Ala Wai Palms

MLS property data from 6/6 listings agree that the building was constructed in 1961. There are no remarks suggesting a different build year or a complete reconstruction, so 1961 is accepted as the construction year with high confidence.

Across 6 listings, the highest unit floor reported is the 9th floor, including a remark describing a 'preferred higher 9th floor' unit. No remarks indicate a higher or top floor or give a total story count, so the building is inferred to have approximately 9 floors based on current MLS data.

No listing remarks state the total unit count, and the structured MLS field for total units is 0 in all 6 cases, suggesting the true number of units is not being reported. As a result, the total number of units in the building cannot be determined from current data.

I searched for any owner-occupancy disclosures like "80% owner occupied" or "mostly owner occupied." The remarks only describe the units and building amenities, with no occupancy breakdown. The current 52% value is therefore kept, but it is not supported by the public remarks.

I looked for explicit elevator counts such as "2 elevators," "multiple elevators," or similar wording. The remarks only confirm that the building has an elevator, which is consistent with the current value but does not verify the number. Given the building size, 2 elevators remains plausible, so the current value is kept with low confidence.

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.

Across all remarks, cooling is only described via a 'window AC unit' and there is no reference to central air or AC included in dues. With 0/6 MLS records indicating central AC in the fee, this feature is considered not included in maintenance.

MLS records consistently indicate cable TV is included in the maintenance fee: 7/7 listings have CABTV checked. The public remarks focus on amenities and location rather than fee inclusions, so there is no contradictory evidence. This appears to be a stable building-level inclusion rather than a copy-paste anomaly.

Common-area or other building expense inclusion appears in 6/7 current MLS listings. The public remarks mention shared amenities like pool, sun deck, secured entry, and laundry room, which are consistent with building-level operating expenses being part of the fee. Evidence is strong from MLS data even though the remarks do not spell it out.

All remarks describe fee-simple condo-style ownership with no indication of a cooperative tax structure. With 0/6 MLS entries indicating cooperative taxes, co-op taxes are not included in the maintenance fee.

Across multiple independently written remarks, there is no statement that 'maintenance fee includes electricity' or similar, and the ELECTR box is consistently left unchecked in the MLS (0/6). This supports that unit electricity is separately metered and not included in the HOA fee.

The building descriptions do not reference gas appliances or gas utilities at all, and MLS fee-includes fields never show GAS. This indicates gas, if present at all, is not included in the maintenance fees.

Public remarks never mention hot water being included in fees, and MLS inclusions frequently specify individual water heaters, which is inconsistent with building-supplied hot water. Combined with HOTWAT being unchecked on all listings, hot water is not included in the maintenance fee.

If internet were a building-wide included utility, it would typically be consistently checked and highlighted, but here only 2/6 MLS records show it and no remarks mention it. The majority of listings omit it from fee includes, so internet is treated as not included in the HOA fees.

The building is described as overlooking the Ala Wai Canal and golf course but not as having a marina or boat facilities. With all MLS records lacking MARINA in the fee includes, marina fees are not included in maintenance.

Sewer is included in the association fee in 6/7 current MLS listings. The public remarks do not explicitly mention sewer, but the MLS pattern is consistent and strong across multiple listings. This looks like a reliable building-level fee inclusion.

Water is consistently included across all current MLS listings: 7/7 show WATER checked. The public remarks do not mention fee inclusions directly, but there is no conflicting evidence. This is the strongest-supported fee item in the dataset.

At least one agent describes using a barbecue in conjunction with the condo pool, implying a common BBQ/grilling setup available to residents. This direct remark outweighs the unchecked MLS amenity box and supports including BBQ as a building amenity.

Across six listings, none indicate bike storage in the amenities or describe a bike room, bicycle storage, or bike racks, even though lifestyle and building features are heavily marketed. Given this consistent omission alongside detailed amenity lists, it is very likely that Ala Wai Palms does not offer dedicated bicycle storage.

The canal is presented purely as a view, not as functional waterfront access. Given both remarks and MLS data, the building does not offer a boat dock or marina access.

Parking is described as assigned and sometimes covered/secured, but there is no reference to washing facilities. With zero MLS support, a car wash amenity is very unlikely to exist.

