Ala Wai East

MLS property data uniformly reports the building as built in 1969 across all available listings. The remarks reference an older, boutique style building and upgrades to units, which is consistent with a 1969 construction date. There is no textual evidence of a later original build year.

Remarks for the penthouse unit explicitly state it is on the 10th floor and is the 'entire top floor,' so the building height is 10 floors. Other listings reference floors below without contradicting this, supporting a 10-story structure. No remarks suggest additional stories above the 10th floor.

All five listings describe Ala Wai East as having 'only two units per floor,' and the penthouse is described as 'the entire top floor' on the 10th floor. Interpreting this as 9 floors with 2 units each plus 1 full-floor penthouse yields an estimated total of 19 units. No listing provides a conflicting unit count or different building layout.

Retained the current owner-occupancy value of 53% due to lack of contrary evidence. Searched for phrases like 'owner occupied', '% owner occupied', 'majority owner occupied', or similar, but none appeared.

Kept the existing value of 1 elevator because there is no evidence in the remarks to confirm or contradict it. Searched for mentions of 'elevator', 'lift', or 'multiple elevators' and found none.

Calculated from the lowest association fee observed across all non-penthouse unit listings for this building.

Calculated from the highest association fee observed across all non-penthouse unit listings for this building.

Calculated from association fees observed in penthouse unit listings for this building.

The MLS association-fee data never includes ACCEN (central AC) for this building, and remarks instead describe portable A/C units, which indicates individual, not central, cooling. Together this strongly supports that central air conditioning is not included in the maintenance fees.

All available MLS entries for this building (6/6) check CABTV in the association_fee_includes field, matching prior data where every listing also showed cable TV included. Even though remarks do not explicitly mention cable, the consistent checkbox usage across all units and time periods strongly indicates that cable TV is included in the maintenance fees.

Association_fee_includes shows OTCOEX (other common expenses) on every listing for the building, signaling that shared building operating costs are bundled into the fees. While remarks don’t spell out 'common area electricity', the uniform inclusion of OTCOEX strongly suggests common-area power is covered by the maintenance fees.

The MLS never shows COOTAX (co-op taxes) for this building and all remarks describe it as a condominium, not a cooperative. This makes it highly unlikely that cooperative taxes are part of the maintenance fees.

None of the building’s listings mark ELECTR (electricity) as included in the association fees, and the public remarks are silent on any 'electric included' benefit. This strongly suggests that unit electricity is not covered by the maintenance charges.

The MLS data consistently omits GAS from the fee-included fields, and the marketing remarks never reference gas service or gas being part of the HOA. This supports that gas is not included in the maintenance fees for this building.

Most listings (5/6) specifically list individual water heaters (WTRHTR) as unit inclusions, which is inconsistent with building-supplied hot water being included in association fees. With only a single outlier listing showing HOTWAT and no remarks mentioning hot water as an included utility, the weight of evidence supports that hot water is not included in the maintenance fee.

Four out of five MLS entries for this building mark INTSER (internet service) as included in the association fees, with one listing likely missing the checkbox. The strong majority pattern indicates that building-provided internet is part of the maintenance fees.

No listing for this building shows MARINA in the fee-included fields, and the descriptions focus on canal and golf-course views without any reference to marina amenities or boat slips. This makes it highly unlikely that marina access or fees are included in the maintenance charges.

Every MLS listing for this building consistently shows SEWER included in association fees (6/6), aligning with prior high-confidence data. While remarks do not spell this out, the universal and repeated checkbox selection across multiple listings and agents strongly supports that sewer charges are covered by the HOA fee.

MLS data for the building unanimously indicates WATER is included in association fees across all recent listings (6/6). Although the public remarks focus on location and unit upgrades rather than utilities, the consistent MLS checkbox behavior over multiple listings strongly indicates that water service is paid through the HOA rather than separately by unit.

No listing remarks reference BBQ, grills, or an amenity deck with cooking facilities. Combined with 0/5 MLS amenities indicating BBQ, this strongly suggests the building does not offer a BBQ area.

None of the five listings mention any form of bicycle storage, bike room, or bike racks, and the bike storage checkbox is consistently unchecked in the MLS data. Given the total absence of references across multiple agents, it is very likely the building does not offer dedicated bike storage facilities.

