Limited Time Offer. Become a Founder Member Now!

Oro Valley planning panel votes to begin zoning code updates for mechanical screening and yard-wall heights

October 07, 2025 | Oro Valley, Pima County, Arizona


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Oro Valley planning panel votes to begin zoning code updates for mechanical screening and yard-wall heights
The Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 Oct. 7 to initiate changes to the town zoning code intended to update screening standards for ground- and roof-mounted mechanical equipment and to allow 7-foot side and rear yard walls.

Planning staff presented the proposal and asked the commission to authorize research and drafting of a formal code amendment. "The purpose for tonight's meeting is to consider initiating updates to the zoning code related to mechanical equipment screening and yard wall heights," Ms. Hayes, a planning staff member, told the commission.

The request responds to several inconsistencies staff said exist between the town's zoning regulations and building practices. Currently the zoning code requires a 4-foot screen wall around many ground-mounted mechanical units; staff said that fixed height can be too tall for small condensing units and too short for larger systems. "Our code currently requires a 4 foot tall wall," Ms. Hayes said, noting the department is also considering whether screening heights should relate to the actual unit height. Staff also flagged a code provision that requires a screen wall to be no more than 10 feet from a mechanical unit; that rule, staff said, can require additional walls where a unit already sits inside a fenced area.

Separately, the town's building-code allowance for certain wall heights recently increased from 6 feet to 7 feet, and staff proposed updating the zoning code so side and rear yard walls could match the building-code height. "A proactive approach to this wall height discrepancy between codes could be to update the zoning code to allow a 7 foot wall on the side and rear lot lines," Ms. Hayes said.

Commissioners asked about several practical impacts. Commissioner Nichols asked whether the 4-foot screening requirement applies to every mechanical installation; Ms. Hayes confirmed that the code currently uses a blanket 4-foot standard and said staff will examine options such as sizing the screen to the specific unit. Commissioner Zielinski raised public-safety concerns and asked whether police had weighed in on taller walls; Ms. Hayes said she would consult the police department as part of staff research. Commissioner Wilson asked whether existing rooftop units would be grandfathered; Ms. Hayes said any code change would apply prospectively and not be retroactive.

Commissioners also discussed the interplay with homeowners associations. Ms. Hayes said private covenants can be stricter than town rules and that homeowners must comply with both.

The motion to initiate the code amendment—described at the meeting as "Update the current mechanical equipment screening standards for ground and roof-mounted units and update the yard wall height allowances on side and rear property lines"—was made and seconded during the meeting and carried 7-0. The commission's action directs staff to research draft language, consult stakeholders (including the police department and HOAs), and return to the commission with a proposed amendment.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of Sept. 10, 2025 meeting minutes — motion to approve carried 7-0 (no mover/second identified on the public transcript).
- Initiate zoning code amendment to update mechanical equipment screening standards and yard wall heights — motion carried 7-0; mover: Commissioner Nichols; second: Commissioner Zielinski.

Staff-level next steps include measuring typical mechanical-unit heights, reviewing rooftop screening approaches for new residential construction, evaluating the utility of the 10-foot proximity rule, checking consistency with the International Residential Code, and soliciting input from the Oro Valley Police Department and homeowners associations. The commission did not adopt specific code language Oct. 7; it authorized staff to research and prepare formal amendments for future commission review.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Arizona articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI