Why? (lot sizes)

[Guest]

Check and Mate ! []

[Carey]

Just an aside, I grew up on & have bought narrow AG lots on the mainland, all subdivided in the 1920's - 50's... this was a VERY common practice, and none of them were further subdivided, even though all of these were in the collar counties surrounding Chicago & "prime" development acreage...

Why were they not re-subdivided? because many different landowners had bought parcels, the land usage was already zoned 1-5acre-AG. and housing was established on these individual lots...

This is all very similar to the Puna lots, which are 1-20 ac AG. As to what the intent of the larger land owners at the subdivision...most likely to get as many parcels for the zoning at the least cost to subdivide.... In Puna, if they were going for further subdivision & it was ECONOMICALLY practical, I kinda think those landowners would have done it (these were large land owners, some of whom STILL ARE large landowners...) I really doubt they lacked the resources to subdivide as MOP has suggested...IF IT WAS ECONOMICALLY PRACTICAL...

In order to upgrade to a residential zoning as suggested, there is (has been for longer than I have been alive) a very large "entry fee" of roads, utilities, and other amenities that make that rezoning less desirable and rarely done on small scales of a few acres (Images, as MOP has suggested that you have 2 (or 4) adjacent lots in outer HA. To meet the rezoning requirements, you would not only need to pay for the road, but also the SPSS for the lots - ALL of the rezoned lots! and then you would have a mini subdivision...in the middle of outer HA, still having to rely on the roads & such that are controlled by a homeowners group ... ) ....even in a very economically advantageous market it comes at a very HUGE price (Oahu has some of these small parcel AG re-zonings), one I doubt anyone in the 1920-50s, or even 2014 would expect would be advisable in Puna (or even around Chicago in todays market...)

[Haaheo okole puka]

It's a method of land development that does not work here. It's not a method used much if at all anymore. Back in those days, a simple lunch out with county/state officials, a paper napkin drawing and a handshake could get nearly anything underway development wise.

This right here -
"concerns that people might someday build on the lots (as never originally intended) and demand services and infrastructure from the County"
This sort of land development was not commonly practiced to entice end product owners. I'm not saying they didn't target end item owners here. They obviously abused this method of land development practice and did so in a very big way. This also occurred on the mainland but not on this scale.
You can interpret the book however you like but without understanding the particular practice to make available tracts to housing developers as they did back in those days - it evidently results in not understanding the actual meaning of the passage and why the intended method was not subject to those infrastructures found in housing developments. As per "spaghetti lots" the future intent to this day is still assigned to these lots through the applied address system where these lots are individually pre assigned a whole group/block of address numbers. This does not mean you can immediately go down and have them re-zoned and subdivide them. It means they are "in reserve" for single family housing subdivision use.

[Carey]

I am probably closer to "back in those days" and have experience with LIVING in a long "spaghetti" lot subdivision for over a half a century... going back to before some of the subdivisions in Puna were subdivisions... & my folks for way longer.... you may not believe it, but even the address system was similar in the midwest (BTW the birthplace of the grid system that you referred to... thanks to Burham) however the ahuapu`a dang spellcheck! ahupua`a system changes the gridding slighly, so the county wide system is more a pie grid address system...

[EightFingers]

I noticed the second link (provided by Midnight Rambler) does indeed mention the lots can be subdivided.*



*I'm thinking it requires a bit of "palm-grease" tho'.

[Haaheo okole puka]

"*I'm thinking it requires a bit of "palm-grease" tho'. "

LOL... I like that one

[Haaheo okole puka]

From: http://imgur.com/gallery/E1C0MKm
General Information –
… “There are no restrictions or provisions on home construction or improvement of the land. You can build immediately or not at all, rent, lease or subdivide.”
Imagine if that were still true today

[kjlpahoa]

One possible reason for the narrow lots is that it encouraged people to buy more than a single lot. At the price of the original lots, it was worth it to buyers to buy multiple lots. But now, single lot purchases are the norm and it does get a little frustrating dealing with very narrow, long lots.

[Rob Tucker]

My opinion is that the developers and the county figured they could get the maximum taxable TMKs with the minimal amount of "road" building.

[unknownjulie]

My lot in Orchidland is 2 acres. All the lots are not 3.