While units enjoy views of the Ala Wai Canal and golf course, there is no claim of a boat dock, marina, or slips attached to the building. Given 0/5 MLS checks, boat dock access is effectively ruled out.

The building is described as having off-street or covered parking, and 2/5 MLS entries mark car wash as an amenity. While not mentioned in remarks, the MLS pattern moderately supports the existence of a car wash area.

The building is consistently described as a small 'boutique condominium' with privacy and only two units per floor, and no mention of a clubhouse. With 0/5 MLS checks, there is no indication a clubhouse exists.

Agents focus on location, views, dual entrances, and secure entry but never advertise concierge or front-desk services. Across multiple marketing descriptions and unchecked concierge amenities, it is highly likely that no concierge service is offered in this building.

Agents mention pet-friendly status and nearby Kapiolani Park for walks but not any on-site dog run or pet area. With 0/5 MLS checks for a dog park, it is very likely there is no dedicated dog park in the building.

Descriptions emphasize a 'boutique condominium' and 'secure(d) entry' but never refer to staffed entry or a doorman, which would normally be a key selling point. The consistent lack of any such reference across all listings strongly indicates there is no doorman service at this property.

Across 5 listings, there is no reference to any gym or fitness facility, and 0/5 MLS entries checked the exercise room amenity. In a boutique building where agents highlight every notable feature, the absence of any gym mention strongly suggests there is no exercise room.

The building is positioned as a boutique condominium, not a full-service luxury high-rise, and there is no suggestion of chauffeur or limo services. With 0/5 MLS checks, limo service can be safely ruled out.

Agents highlight flexible in-unit layouts and the quiet boutique nature of the building, but do not mention any shared meeting or conference space. The lack of both MLS and textual evidence indicates there is no meeting room.

No analysis available

Multiple listings emphasize that you can "Walk around Kapiolani Park, Solo or with your Dog, 2 blocks away" and walk to the beach, but none describe any jogging or walking path on the building property itself. This mirrors prior findings where off-site walking options were highlighted but no on-site path was ever mentioned. Given this and inconsistent WAJOPA checkbox use, the building is best characterized as not having its own jogging/walking path.

While the neighborhood amenities like the Zoo and Kapiolani Park are mentioned, there is no indication of an on-site children's playground. The absence in both MLS amenities and remarks makes a building playground very unlikely.

No analysis available

Views of the golf course are highlighted, but not any on-site golf or putting facilities. With 0/5 MLS indications, the building does not appear to have a putting green.

Across 6 detailed listings, none mention any on-site recreation area, recreation deck, or amenity deck, even though agents describe many other building amenities (pet friendly, secure entry, storage, parking). Historical analysis also found 5 prior listings with no such mentions and most agents leaving this box unchecked. The rare RECARE checkmarks appear inconsistent with the remarks and likely reflect MLS checkbox error rather than a real building feature.

Listing descriptions focus on in-unit features and privacy with two units per floor, but never mention a rec room or common game/entertainment space. With 0/5 MLS amenity checks, a building recreation room is very unlikely.

Agents highlight that the building is 'just blocks from dining, shopping, entertainment,' which clearly refers to neighborhood options. With 0/5 MLS checks and no on-site dining mentioned, the building does not have its own restaurant.

Remarks discuss panoramic views from inside the units, not from any shared roof deck or rooftop amenity. Combined with 0/5 MLS checks, this strongly suggests there is no common rooftop amenity.

A sauna would typically be highlighted as a desirable amenity, yet it is not mentioned once across 5 listings. With no MLS support, the building almost certainly does not have a sauna.

At least one remark states the unit has 'additional storage', and several MLS entries flag storage in unit features, indicating that some units come with extra storage space. Other listings do not contradict this and likely just omit it from the narrative. Buyers looking for buildings with storage lockers/extra storage would reasonably find this building relevant.

Public remarks for multiple listings mention generic 'additional storage' but never reference surfboard-specific storage facilities. Searched for terms like surfboard storage, board storage, surf storage, and bike/surfboard storage and found none. Based on this absence, surfboard-specific storage is assumed not present, but this cannot be confirmed with high certainty from remarks alone.