Marketing focuses on the urban Waikiki location and standard condo amenities but never refers to any clubhouse-type facility. This, along with MLS data, indicates there is no clubhouse.

Marketing remarks focus on location, pool, secured entry, and a resident manager but never describe concierge or front desk services. Given 0/6 MLS concierge checks and no textual support, it is very likely the building does not offer concierge service.

In a pet-sensitive market, a dedicated dog park would be a strong marketing point but is never mentioned here. This lack of mention plus MLS data indicates the building does not have a dog park.

Buildings with a doorman almost always advertise it prominently, but these remarks never reference one and instead mention a resident manager. The consistent omission plus unchecked MLS data indicates the building does not have a doorman service.

Across six listings, agents highlight the pool, sun deck, laundry, security, and parking but never refer to a gym or fitness facility. Combined with MLS showing no exercise-room amenity, this strongly suggests the building does not offer an exercise room.

In a building where such a service existed, it would be a major luxury selling point, yet it is never mentioned. The consistent omission and MLS data support that there is no limousine or house car service.

Agents do not promote any common indoor meeting or conference space, which would typically be highlighted if present. The absence in both remarks and MLS supports that there is no meeting room amenity.

Remarks describe a 'sun deck', 'covered lanai', and 'spacious patio' or lanai in several listings. Combined with 6/6 MLS records showing patio/deck amenities, this strongly supports that the building offers patio/deck outdoor space to at least some units.

While the tower is near the Ala Wai Canal and beaches, agents never promote a dedicated jogging/walking path within the property. The isolated MLS checkmark without remark support indicates the building does not offer a formal jogging path amenity.

Agents emphasize adult-oriented amenities (pool, sun deck, proximity to shopping and beaches) and never mention any kids' play facilities. This strongly suggests there is no playground amenity.

Across all provided remarks, outdoor areas are limited to lanais, patios, pool, and sun deck—there is no reference to any private or fenced yard space. Given the high-rise setting and lack of MLS indicators for PRIYAR, it is very likely the building does not offer private yards.

Remarks distinguish between views of nearby golf facilities and on-site amenities, which are limited to pool/sun deck and building services. With no MLS or remark support, the building does not have its own putting green.

Remarks frame the pool and sun deck strictly as those features rather than a larger recreation or amenity deck. Given the lack of explicit references and unchecked MLS entries, a distinct recreation area is not supported.

Listings describe the pool, sun deck, laundry room, and general building security but omit any recreation/game/multi-purpose room. With no MLS or remark support, a recreation room is very unlikely to exist.

Agents consistently highlight nearby dining options rather than an in-building restaurant. This pattern and the MLS data indicate there is no restaurant amenity within the building itself.

View descriptions focus on lanai views of the Ala Wai, golf course, and city lights from typical floors, not from a shared rooftop. With no MLS or remark support, a rooftop amenity is very unlikely.

Agents describe only basic recreational facilities (pool, sun deck) and building services, not wellness amenities like a sauna. This strongly suggests the building does not have a sauna.

Over six recent listings for Ala Wai Palms, none list storage units or lockers in the building amenities or describe dedicated ‘extra storage’ spaces; the only reference is to ‘ample storage space’ within a unit. Because multiple agents consistently highlight other amenities (pool, sundeck, secured entry, laundry, BBQ, resident manager) without any mention of separate storage lockers, it is very likely the building does not have common storage units.

I searched for surfboard storage, board storage, surf storage, and bike-and-surfboard storage. The listings mention surfing and even surfboards in a buyer credit context, but not any dedicated storage facility.

Agents focus on proximity to beaches, shopping, pool, and sun deck but never mention tennis. The complete absence of references plus unchecked MLS fields indicates the building does not have tennis courts.

While many condos may have chutes by default, agents do not highlight one here and MLS does not list it. Due to the complete lack of explicit evidence, we do not treat a trash chute as a confirmed amenity for this building.

Parking is consistently described as 'assigned' and within a 'secured parking garage' with no mention of valet services in any remarks. With VALET unchecked in all MLS records, the evidence indicates the building does not provide valet service.

The building is presented as a central Waikiki condo with secured entry and garage but no mention of a perimeter gate, wall, or fence. The repeated lack of 'gated' or similar language and unchecked MLS data strongly suggest the property is not enclosed by a wall or fence as a notable security feature.

