Ala Wai Terrace

Consistent MLS property data across 8 listings indicate the building was constructed in 1968. No public remarks mention any alternative construction year or full rebuild that would override this.

Listings in this building show units as high as the 14th floor, and no remarks indicate a higher or penthouse/top floor. Following the rule to use the highest observed floor number when no explicit story count is given, the building is treated as having 14 floors, though this should be considered an informed minimum estimate.

The only structural clue is a remark that there are "only 3 units per floor" combined with MLS data showing at least 14 floors with units, suggesting roughly 42 units. Because no agent explicitly cites a total unit count, this figure is an estimate rather than a confirmed number.

I searched for explicit owner-occupancy references, including a percentage or phrases like majority owner occupied, but found none. With no remark-based evidence to update it, the current value of 47% is retained at low confidence.

The listings consistently reference a single elevator rather than multiple elevators. This matches the current value and there is no contradictory remark suggesting a larger elevator bank.

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.

Very strong evidence that central A/C is included. Several remarks explicitly say 'central A/C' or 'AC included in the HOA fee,' and MLS data shows ACCEN in all 10/10 listings. This is a consistent building-level feature across listings.

Strong evidence this building includes cable in maintenance fees. Multiple remarks explicitly mention 'cable TV' or 'Spectrum internet / cable,' and the current MLS data shows CABTV in 9/10 listings. The evidence appears consistent across multiple agents rather than a one-off copy/paste error.

The building likely includes common-area electricity, but the current remarks do not name it directly. Historical MLS data is strong (9/10 listings with OTCOEX), and the repeated 'all utilities' language supports the inclusion indirectly. Confidence is moderate because the evidence is mostly inferential.

None of the 8 listings or remarks reference cooperative ownership or co-op tax structures. All MLS records leave the co-op tax inclusion box unchecked, supporting that coop taxes are not applicable or included here.

Electricity is clearly included in the maintenance fee. Many remarks explicitly state 'electricity' is covered, and MLS data shows ELECTR in all 10/10 listings. The evidence is strong and consistent across multiple listings.

Several listings carefully list which utilities are included and omit gas every time. No MLS listing checks gas as an included item, indicating gas is not part of the building’s provided or HOA-covered utilities.

Hot water appears to be included in the HOA/maintenance fee. Several remarks explicitly mention 'hot water' alongside other utilities, and current MLS data shows HOTWAT in 10/10 listings with no WTRHTR conflicts. This is a strong, consistent building feature.

Internet is included in the maintenance fee. Several listings explicitly mention 'internet' or 'Spectrum internet / cable,' and MLS data shows INTSER in 9/10 listings. The evidence is strong and repeated across multiple remarks.

Although the building is across from the harbor and mentions nearby marina-related amenities, there is no indication that marina access or boat slip fees are paid through the HOA. All MLS entries leave the marina-included checkbox empty, supporting that marina costs are separate.

Sewer is included in the HOA/maintenance fees. One remark explicitly lists 'water, & sewer,' and MLS data shows SEWER in all 10/10 listings. The evidence is strong and consistent.

Water is clearly included in the maintenance fee. Several remarks explicitly mention water, and MLS data shows WATER in all 10/10 listings. This is one of the most consistent features in the listing history.

Multiple listings describe lanais, views, and nearby beaches and parks but never mention BBQ or grill areas. With BBQ not selected in any MLS amenities and no textual mention, it is very likely the building lacks shared BBQ facilities.

Zero of eight current listings mark bike storage in building amenities, and no remarks mention a bike room, bicycle storage, or bike racks. With consistent omission across multiple agents and listings, the evidence strongly indicates the building does not provide dedicated bike storage facilities.

Proximity to the Ala Wai Boat Harbor is described as a location benefit, not as ownership of dock facilities. With MARINA unchecked in every listing, the building itself does not appear to have a boat dock or marina access as an amenity.

Parking and an optional nearby pool (via Waikiki Marina) are mentioned, but no car wash facility is described. The consistent absence of CRWSH in MLS amenities suggests the building lacks car wash services.

Across 8 listings, amenities like pet-friendliness, security, and utilities are stressed, but a clubhouse is never mentioned. With CLUHOU unchecked throughout, it is highly likely there is no clubhouse.