There are no references to tennis courts in any of the public remarks, and 0/5 listings check tennis court in amenities. Given the small, boutique nature of the building, it is very unlikely a tennis court exists.

The building operates as a multi-story boutique condo with only two units per floor, a configuration where trash chutes are common. With 1/5 MLS entries indicating a trash chute and no contradicting evidence, it is moderately likely that trash chutes are present.

No analysis available

Security is described in terms of entry to the building rather than perimeter features, and there are no references to a gated or fenced complex. With zero mentions of gates, walls, or fencing across all listings, the building likely does not have a significant perimeter wall or fence as an advertised amenity.

Listings focus on views, in-unit upgrades, and location but do not mention any shared spa or whirlpool. The consistent absence from both MLS and remarks indicates no whirlpool facility.

Across 5 listings, no remarks mention a pool, swimming pool, or related amenities, and 0/5 MLS entries have any pool fields checked. The marketing copy consistently highlights views, privacy, and proximity to beaches instead of an onsite pool, indicating the building does not offer a pool.

Because the building appears not to have a pool at all and 0/5 listings indicate any heated pool features, a heated pool can be ruled out. No listing remarks reference a heated pool or warm swimming facility, supporting a confident false value.

Remarks describe views, location, unit upgrades, and lifestyle amenities but do not reference any swimming pool, including a saltwater or saline pool. Searched for terms like 'salt water pool', 'saltwater', 'saline pool', and 'salt pool' and found no matches. In the absence of any explicit evidence, this feature is assumed not present.

Multiple listings confirm in-unit laundry at Ala Wai East. Remarks from three different units explicitly state "Private Laundry," "Washer/dryer included," and "washer and dryer IN unit," and all 6 current MLS entries list washer/dryer in the inclusions. Evidence is consistent across agents and time, so the building is correctly flagged as offering in-unit laundry in at least some units.

Across 5 listings, no agent remarks mention community or shared laundry, and 0/5 MLS entries have community laundry checked in amenities. Listings consistently emphasize in-unit washer/dryers instead, indicating the building relies on in-unit laundry rather than a shared laundry room.

The listings do not reference any paid or coin/card-operated community laundry facilities. Terms such as 'coin-op', 'coin laundry', 'card-operated laundry', or 'laundry fee' do not appear, so paid community laundry is assumed not to be available based on the remarks.

The remarks reference in-unit washer/dryer but never mention any shared or community laundry rooms, nor laundry available on every floor. Phrases like 'laundry on each floor' or 'community laundry room each floor' are absent, so this feature is assumed not present based on current information.

All five listings indicate parking via MLS codes (OPEN/COVERED/GARAGE/ASSIGN/UNASSI) and none indicate no parking. Remarks explicitly mention 'off street parking space' and 'covered parking,' so the building clearly offers parking to residents.

At least one listing clearly advertises 'Assigned Covered Parking,' indicating designated stalls. Together with 4 of 6 MLS entries marking ASSIGN for parking_features, this strongly suggests the building provides assigned or deeded parking spaces for its units.

Two separate listings explicitly mention covered parking, including 'Assigned Covered Parking' and 'covered parking.' Combined with 4 of 6 MLS entries checking covered or garage-style parking, this is strong, multi-agent evidence that the building offers covered parking stalls.

Listings describe assigned/covered and off-street parking included with the unit, but never claim parking is deeded or included in the deed. In absence of explicit deed language, deeded parking is considered false with low confidence.

Across all available listings, there is no MLS checkbox for EV charging and no textual mention of charging stations. Given how marketable EV amenities are, their total absence in remarks strongly indicates the building lacks EV charging.

I searched the remarks for 'parking fee', 'monthly parking', and similar phrases; listings indicate assigned/covered parking but provide no monthly cost or rental fee, so the parking fee is unknown from the remarks.

Despite detailed marketing language, none of the remarks reference guest or visitor parking, and the GUEST feature is unchecked in all MLS entries. This consistent omission makes it likely there is no dedicated guest parking area.

MLS data never marks secured parking entry, and remarks do not mention 'gated' or 'secured' parking specifically—only general building security. This indicates there is secure building access but not a separately secured parking entry.

