Guymon planning commission approves Lot 34 split in Rimrock Estates, 4-1

The Planning Commission of the City of Guymon voted 4-1 on Jan. 7, 2025, to approve a lot split of Lot 34 and the north half of the vacated North Street in the Rimrock Estates Addition, a decision that will allow the applicant to create two separate residential lots.

Planning staff told commissioners that "Miguel Chaparro submitted an application for a lot split on this property. He would like to split the lot to be able to put a house on each lot once it's split," and that staff recommended approval. Staff said there were no protesting letters filed and noted that mail-notification to properties within a 300-foot radius is not required for lot splits the way it is for rezonings or variances.

The commission and staff discussed dimensional compliance. Planning staff said the city's R-1 minimum lot size is 7,000 square feet and that, to avoid neighborhood friction, staff and the applicant sized the proposed parcels to meet the neighborhood covenants' recommended minimum of 8,400 square feet per lot. Staff also said the proposed split would meet the required zoning setbacks. The applicant confirmed access arrangements and easements: the driveway is expected to access Remrock (Rimrock) and the property is bounded to the south by an alley easement and to the east by a utility easement.

Applicant Miguel Chaparro addressed the commission, saying the proposal was intended to "add homes a little bit to Guymon" and that he had measured the site to confirm compliance with applicable requirements. Staff reiterated that, while the city enforces its ordinances, private neighborhood covenants are not enforced by the city; nonetheless, staff said they had the applicant resubmit the split to conform to the covenants "to not ruffle any feathers." The commission received no public comments in opposition during the meeting.

A motion to approve the lot split was made and seconded; the motion passed with four votes in favor and one against. The transcript does not identify the motion-maker or the seconder by full name in the public record. Staff noted there were no protesting letters on file and that the split, as drawn, will allow each new parcel to meet the covenant and ordinance minimums and required setbacks.

The commission moved on after the vote; staff and the applicant were directed to proceed with the administrative steps necessary to record the split and update property records.