None of the listings reference concierge or front desk services, despite describing several other amenities and an on-site resident manager. This consistent omission, along with unchecked MLS boxes, indicates the building does not offer concierge service.

Agents emphasize that the building is "Pet Friendly" but do not mention any dedicated pet run or dog park. The absence of DGPRK in MLS across all listings strongly suggests there is no on-site dog park.

Across all provided remarks, there is no mention of a doorman or lobby attendant, which would typically be prominently advertised if present. The repeated focus on a resident manager rather than staffed door service strongly indicates there is no doorman.

None of the 8 current listings mention any gym, fitness room, or exercise facility, and the EXEROO amenity is never checked in the MLS data. Agents repeatedly list other amenities but omit any reference to an exercise room, indicating the building does not offer one.

Even though some listings market the property as a strong investment and urban home, they do not mention chauffeur or car services typical of luxury towers. With LIMSER at 0/8, we can be very confident there is no limo or house car service.

Listings never mention any conference or meeting facilities, focusing instead on residential and security features. The MEEROO amenity is also absent in all 8 listings, indicating no meeting room amenity.

Multiple independent listings describe units with a 'large covered lanai', 'spacious lanai', or a specific '128 sq ft lanai'. This strongly indicates that balconies/lanai-style patio spaces are a standard feature in this building, not a one-off penthouse amenity.

The remarks talk about proximity to Ala Moana Beach Park and urban conveniences, not a dedicated jogging path within the property. With WAJOPA absent from all amenities, the building appears not to have its own jogging/walking path.

Amenities described are oriented toward adults (views, utilities included, security) with no mention of kids' play structures or playgrounds. With PLYGRND unchecked in 8/8 listings, the building almost certainly lacks a playground.

All remarks focus on lanais and views rather than any yard or enclosed ground-level outdoor space. Given the urban high-rise setting and lack of any 'yard' references, it's very likely the building offers no private yard areas.

None of the marketing language references golf or a putting green, and PUTGRE is 0/8 in amenities. This combination makes it highly likely the building does not have a putting green.

Agents describe lanais and proximity to parks and the beach, but not any on-site recreation deck or amenity deck. The consistent lack of RECARE and textual mention supports that the building does not have a designated recreation area.

The only shared interior spaces mentioned are community laundry and general building access (elevator, gated entry). With no mention of a rec room and RECROO unchecked in all listings, a recreation room is very unlikely.

Agents highlight that the building is within walking distance to world-class dining and shopping rather than hosting those services itself. The RESTAU checkbox is never used, indicating the building does not contain a restaurant amenity.

Views are described from the lanai and unit windows, not from a shared rooftop or roof deck. With ROOFDCK never selected and no textual reference, the building appears not to offer rooftop amenities.

Agents list many selling points (utilities included, central AC, security, pet friendly) but never mention a sauna. The lack of SAUNA in all MLS records strongly indicates there is no sauna amenity.

Storage is strongly supported across the remarks: at least 2 listings explicitly mention extra storage, including a "highly-coveted exterior storage closet (for $30/month)" and "ample storage w/multiple closets & cabinets." Given the prior high-confidence MLS signal and the detailed, repeated references, this appears to be a legitimate building amenity rather than an unchecked MLS copy-paste item.

I looked for surfboard-specific storage terms like surfboard storage, board storage, surf storage, or bike-and-surfboard storage. The remarks discuss storage generally, but nothing indicates dedicated surfboard storage.

Listings focus on location near Ala Moana, views, and utilities but never mention tennis or courts. Combined with MLS data showing 0/8 listings checking TENCOU, this strongly indicates there is no tennis court amenity.

Agents repeatedly describe utilities, sprinklers, community laundry, and security features, but do not reference a trash chute, and TRACHU is 0/8 in the amenities data. This consistent omission suggests the building likely does not advertise or offer a trash chute system.

Agents consistently describe conventional parking (e.g., 'covered parking', 'parking space "D"') without any 'valet' or 'valet parking' language. This pattern strongly suggests the building does not offer valet service.

One listing calls the property a "Secure gated community," and at least two listings note a "gated entry," aligning with MLS GATED/WALFEN checkboxes on several units. This consistent language across different remarks strongly supports that the property is enclosed by a gate or fence.

One listing notes access to a neighboring Waikiki Marina pool, but not a whirlpool or spa within this building. With no WHIRLP amenity checked and no textual mention, the building itself appears not to have a whirlpool/hot tub.

None of the 8 listings advertise a building pool in the remarks or checked amenities, despite repeatedly listing other amenities like gated entry, resident manager, and community laundry. The only pool reference is to the separate 'Waikiki Marina Pool' accessible by fob, which suggests the subject building itself does not have its own pool.

No listing remarks or MLS amenity fields reference a heated pool, and the building does not appear to have a pool at all. Given the complete absence of any 'heated' or similar language and no pool amenity, a heated pool is not present in this building.

I searched for salt-water terminology such as saltwater pool, saline pool, or salt pool. The remarks mention a pool only in a named context, but there is no evidence the building has a salt-water pool.

Multiple listings confirm in-unit laundry availability, including direct phrases like "in-unit washer/dryer" and "in-unit washer." Another remark says "washer/dryer can be installed in-unit w/ approval," which supports that the building allows it even when not currently installed. This is consistent across several listings and does not look like a one-off copy-paste error.

The building clearly has shared laundry facilities, with multiple listings explicitly stating "community laundry" and one noting it is "downstairs." The historical MLS pattern is also very strong, with 9 of 10 listings showing the community laundry amenity. This appears to be consistent across agents rather than a copied checkbox error.

I searched for terms indicating paid laundry such as coin laundry, coin-op, quarters, card-operated machines, or laundry fees. The listings confirm community laundry exists, but they do not state whether it requires payment.

I looked for wording like laundry on each floor, every floor, or floor-by-floor laundry. The only explicit location found was downstairs, which supports shared laundry but not laundry on every floor.

Multiple listings confirm parking, including mentions of a dedicated "parking space 'D'" and units that "come with 1 of only 6 covered parking stalls." 8/8 current MLS records show parking codes (OPEN/COVERED/GARAGE/etc.) and none show 'NONE', indicating the building offers parking options.

Assigned/reserved parking is clearly supported across multiple listings, with at least 6 remarks referencing it directly. The language is specific enough to indicate reserved or assigned stalls rather than generic parking, including phrases like "parking space 'D'" and "one secured, covered parking stall." This appears consistent across agents and not just copy-paste checkbox data.

Covered parking is cited in several listings (at least 3), including phrases like "one secured, covered parking stall," "covered parking," and "1 of only 6 covered parking stalls," showing the building offers covered parking stalls. Multiple agents' remarks corroborate the feature.

I looked for phrases like deeded parking, owned stall, or parking included in the deed and found none. The listings only indicate assigned or available stalls, which is not enough to call the parking deeded.

No listing remarks mention EV charging, Tesla chargers, or stations, and the EVCHRG checkbox is absent on all available MLS records. Given this and the building’s age/profile, it is very likely the building does not offer dedicated EV charging at this time.

I searched for parking rent, monthly parking charge, or additional parking cost and found nothing. The remarks mention parking availability and storage fees, but not any parking fee.

Across all provided listings, there are no references to guest or visitor parking, and the GUEST feature is never selected in MLS data. This suggests the building does not provide dedicated guest parking stalls.

Secured entry/gated parking is referenced in multiple listings (at least 4) with phrases such as "secured entry," "Secure gated community," "gated entry, video cameras," and mention of fob access for parking. Multiple agent remarks consistently confirm secure/gated access.

None of the listings refer to any stalls as tandem, nor do the MLS parking_features include TANDEM for this building. This strongly indicates that tandem-style parking is not a characteristic offering here.

There are no references to valet, attended parking, or similar services in any remarks, and the VALET checkbox is never marked in MLS data. Given the building’s profile and complete lack of mention, it is almost certain that valet parking is not provided.

I looked for parking waitlist, waiting list, or join-the-list language and found none. The remarks describe a limited number of stalls, but do not say buyers must wait for parking.

Listings reference an elevator but never describe it as keyed, fob-access, restricted, or otherwise secure. Given that such a feature is typically highlighted and is not mentioned anywhere, the building almost certainly does not have keyed elevator security.

I looked for key card, fob access, card reader, or electronic entry language. The references to secured entry and fob access strongly support a card/fob security system.

None of the eight listings mention a security guard or 24/7 security staff, despite multiple references to other security features like "secured entry" and an "on-site resident manager." Given the complete absence of guard-related terms in remarks and MLS checkboxes, this building is very unlikely to have security-guard service.

I searched for patrol-related language such as security patrol, roving security, or patrolled building. The remarks mention gated entry, cameras, and a resident manager, but not any patrol service.

Two listings clearly describe building features as including "video cameras" along with gated entry and an on-site resident manager. This repeated, explicit language provides strong evidence that the building has video surveillance despite unchecked MLS boxes.

Strong evidence the building has central air conditioning. At least 4 separate listings explicitly mention 'central A/C' or describe running the 'central A/C' as part of HOA-covered utilities, while other remarks refer to HVAC-style building-wide cooling through all-inclusive maintenance fees. The repeated wording across multiple listings suggests this is a real building feature, not just a copied checkbox.

Across all provided listings, AC is consistently described as central and included in the HOA fee, with no mention of mini-splits or ductless units. The MLS split AC checkbox is never selected (0 of 8), indicating the building is not marketed as offering split AC in its units. Evidence strongly suggests there is no building-level or typical split AC feature to advertise to buyers.

No listing mentions window or wall AC; instead, they emphasize central AC included in maintenance fees. With 0 of 8 MLS listings indicating window AC, and remarks focusing solely on central AC, it is highly likely the building does not offer or market window AC as a feature. Buyers searching for window AC–dependent buildings would not find this an appropriate match.

All current MLS listings for this building show construction_materials as CONCRE (10 out of 10), which is very strong building-level evidence. None of the public remarks contradict this or suggest a different construction type, so the concrete construction designation remains highly reliable.

Three listings explicitly mark double wall construction, and none contradict it. This pattern implies that double wall construction is present in at least some parts of the building.

No listing identifies hollow tile construction, and agents only select concrete as the construction material. In the absence of any mention across multiple listings, hollow tile construction is unlikely.

Neither MLS checkboxes nor remarks indicate masonry or stucco construction. The uniform concrete designation suggests masonry/stucco is not a primary construction type here.

MLS data never lists steel frame, and every listing cites concrete construction instead. With no textual evidence of steel framing, a steel frame structure is very unlikely.

Two listings indicate slab construction and no listings indicate a different foundation type. Combined with typical construction practices for Waikiki concrete towers, this supports slab construction with moderate confidence.

No analysis available

No listings identify wood frame construction, and all instead specify concrete. Given the building type and consistent MLS data, wood frame construction can be ruled out with high confidence.

Above-ground construction is never selected in MLS data and would be unusual for this style of concrete condo tower. The evidence supports that it is not classified as above-ground construction in MLS terms.

There are no references to brick construction in MLS checkboxes or remarks. The consistent concrete designation across all listings supports excluding brick construction.

Single wall construction is never indicated and would be atypical for this type of high-rise. The MLS data and building description strongly support that it is not single-wall construction.

The public remarks clearly show rental activity is allowed, with explicit 30-day minimum rental permission. That supports STR/rental allowance under the provided definition.

I searched for hotel pool branding such as hotel rental program, Hilton/Trump/Ritz pool references, or managed-by-hotel wording and found none. Since there is no evidence of a hotel rental pool, this is set to false.

I looked for signs that owners must participate in a rental program or cannot opt out, and found none. The remarks emphasize flexibility for personal use or income potential, which is inconsistent with a mandatory pool.

One of the 8 listings clearly states it is a "fee simple" unit, and none of the remarks mention leasehold or land lease terms. Thus, the building is confirmed to have fee simple units (at least 1 of 8 listings explicitly FS, 0 of 8 explicitly LH).

No listings describe units as leasehold or reference lease rent or expiration, while at least one unit is explicitly fee simple. This pattern across multiple agents and listings makes it highly likely that the building does not offer leasehold units.

I searched for wording such as ground lease, leasehold, lease expires, renewal, and expiration year, but found nothing. The remarks describe the unit, parking, and rental rules, but do not provide any land tenure expiry information.