The tandem parking checkbox is consistently unused and there is no textual reference to tandem or back-to-back stalls. This strongly suggests the building does not offer tandem parking as a feature.

Valet parking is absent from both MLS checkboxes and all marketing remarks. Given that valet service is a premium amenity agents almost always highlight, it is very likely not offered here.

Listings describe parking as assigned/covered or off-street for the unit(s) advertised and do not reference limited parking managed by a waitlist. Therefore there is no evidence of a parking waitlist.

Agents highlight privacy (only two units per floor) and secure entry, but do not reference any keyed or fob-controlled elevator access. With repeated marketing across multiple agents and no mention or MLS checkbox for secure elevator access, a keyed elevator system is unlikely to be present as a building feature.

The listings state that the building has 'secure(d) entry,' but provide no detail indicating a card or fob-based access system. Searched for terms like key card, fob, card reader, electronic access, and keycard entry and found none. Based on this, the presence of a dedicated card/fob access system is unlikely but not definitively ruled out.

Multiple independent remarks describe the building as a boutique condo with secure/secured entry but never reference a guard or on-site security staff. With 0/5 listings checking the guard amenity or using phrases like 'security guard' or '24-hour security', this strongly suggests the building does not offer guard service.

The remarks describe secure entry but do not reference any type of security patrol or roving security service. Searched for 'security patrol,' 'roving security,' 'patrolled building,' and similar phrases and found no matches. In the absence of any mention, a security patrol is assumed not to be present.

Remarks refer to 'secure entry' and 'secured entry' but do not mention cameras or any form of video monitoring. Given the total absence of camera-related language and unchecked security system amenities across all listings, it is very likely there is no building-wide video surveillance system promoted as a feature.

Across 5 listings, no agent mentions central air or any building-wide AC system, and 0/5 MLS entries show central AC in features or inclusions. One unit relies on portable AC units and others highlight natural airflow instead of mechanical cooling, indicating the building lacks central AC.

One listing has a split AC checkbox marked, but none of the 5 remarks reference split or ductless systems, and one explicitly uses portable AC units. Following the rule that unchecked/unsupported boxes are likely agent error, there is no reliable evidence that units in this building have split AC.

Across 5 listings, agents never mention window or wall AC and 0/5 MLS entries show window AC checked. The only AC reference is to portable units, strongly suggesting the building does not offer window AC units in its residences.

Across all 6 listings for this building, agents consistently mark concrete (CONCRE) in the construction materials. Given the building’s mid/high-rise condo form and the uniform MLS data with no contrary remarks, it is very likely constructed in concrete.

No analysis available

No analysis available

No analysis available

No analysis available

No analysis available

No analysis available

No analysis available

Remarks repeatedly reference upper-floor units, a full-floor 10th-floor penthouse, and panoramic exterior views, confirming the structure is an above-ground multi-story building. The presence of ABOGRO in 2 of 6 MLS entries further supports that the building’s construction is above ground.

No analysis available

No analysis available

The remarks suggest rental potential (e.g., renting one side, prior monthly rent) but contain no explicit authorization for short-term or vacation rentals. Per rules, absence of STR language leads to false with medium confidence.

There is no language indicating participation in a hotel rental pool and STR is not indicated as allowed; therefore hotel pool participation is false with high confidence.

Listings do not reference any mandatory rental-pool requirement or inability to opt out; because STR is not indicated as allowed, mandatory pool participation is also false with high confidence.

Across all provided remarks there are no references to 'fee simple,' land ownership, or similar wording. The tenure field in the summarized MLS data does not show any FS entries, but it is also not clearly marked as leasehold, so tenure type remains uncertain. Because there is no positive evidence of FS units, this is currently treated as not established rather than confirmed present.

The remarks for all five listings are silent on leasehold terms such as lease rent, expiration dates, or renewals. The summarized MLS tenure data also shows no explicit LH flags. In the absence of any explicit leasehold language, the presence of leasehold units cannot be confirmed from the current data.

I searched for phrases like 'lease expires', 'land lease', 'ground lease', and specific expiry years but found no references. Therefore the lease expiry year is unknown from the public remarks.

