10-09-2014, 08:40 AM
Sounds like Hamakua has learnt a lesson from Puna and Ka`u.
|
Property Values
|
10-09-2014, 09:42 AM
randomq,
I live in the area covered by the Hamakua CDP (even though I am in the South Hilo district), and I have a few good friends who have worked for years on the CDP and served on the organization that is steering it. So I can get questions answered, but do not profess to be entirely knowledgable. It is online though. All the CDP's are online under the County Planning sites. As a matter of fact, there is a new subdivision proposal coming up, and there will be a community meeting tomorrow, Friday, where a member of the Planning Department will be present to explain what is and isn't allowed under the CDP and other related issues. If anyone is interested in attending, let me know. The general position of the Hamakua-Hilo CDP is to keep Hamakua Hamakua, that is rural. To not overburden what is already old infrastructure with new building that would strain the system. So yes, a new subdivision has to shoulder its weight in the community. Above all, because Hamakua contains some of the best true agricultural land on the island, with 15 feet of soil as compared to mere inches in much of Puna, the CDP opposes taking "prime" agricultural lands permanently out of production by subdividing them through rezoning. The land is Ag-20, so subdividing into 20 acres wouldn't require rezoning, but would trigger infrastructure requirements. There are many lots that are less than 20 acres, as they were existing kuleanas at the time that zoning first came to the island (I was told that prior to Statehood, the government did not have power to enact zoning?). The huge tracts of land that did come under the 20 acre zoning were largely held by the sugar plantations, which then sold off some or all of their holdings when they closed up. Much of the residential structure of Hamakua was based on the plantation camp model. The old camp areas already have small lots of around 5K sq feet, and are not expensive. But anyone wishing to move into an old camp area needs to understand that many of the residents there are old-timers and there is a huge bond between them. One can't expect to move in there and gentrify it or change the culture, or you will be most unpopular with the community. Mainland values not welcome. Kathy
10-09-2014, 10:18 AM
quote:I don't think so, actually. I don't think they spent a lot of time looking at those districts. If anything they compare to Hilo and Kohala as the closest neighbors. They went with what would work for the area, what was logical. Kathy
10-09-2014, 10:27 AM
dont think values are going up in puna anywhere. i mean think about it what individual clearly thinking, would buy land in a "lava" flowing area. all of us folks that own land in puna bought our land knowing there was always a risk . i never bought thinking i would become rich off of jungle property, that just might someday be over run with black hot molten lava.
10-09-2014, 10:30 AM
I understand what you are saying, Kathy.
Maybe Kohala and Hilo learnt something from Puna and Ka'u, where subdivisions were done 5 and 6 decades ago with zero infrastructure and subsequent problems.
10-09-2014, 10:42 AM
To clarify:
The rules about subdivisions are County-wide. Each CDP has a posture towards growth. HCDP doesn't want any (for various reasons mentioned above). PCDP says growth in certain places is allowed (subject to conditions that are very difficult to meet). Both would seem to prefer "drive to Hilo".
10-09-2014, 11:11 AM
Re "drive to Hilo," at least with HPP, from what I was told long ago, it was seen as a bedroom community of Hilo.
My husband was a skilled carpenter living in Hilo in 1976, who was hired to build early days homes in HPP. I remember him telling me about that way back 35 years ago when we met. The way he put it at the time, when I asked "what is Hawaiian Paradise Park" was --it's this inexpensive bedroom community on junk land for people who work in town and are willing to commute if it means paying less for their homes." While I'm sure his view doesn't encompass all of what people thought of HPP, it's probably a fair bead of how the construction industry looked at it, and there are certainly plenty of people who settled there with that understanding of the tradeoff. Keep in mind that people didn't expect full service village centers as a component of rural life then. I hear so much complaining about "drive to Hilo" like it's some burden placed only on Puna. Lots of people tell their stories of their own rural living, but it never seems to sink in. Well, here's mine. Where I went to high school, I lived two thousand feet elevation above the town that had full services, and an hour's drive away on winding two lane roads. Every morning I caught the bus at 6:30 AM and I got home from school about 4:30 PM. The bus ride was 90 minutes to 2 hours each way, five days a week. My father commuted two hours each way to his job. My mother went to town once a week to do her errands. For medical, we made a two hour drive to our family doctor. There was a village about 20 minutes away, and another at 30, but basically all they had was a gas station and churches, maybe some tiny store. And this was in Los Angeles County, not exactly a backwater or remote. So from my past perspective, I don't see anything weird about a plan made in the 1960's that expected rural areas of the county to go into town for town needs. I understand the Puna land divisions were land scams in certain respects, but in other ways the set up was not unusual. I could describe five other places I have lived that were also very far from town and where a lot of driving was required and the kids would sit on the bus for a good amount of time I just don't understand how anyone with a rural living background can continually whine about not having a store and a market right down the street. If you didn't have a rural living perspective, then you shouldn't have moved here unless you were ready to adopt one. I understand that if Pahoa goes, it will be a HUGE unfathomable loss to many, which I feel for. But the whining predates any imminent loss of Pahoa. What Pahoa has offered to rural Puna is so much more at reasonably close range than I ever had access to in my years of rural living, where rural villages were really just a gas station, a tiny little store, and a church or three. Oh, and a bar. Kathy
10-09-2014, 11:52 AM