This is strong public evidence that VA financing is available or at least that a VA loan is in place and assumable. I did not find any contradictory remarks about VA eligibility.

I looked for any wording indicating comprehensive building insurance or walls-in coverage and found nothing. Because there is no explicit insurance statement in the public remarks, I cannot mark the building as fully insured.

Strong evidence across the listing set: at least 3 remarks explicitly mention fire sprinklers or sprinklered construction, and the MLS amenity appears consistently present. The wording is repeated by multiple agents rather than a single isolated mention, so this looks like a stable building feature.

I searched for explicit FLSE/pass language such as passed fire inspection, fire/life safety evaluation passed, or fire safety certified, and found none. The presence of sprinklers is a positive safety sign, but it is not the same as a stated FLSE pass, so this remains false based on the remarks.

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

Ocean views are strongly supported across the listings, with several agents explicitly describing 'ocean' or 'Pacific' views and one noting the building is 'across the street from the ocean.' This looks consistent across multiple remarks rather than a one-off copy-paste claim.

Mountain views appear in at least a few listings, including explicit 'mauka' references and a remark calling out 'ocean, mountains, boat harbor' views. The evidence is not universal, but it is consistent enough to confirm mountain-facing units exist.

Across all provided remarks, views are described in terms of ocean, marina/harbor, mountains, city, sunrise/sunset, and fireworks, with no mention of Diamond Head. Given the consistent omission and 0/8 MLS entries marking Diamond Head, it's very likely the building does not offer notable Diamond Head views.

City-style views are implied in several remarks, though they are less explicit than ocean/marina views. With 6/10 MLS listings marked CITY and some supporting references to Waikiki/urban surroundings, this is a reasonable include at moderate confidence.

Coastline views are less explicitly named than ocean or marina views, but the building’s direct proximity to the ocean, beaches, and harbor supports the feature. The remarks suggest broad coastal vistas rather than a single isolated claim, so this stays included with moderate-high confidence.

Listings emphasize ocean, marina, mountain, and city views, and do not describe any notable garden or courtyard outlooks. With 0/8 MLS records checking GARDEN, garden views appear not to be a defining feature of this building.

All described views focus on ocean, marina/harbor, mountains, city/Waikiki, sunrise/sunset, and fireworks, with no reference to any golf course. Combined with 0/8 MLS records checking GOLF COURSE, it's very likely the building does not offer golf course views.

Marina/harbor views are one of the strongest building features in the dataset. Multiple agents independently mention 'Ala Wai Harbor,' 'boat harbor,' and 'Yacht Harbor,' which aligns with the high MLS frequency.

One remark notes a 'large covered lanai to enjoy the sunrise or sunset,' indicating some units have an aspect suitable for morning sun/sunrise views. This, combined with 2/8 MLS records tagging SUNRISE, supports including sunrise views as available in the building.

Sunset views are clearly supported by both MLS data and remarks. Several listings explicitly advertise sunset viewing, including 'golden sunsets' and 'stunning marina sunset views,' indicating this is a real and marketable building feature.

Across all eight sets of remarks, no agent references a cemetery or similar view, despite extensive descriptions of other outlooks. Given the urban beachfront/harbor context and 0/8 MLS entries for CEMETERY, it's highly likely there are no notable cemetery views from this building.

This is directly confirmed in multiple remarks. The wording clearly states fireworks are visible from the unit/lanai, not merely nearby.

No analysis available

No analysis available

At least four separate listings highlight that the building is 'Pet Friendly' or 'pet-friendly', and no remarks contradict this. This repeated emphasis by multiple agents indicates that pets are allowed in the building.

Multiple listings explicitly mention a resident or on-site manager, including phrasing like 'onsite resident manager' and 'on-site resident manager.' This is consistent across several remarks and aligns with the MLS amenity being checked, indicating a reliable building-level feature.

The remarks frame the building as a residential condo allowing 30-day minimum rentals, not nightly hotel-style stays. In the absence of any 'condotel' or hotel-program language, it is very likely not operated as a condotel.

The building is described as fee simple and marketed like a standard condominium, with no references to shares, co-op boards, or cooperative ownership. This strongly supports that it is not a co-op.