Multiple listings for the building explicitly mention 'VA Approved', indicating the building is eligible for VA financing. This is direct language from the public remarks and supports a high confidence determination.

Did not mark the building as fully insured because the remarks only specify hurricane insurance, not full walls-in or comprehensive building coverage. Searched for phrases like 'fully insured', 'full insurance', 'comprehensive building insurance', and 'walls-in coverage' without finding them.

No listing remarks reference fire sprinklers, a sprinkler system, or recent sprinkler installation, despite detailed descriptions of building and unit features. The MLS amenities field shows FIRSPR unchecked in all available listings. For a 1969 boutique building where agents highlight key features, this consistent omission is strong evidence that common fire sprinklers are not present.

Set to false by default because there is no indication the building has passed a formal fire/life safety evaluation. Searched for terms like 'fire life safety evaluation', 'FLSE', 'fire inspection', and 'life safety compliant' but found nothing.

Flood zone determined from official FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) data using building coordinates, not from agent-reported listing data.

No analysis available

Multiple listings describe wide-ranging views but omit any reference to an ocean or Pacific view, even for the penthouse, which strongly suggests there is no meaningful ocean-view exposure. MLS view data also never flags an ocean view for this building.

At least two listings describe mountain views, including '180 Degree views of the ... Mountains' and 'breathtaking views of ... mountain.' MLS view data (3/6 with MOUNTA, 0/6 with NONE) aligns with the remarks. Evidence from multiple agents and units strongly supports that some units in this building have mountain views.

Multiple remarks note Diamond Head views, including 'Full Moon Rise over Diamond Head, from your living room window,' '180 Degree views of ... Diamond Head,' and 'breathtaking views of ... mountain, including Diamond Head.' This repeated emphasis across several units confirms that the building offers Diamond Head-facing view units.

One listing explicitly mentions 'Stunning views of the city and Diamond Head facing the Ocean' from the primary suite. This is sufficient evidence that the building offers city views from at least certain orientations or floors.

Listings that describe expansive views still restrict their claims to canal, golf course, mountain, Diamond Head, and city, without any 'coastline' or 'shoreline' language. The consistent absence of COASTL in MLS view data further supports that coastline views are not a building feature.

All marketing for this building centers on canal, golf course, mountain, Diamond Head, and city views; no listing references any garden or courtyard outlook. The absence of GARDEN in all MLS view entries supports that garden views are not a notable feature here.

Listings consistently advertise 'Golf Course View,' '180 Degree views of the ... Golf Course,' and 'panoramic breathtaking views of the ... golf course.' The frequency and clarity of these mentions across many units make golf course views a well-established feature of this building.

Remarks describe 'Gorgeous Ala Wai Canal' views, '180 Degree views of the Ala Wai Canal,' and 'panoramic breathtaking views of the Ala Wai canal.' Consistent references to canal/harbor-style water views across multiple units and agents strongly support a marina/canal view feature for this building.

While agents do not explicitly say 'sunrise' in the remarks, several units face Diamond Head and the ocean side, an easterly orientation consistent with morning sun. With 3/6 MLS entries checking SUNRIS and no contradictory evidence, it is reasonably likely that some units in this building enjoy sunrise views.

Across five sets of remarks, agents never market sunset or evening views, despite heavily emphasizing other view types, and SUNSET is never checked in MLS data. This pattern indicates that distinctive sunset views are not a notable feature of this building.

None of the analyzed listings reference a cemetery or similar landmark in the view description, and CEMETA is never flagged in MLS data. Given the building’s urban Waikiki setting, it is very unlikely that any units have a cemetery outlook.

Searched for any mention of viewing Friday night fireworks from the unit, lanai, or building and found none. Given the detailed view descriptions, the absence of fireworks mentions suggests this feature is not present or not marketed.

No analysis available

No analysis available

The building is repeatedly described as a small, boutique condominium with privacy and only two units per floor, but no listing mentions a resident or on-site manager. With RESMAN checked in just 1 of 5 MLS records and absent from remarks, the weight of evidence suggests there is no dedicated resident manager on-site, and the lone checked box is likely a mis-entry.

No analysis available

No analysis available