. Their research examined 2,969 single-family sales from 1990 through 2007. Looking only at sales after completion suggested homes nearer the temple were worth more. Adding the earlier sales showed that the proximity pattern already existed.

Their peer-reviewed study, published in Contemporary Economic Policy in 2012, found no consistent evidence that completion itself increased surrounding home values. This was one older Omaha neighborhood, not a forecast for Queen Creek, but it demonstrates why an expensive house beside a temple is not by itself proof of a temple-created premium.

A broader 2026 analysis: location selection matters

In a January 2026 KUER interview, data scientist Alex Bass described his Mormon Metrics analysis of 42 U.S. temples and 15 years of Zillow data. He reported that temple ZIP codes outperformed the national average, but that the apparent temple effect disappeared after accounting for their baseline demographic characteristics.

Bass also said a positive result in heavily Latter-day Saint areas was not statistically significant. This is an independent analysis described by its author, rather than the same kind of peer-reviewed evidence as the Omaha paper. ZIP-code results also cannot establish the value of an individual home with a temple view.

What that history means for existing homes and vacant land

The recurring lesson is to separate neighborhood growth from the effect of the temple itself. A rise in the area’s median sale price can reflect larger new houses entering the sales mix, improved roads, amenities or broader market conditions. It does not necessarily mean the same existing house gained that amount because of a temple.

For Barney Farms, Ironwood Crossing and Madera, a useful local comparison would track similar completed homes sold before and after the August 31 site announcement, against comparable homes farther away. It should account for builder incentives and differences in age, size, upgrades and lots. With the site announcement only a week old, this story does not establish such a local price effect.

Vacant land requires a separate conclusion. The research discussed here measures housing, not a reliable before-and-after return on undeveloped acreage around temples. There is no supported percentage in these sources to apply to a Queen Creek land purchase. A parcel that becomes buildable or receives utilities can gain value for those reasons; attributing the whole gain to a nearby temple would confuse development value with a religious-location premium.

Existing homes offer an observable building, an established setting and potentially usable resale or rental comparisons. Raw land adds uncertainty about approvals, servicing, construction and the time before it can produce income. Either can be overpriced. History supports checking the property’s fundamentals, not assuming an automatic windfall at announcement, groundbreaking or dedication.

Land-buying analysis: the announcement is not enough

A future temple could make proximity more attractive to some buyers who value convenient access to worship. That is a plausible source of demand, not evidence of a measurable increase in nearby land values.

This story has not established a temple-related price premium through closed land sales, an appraisal or a study of this location. It would be premature to call surrounding acreage a good investment simply because a temple is planned.

The purchase price matters as much as the location. If a seller has already priced in years of expected appreciation, a buyer can be right about the area’s appeal and still overpay. Nearby raw land also needs a different analysis from a finished residential lot: the cost and feasibility of making it usable can determine whether the deal works.

Five questions before buying nearby

  • What can actually be built? Identify the parcel and governing jurisdiction, then verify current zoning, allowed uses, setbacks and any subdivision requirements. A nearby religious project does not establish development rights for another property.

  • How will water and wastewater service work? Obtain parcel-specific information from the relevant provider, including connection availability and costs. The Arizona Department of Water Resources explains that its assured-water program evaluates a 100-year supply for covered developments within Active Management Areas. Do not assume a neighboring development’s water status applies to vacant acreage.

  • Is access usable and legally documented? Review the title report, easements and survey. Price road work, power connections, drainage improvements and any other work necessary for the intended use; a road visible on a map does not settle those questions.

  • What do comparable closed sales show? Compare parcels with similar zoning, size, access and utility service. Asking prices alone do not show what buyers have paid, and a finished lot is a poor substitute for a raw-land comparison.

  • Can the purchase survive a long hold? Include financing, taxes, insurance, maintenance, professional fees, improvements and eventual selling costs. Test a scenario with no appreciation and a later resale than planned.

When the numbers could work

A parcel deserves a closer look when its price is supported by comparable sales, its intended use is feasible, service and improvement costs are documented, and the buyer can carry it through a slow resale. Proximity to the temple could then be an additional benefit.

A deal is much harder to justify when the expected profit depends on a quick temple-driven price jump, an unannounced completion date or an assumption that utilities and approvals will arrive cheaply.

For now, the useful distinction is between a confirmed temple location and an unproven investment return. Buyers should make the parcel work financially without assigning it an automatic temple premium.

For more Queen Creek neighborhood context, explore our Barney Farms community guide.

This is general reporting and analysis, not a valuation of any parcel or personalized investment advice. Updated September 7, 2026, to add historical research and nearby existing-home context. Project and source information checked the same day.