Amenity descriptions are specific to a standard pool and sun deck without any indication of a separate spa or whirlpool. The lack of mention and unchecked MLS field indicate no whirlpool amenity.

The pool feature is strongly supported. At least 5 of the provided remarks mention it directly with phrases like "swimming pool," "on-site pool," "refreshing swimming pool and sun deck," and "azure condo pool." This appears consistent across multiple agents and matches the previously high-confidence MLS amenity data.

None of the six reviewed listings mention a heated pool, even when highlighting pool amenities in detail. Combined with the fact that no MLS records have the heated pool option checked, the evidence indicates the building’s pool is unheated.

I looked for salt pool wording such as salt water pool, saltwater pool, or saline pool. The building has a pool, but the remarks do not specify its water type.

None of the 6 listings mention in-unit washer/dryer or check the washer/dryer inclusion, even for renovated 2BR units that would typically advertise this feature. One listing instead promotes an 'upgraded laundry room' for the building, implying shared facilities rather than in-unit machines. With no remarks or user data indicating any exceptions, this building is very unlikely to offer in-unit laundry in its units.

5 of 6 listings have the community laundry (COMLAU) amenity checked, and one remark states the building offers an 'upgraded laundry room' along with the pool, sun deck, and secured entry. This language clearly refers to a shared building facility, and the consistency across multiple listings from different agents supports that community laundry is a reliable building feature.

I searched for language indicating paid laundry such as coin laundry, coin-op, card-operated, or quarters. The listings mention an upgraded laundry room but give no evidence that it requires payment.

I looked for phrases like laundry on each floor, laundry room on every floor, and floor-by-floor laundry. The remarks only confirm a shared/upgraded laundry room in the building, not that laundry facilities are available on every floor.

Multiple listings state that units include a parking space (e.g., '1 Assigned Parking Spot', 'Pool and assigned parking space comes with the unit'). With 6/6 MLS records indicating parking and several agents highlighting it, parking is clearly available in this building.

Assigned parking is strongly supported across the remarks, with multiple listings explicitly stating 'assigned parking' and '1 Assigned Parking Spot.' One remark also specifies that the covered stall is assigned to the unit, suggesting this is a real building feature rather than a checkbox copy-paste issue.

Covered parking is confirmed by multiple remarks, including a listing that says '1 covered parking stall is assigned to the unit' and another that mentions a 'secured parking garage.' This aligns with the prior high-confidence MLS evidence and appears consistent across listings.

The listings consistently describe parking as assigned, including “1 Assigned Parking Spot” and “1 covered parking stall is assigned to the unit.” I found no language indicating the parking is deeded or owned with the unit.

Across all provided listings, there is no reference to EV or charging stations in remarks or MLS features. Given this absence, the building is very likely not offering EV-specific parking or charging at this time.

I looked for terms like parking fee, monthly parking charge, parking rental, or additional parking cost, but nothing was stated. The remarks only say the parking is assigned, without any fee detail.

No listing remarks mention guest or visitor parking, and the MLS data does not flag any guest parking feature. This strongly suggests the building does not provide dedicated guest parking.

Remarks cite both 'secured entry' to the building and a 'secured parking garage' for at least one unit, and MLS flags secured parking in one entry. This supports that some or all parking is within a secured-access garage or area.

Neither the MLS data nor the listing remarks reference tandem stalls. This lack of evidence indicates that tandem parking is not a characteristic feature of the building’s parking.

Listings describe self-use assigned or covered parking but never valet or attended service. With no MLS or remark support, valet parking can be safely ruled out for this building.

I searched for parking waitlist or waiting list language and found none. The remarks suggest parking is included as an assigned space rather than something requiring a waitlist.

The phrase 'Secured entry and elevator' directly ties security to the elevator itself, fitting the 'secure elevator' pattern described in the feature definition. Combined with 'Secure Entry with Key Access' in another listing, this supports the presence of a keyed or fob-access elevator system as a building-level feature, even though MLS amenities do not explicitly flag it.

I searched for key card, fob, card reader, and keycard entry language. The listings only support secure/key access, not a card-based security system.