quote:I think Hilo town was always going to be different, because it was the primary town of the island, but in the rural areas north of Hilo, there are many substandard roads, there are catchment water areas, and so forth, and the sugar plantations provided for people's basic needs in lieu of public infrastructure. I've loaned out my copy of "Land and Power in Hawai'i," but I seem to recall that Waikoloa was almost developed without infrastructure, back in the same time period, but it was blocked. Having lived over there and owned, I became aware of things that I'm not too sure people over here realize. For example, the ag land subdivisions of leeward North Kohala (Kohala Estates, Kohala Ranch, Kohala by the Sea) were developed a lot more recently, but they don't have County water. They have private roads paid for by the residents. (Kohala Estates has a County feeder road.) There's no broadband cable or DSL. You can't grow anything much. There's no cheap water and it almost never rains. There's no mail delivery. There are keyed outdoor boxes at the gas station at Kawaihae, so 10-15 minute drive to get mail, but a 45 minute drive to postal service in Waimea (which is the zip code for that area, where they would hold any packages). There's not much of a village center at Kawaihae, and keep in mind that Kawaihae was developed by Rockefeller as a worker's bedroom community when he built the Mauna Kea Beach Hotel, and is what it is in large part due to his entrepreneurial spirit and not County planning. Waikoloa Village is a big residential development with NO County water, no sidewalks (when I moved there, but they pushed to put them in on part of the main road, all paid for by HOA fees IIRC). When I moved there, which was in the 21st century, the KTA there was teeny (now double the size and all renovated), and the shopping center bare. I had to go to Waimea or Kailua to get a simple hardware item or tool, and to get affordable groceries. When I lived in Kapa'au, the only grocery store was in no way adequate and for most things we drove to Waimea, 45 minutes each way over Kohala Mountain Road, which gets real old quick and costs a lot in gas. What those subdivisions have that is different from a lot of Puna is private water companies and piped in water, but all private and MUCH more expensive than County water. Watering landscaping over there costs a bundle (no help from rain). The water tastes awful too. Some of the subdivisions but not all there have CC&R's and HOA fees that would make you cry they are so high. Waikoloa Village when I lived there had a fairly low HOA fee of about $500 a year, more now I'm sure. A few of those "ag land" subdivisions are gated. So the point of all this is there are subdivisions with high property values that don't have County provided infrastructure, although they do have HELCO and HawaiianTel basic service without any SSP. Yet it costs 300K for a vacant 3 acre parcel in Kohala Ranch, after which anyone who builds has to go through architectural committee and all that with the HOA to get a home approved, and must conform to some extent with approved style and colors as well as minimum size. I think the key to having functional subdivisions with private roads and often utilities is the dues must be mandatory, the HOA must be empowered by agreements from the landowners, and it can't be so big that there are too many people to get a consensus. Although, I lived in Kohala Estates, which has no HOA or CC&R's for the subdivision, and it worked. We had a tiny HOA just for our cul de sac of under ten parcels, and we were responsible for our own road, which was not paved. However, not having unpaved roads subject to windward style rains also makes it possible to have a dirt road. Somehow, in these other parts of the island, people didn't spend any energy that I heard complaining about the County. They worked within the parameters of the framework that was in place in each subdivision towards improvement. Not that they have any special harmony, friction between people is everywhere. Because I was coming from that experience, when I began looking at property in Puna, way back in 2003, I didn't have any expectations of change. I just looked at what there was, looked at the lava risk, tsunami risk, utilities and roads situation, whatever, and if I thought I could handle it I considered buying, and if not I crossed that subdivision off my list. As for increase in property value, that was never the thinking. The thinking was more that I can get a nice house in Puna for the same price or less than a horrible fixer in Hawi, and the tradeoffs are .... numerous. Kathy
10-09-2014, 01:40 PM
I don't see anything weird about a plan made in the 1960's
Times change, people change. It seems a little strange that this has never been rethought. I think the key to having functional subdivisions with private roads and often utilities is the dues must be mandatory, the HOA must be empowered by agreements from the landowners, and it can't be so big that there are too many people to get a consensus. I could not agree more. The "impossible consensus" is probably the biggest problem. Unfortunately, these "right ways" are nearly impossible to retrofit, just like an inadequate road easement. I've often said "HPP is larger than some towns" -- but even if HPP were granted the right of incorporation, there would still be no clear consensus on how it ought to be managed. Oh well. It was a nice experiment.
10-09-2014, 02:02 PM
Yeah, I agree, kalakoa.
I almost bought in HPP more than once, was in one escrow and canceled it because of the specific structure and not the subdivision issues. I will also say that I never heard squat about the road dues and maintenance and HOA as any kind of problem I would be taking on. In hindsight, I think realtors should be on top of that and inform buyers that it's not all rosy (understatement), and that goes for other SD's too. A buyer does have due diligence, but there's an awful lot of ground to cover in that short period, and I never got any hint that I should look into that situation. As for rethinking outdated planning models, well it's easy to rethink but harder to redo, as you acknowledge. My point about Kohala by the Sea is here's an example of an SD without County water and with private roads that was first offered circa 2002. Not a product of the 60's. I'm fairly sure it is Ag zoning. I think the difference is, the target demographic is "buyers who have enough money to take it on and are willing to do so." That and the water was available, but was private and expensive, so no catchment. However, for people who buy there who can only just afford the entry price, the additional costs could end up being over the top, same as they can in Puna. Kathy |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)