Why? (lot sizes)

[Jason808]

Or where your neighbors rooster pen is in relation to your house

[Haaheo okole puka]

Actually... Long narrow lots were originally intended as parent lots created for future sub division.
For example in Waa Waa we have 150X1000 lots and other sizes mauka/makai the beach road.
The 150 wide X 1000 deep parent lots can be later divided into (20ea of SF/R-6500) 50 wide by 130 deep with 20x1000 reserved as half a road and the remaining half of road extracted from an adjoining parent lot where another 20 lots are created. That's a 40' wide road with 40ea SF/R-6500 lots from 2 parent lots.

100X870 can be divided into 17 ea. 50X80 SF/R-4000 lots with 20' at end of parent lot for half width connector road that is parallel to the parent road.

As per the rest of the dimensions found in the subdivisions apply the same concept with 20' as half a roadway width along a side and possibly rear boundary line of the parent lot. The remainder of the parent lot width becomes the depth of the child lots where the selected widths are subjective to the desired zoning size.

If you're the parent lot owner at the time of subdivision, your last name could end up as the name of the future road your lot facilitates.

[Haaheo okole puka]

Where's the best place to facilitate space for future generations? Remove more forest or subdivide the existing?

[mac nut]

Never thought about narrow lots needing less road space but it makes sense in a puna kind of way []

[Haaheo okole puka]

The parcels lengths are the result of a longer list of failed development projects in Hawaii. No investors, no completion. They had to peddle the dirt to the public instead. This continues to this day and Hawaii is a very difficult place to develop. These long parcels weren't intended to remain as they are.

This is why I laugh every time I hear someone expressing fear of a new development coming if a road is paved, etc. I have yet to see the forest of investors and potential buyers swim here to make it happen.

[csgray]

Haaheo okole puka,
Do you have any documentation to confirm what you are saying as fact? I have done a lot of research on the history of Puna subdivisions and NEVER came across any mention of these lots being planned for future subdivisions. I have seen brochures for the various subdivisions that now exist that bear only the slightest resemblance to reality (stables and a country club in HA for example), all kinds of advertising materials, even some of the applications filed with the county by the developers, and nothing has ever presented these properties as being designed for future new mini subdivisions. So I have to ask, is this just an idea in your head based on the geometry of the lots, or do you have actual documentation of this?

Carol

[Haaheo okole puka]

Here are some of the more recent reasons why developments are rarely if ever successful here.
http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/Hawaii-Bus...in-Hawaii/

[Haaheo okole puka]

Csgray,
You're not comprehending what I'm expressing.
It was common practice to buy a large tract of land and subdivide it without infrastructure back in the days that these mammoth subdivision were created in. Typically this resulted in smaller developers being able to buy the new parcels and break them down further and sell them to builders etc. It was an initial process of development back in the day. Here that model failed miserably.

[csgray]

H.O.P.
I wasn't asking about why it is hard to develop big properties in Hawaii, I was asking about your claim that the spaghetti lots were designed with future subdivision into mini developments in mind, because in all my research I have NEVER, EVER come across that and I would like to know where that is documented for my future research. My undergraduate degree was in geography with a focus on land use planning and I am still very interested in the history of Hawaii Island land use, if what you are saying is documented I would like to know where. Otherwise it seems like you are just stating opinions as facts on this.

Carol

[csgray]

H.O.P.
I don't think there is a problem with my comprehension, but looking at the edit times you have clearly gone back and rewritten what you originally said, after I asked for documentation. You originally stated that the design of the spaghetti lots HERE IN PUNA was for them to be resubdivided later, but it seems that you have exactly zero documentation of that. Just because that is what was done elsewhere (on the mainland maybe?) it doesn't automatically follow that that was the intention here. My understanding from a lot of research is that the creators of the Puna subdivisions were selling a volcanic version of Florida swampland and the original developers and Hawaii County never thought anyone would actually move onto these lots in Puna and Ka'u, which is why the county let them skip the legally required infrastructure like decent roads.

Carol