No listing advertises a security guard or 24/7 security, instead emphasizing features like secured entry and a resident manager. With 0/6 MLS entries checking a guard-related amenity and no textual references, it is very likely the building does not provide dedicated security guard service.

I looked for explicit references to security patrol or roving security service. The remarks describe a secured building and resident manager, but nothing about patrol service.

Remarks focus on secured entry, secured parking, and a resident manager but never reference cameras or video monitoring. Given the consistent absence of camera-related language and unchecked MLS fields, video surveillance is very unlikely to be a promoted building feature.

Across 6 listings, there are no references to central air or HVAC systems, and MLS checkbox data shows 0/6 units with any central AC feature selected. One listing specifically highlights a window AC unit, suggesting cooling is handled by individual window units rather than a central building-wide system.

No listing remarks reference ductless mini-splits or split systems, and agents did not mark the MLS split AC checkbox for any of the 6 units. The only explicit AC description is a 'window AC unit', indicating the building’s units are using window units rather than split systems.

Multiple agents consistently check the MLS window AC option (5/6 listings), and one remark clearly notes a 'window AC unit' as part of a recent upgrade. This provides strong, multi-agent evidence that at least some units in the building use window air conditioning.

Concrete construction is strongly supported by the MLS record, with 7 of 7 listings indicating CONCRE. None of the public remarks mention an alternative construction type, and the building’s condo-style profile fits reinforced concrete construction.

Double-wall construction is not supported by the remarks, and only 2 of 7 MLS entries currently check DOUWAL. The evidence looks like inconsistent MLS copy/paste rather than a verified building feature, so it should be treated as absent.

Hollow tile (HOLTIL) is not checked on any listing and is not mentioned in remarks. Given the consistent concrete designation instead, hollow tile is very unlikely to be a defining construction type here.

Masonry/stucco (MASSTU) is marked on 2/6 listings, with the remaining listings silent rather than selecting an opposing construction type. While not confirmed in remarks, this partial but repeated MLS usage indicates the building likely has masonry/stucco exterior elements.

Steel frame construction (STEFRA) is not checked on any of the 6 listings, while concrete is always selected. With no textual mention of steel framing, it is very unlikely the building is categorized as steel-frame in MLS terms.

There is no remark-based evidence for a slab foundation, and the MLS checkbox is only present in 1 of 7 listings. In a Waikiki condo building like this, the sparse checkbox appears more likely to be an MLS data error than a confirmed building foundation feature.

No analysis available

Across 6/6 listings, wood frame (WOOFRA) is never selected, and concrete is consistently specified instead. Remarks do not mention wood framing, so it is highly likely this is not a wood-frame building.

Above ground construction (ABOGRO) is selected on only 1/6 listings and never mentioned in the narrative descriptions. Given the lack of corroboration and the consistent focus on concrete condo construction, this is likely not an accurate building-level feature.

No listings select brick construction (BRICK), and there are no references to brick walls, brick exterior, or similar in the remarks. This strongly suggests the building is not considered a brick-constructed property in the MLS data.

No listings indicate single wall (SINWAL), and remarks fit a concrete Waikiki condo rather than traditional single-wall construction. This provides strong evidence the building is not single-wall constructed.

A 30-day minimum rental term is explicitly mentioned, which means short-term rentals are not permitted. That is strong evidence that STR is not allowed in this building.

I searched for hotel rental pool, hotel program, managed-by-hotel language, and similar terms, but found none. Since STR is not allowed, a hotel pool arrangement is also ruled out.

I looked for evidence of any mandatory rental pool or required participation language and found nothing. With STR disallowed, there is no basis for a mandatory hotel pool requirement.

None of the 6 listings describe units as fee simple or use terms like 'fee simple' or 'FS', and the structured tenure field does not show any Fee Simple entries. Because the MLS tenure data appear incomplete and no remarks clarify tenure, there is insufficient evidence that the building offers any Fee Simple units.

Across 6 listings, none are flagged as leasehold in the available MLS data, and no remarks mention leasehold status or provide lease details such as rent or expiration. Because tenure is not clearly reported, there is no solid evidence that the building currently offers leasehold units.

I searched the remarks for phrases like lease expires, land lease, ground lease, leasehold, and renewal dates, but found nothing. There is no specific lease-expiry year stated, so this remains unknown.

Public remarks explicitly mention VA assumable loans, which strongly supports that the building is VA loan approved. I looked for any contrary financing restrictions, but none were mentioned.

I looked for insurance-related phrases such as "fully insured," "walls-in coverage," or "comprehensive building insurance." None of the remarks mention HOA insurance status or coverage scope. Because there is no explicit evidence, this feature cannot be confirmed from the listings.

The fire-sprinkler checkbox is unset in 6/6 MLS entries, and no listing remarks mention sprinklers or a fire suppression system while actively promoting other building features like pool, sundeck, laundry, and security. This consistent omission strongly indicates the building does not have a fire sprinkler system.

I searched for any reference to fire/life safety evaluation status, FLSE passing, fire safety certification, or a passed fire inspection. The remarks discuss secured entry, resident manager, and an elevator, but nothing about fire/life safety compliance. With no evidence in the remarks, this remains unconfirmed and is treated as false/absent.

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

Across six listings, none describe any ocean or water views, despite detailed descriptions of other view types. Current MLS data also shows 0 of 6 units with OCEAN checked, so buyers should not expect ocean-view units in this building.

At least two listings describe 'lush mountains in distance' or 'mountains,' confirming mauka-facing views from certain units. MLS data (3/6 with mountain checked) supports that some units in Ala Wai Palms offer mountain views.

The remarks reference Diamond Head only as a nearby attraction, not a visible view from units. With no explicit 'Diamond Head view' language and just a single MLS checkbox hit, there is insufficient evidence that units here reliably offer Diamond Head views.

City views are well supported across the listings, with 4 of 7 current MLS entries showing CITY in the view field and one explicitly showing NONE. Several public remarks reinforce this with direct references to "city views," "shimmering city lights of Honolulu," and "glimmering city lights at night," indicating this is a real and recurring building feature rather than a copy-paste artifact.

All documented views are oriented toward the Ala Wai Canal, golf course, mountains, and city lights. With no coastline-related language or MLS tagging, coastline views should not be expected here.

Across all six descriptions, there are no references to gardens, courtyards, or landscaped outlooks. With zero MLS support as well, there is no evidence that garden views are a meaningful feature of this building.

Four of six listings explicitly reference 'views of Ala Wai Golf Course' or 'unobstructed views of the Ala Wai golf course.' Consistent remarks and MLS tagging confirm that golf course views are a prominent selling point for certain units.

At least four listings tout 'views of the Ala Wai' or 'Ala Wai Canal,' and talk about city lights reflecting off the calm waters. This strongly indicates that many units enjoy canal/marina-type views, making this a key building feature.

The marketing copy never cites sunrise views or east-facing exposure, even when describing view highlights. With no MLS support for sunrise either, sunrise views cannot be verified as a building feature.

Remarks emphasize nighttime city lights rather than direct sunset views, and there is no clear claim of sunset or fireworks vistas. Given only a single MLS sunset checkbox with no narrative support, sunset views are not reliably established for this building.

None of the listings reference or allude to a cemetery nearby or in the view. The complete absence of cemetery mentions and MLS tagging supports concluding that cemetery views are not a feature of this building.

I looked for explicit references like fireworks view, Friday night fireworks, or watching fireworks from the lanai. The remarks discuss canal, golf course, city, and beach proximity, but nothing about seeing fireworks from the units.

No analysis available

There is no explicit 'no pets' language in any remarks and the NOPET restriction is absent across all current MLS entries. While pets are not directly mentioned, the lack of a no-pet flag suggests pets are at least partially allowed, though buyers should verify specific pet rules.

MLS amenity data uniformly indicate a resident manager in 6/6 listings. This is confirmed in the remarks where a unit is described as having 'secured entry and elevator with resident manager,' providing strong evidence of an on-site resident manager for the building.

The building is presented as a standard condo with minimum 30-day rentals, not as a hotel-style operation. The lack of any condotel/hotel language in remarks and in the MLS architectural style strongly indicates it is not a condotel.

All descriptions and financing details match standard condominium ownership rather than a co-op structure. With no cooperative-related terms in remarks or MLS data, it is highly likely this building is not a co-op.