Diamond Head Terrace
Preliminary Information – Full Audit Pending
This buildings features were determined from publicly available data, including MLS listings. While we cross-referenced additional data sources, it still likely contains incomplete or inaccurate information, as it has not yet been personally verified.
Once a building has been fully audited, this page will be replaced with an in-depth analysis featuring verified details and photos of every key feature.
Until then, we provide a data‑driven overview that blends statistical analysis of the checkbox selections agents make in MLS with an AI‑powered read of their public remarks—yielding a clearer picture of the building than raw listings alone.
If this building is important to your search, you can help prioritize it for a full audit by requesting one below. To see what a complete report looks like, check out the example full report.
Diamond Head Terrace
Building Overview
Diamond Head Terrace in Diamond Head-Kapahulu-St. Louis (built 1960). Pets and short-term rentals are not allowed, management company unknown.
About Diamond Head Terrace
Based on MLS data, Diamond Head Terrace is a residential building located in the Diamond Head-Kapahulu-St. Louis neighborhood. The building was constructed in 1960. Size (number of units, square footage) and construction type are not specified in the available MLS information.
According to available records, the building does not allow pets and short-term rentals are prohibited. The listing does not provide details on specific on-site amenities (such as a pool, gym, or common areas) or unit features.
Management company, parking arrangements, association fees, and other operational details are listed as unknown in the MLS data. Buyers and their agents should verify all building characteristics, rules, and financials with the seller, condominium association, or managing agent prior to making any decisions.
Building Features & Data Confidence
All features from MLS data with AI-assisted confidence analysis. Click each category to expand and see details.
No analysis available
County records and the state registration both report 3 floors. The listings show a single floor-4 entry with no unit-number agreement and are too sparse to outweigh the matching records.
The county reconciled unit count and the state registration both report 25 units, and the parcel covers only this building record.
Owner occupancy from AOUO registration(s) 5005. Refreshed by Real_Estate_Scraper/reb_registry/propagate_owner_occupancy.py, which this lock does not block.
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.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Evidence for common-area electricity is weak and somewhat ambiguous: only 1 of 3 listings includes OTCOEX, and none of the public remarks mention common electric or building power. This looks like a possible MLS checkbox/code interpretation rather than a clearly verified building-wide inclusion.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
There is strong negative evidence for hot water being included in maintenance fees: no listing checks HOTWAT, and all three listings show WTRHTR in inclusions. That pattern is consistent across listings and supports that hot water is not a building-paid utility.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sewer inclusion is consistently supported across all available listings. With 3 of 3 MLS entries checking SEWER and no contradictory remarks, this appears to be a reliable building-level HOA expense.
Water inclusion is strongly and consistently supported across the listings. All 3 MLS records list WATER in the HOA fees, with no remarks suggesting otherwise, so this is a high-confidence building feature.
BBQ is mentioned in 3 current listings, including phrases like 'BBQ area' and 'community pool, bbq, & laundry area.' The repeated references across multiple remarks support that this is a shared building amenity available to residents, even though only 1/3 MLS records currently has the checkbox marked.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
2 of 3 public remarks explicitly mention outdoor patio/deck space, including a "large enclosed covered lanai" and a "massive 150sf private covered lanai." The wording is detailed and consistent across listings, so this appears to be a real building/unit amenity rather than a copy-paste checkbox only.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
The pool feature is strongly supported across the current remarks: 2 of the 3 public remarks explicitly mention it, including phrases like "swimming pool" and "community pool," and one also notes a view overlooking the pool. This aligns with the existing high-confidence MLS amenity history, so there is no indication of a change.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Evidence strongly supports shared laundry at the building level. One listing explicitly states "community pool, bbq, & laundry area," and the current MLS amenities show COMLAU in all 3/3 listings. This appears consistent across listings and not just a single agent's unchecked remark.
No analysis available
No analysis available
One of the two current listings explicitly mentions parking: 'This condo includes 1 assigned parking stall.' MLS checkbox data also shows parking present in 1/2 listings and no listings checked 'NONE.' Evidence is direct and consistent across MLS checkbox + agent remark, indicating the building offers parking.
Assigned parking is well supported across the remarks and MLS data. One listing explicitly states "This condo includes 1 assigned parking stall," and the building-level MLS flags show ASSIGN in 2 of 3 listings, suggesting this is a real feature rather than a copy-paste anomaly.
Covered parking is not clearly described in the public remarks, which only confirm assigned parking. The MLS data has a single listing with a COVERE/garage-type parking feature, but with no corroborating remarks this appears tentative and may be an agent-entered checkbox.
The listings mention an assigned parking stall, including the phrase "1 assigned parking stall." Assigned parking does not establish deeded ownership, and no deeded or owned-parking language was found.
No analysis available
The remarks mention assigned parking but do not state whether a fee applies. No monthly parking amount, rental charge, or additional parking cost was found.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
The remarks describe assigned parking but do not mention a parking waitlist, waiting list, or process for joining one. There is no public-remark evidence of a waitlist.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Concrete construction is strongly supported by the current MLS data: all 3 of 3 listings show CONCRE. None of the public remarks mention construction details, which suggests the MLS field is likely being carried consistently rather than copied from remarks, but the repeated checkbox is still strong evidence.
Double wall construction appears in only 1 of 3 current MLS listings, with no supporting language in the public remarks. That makes this a weak signal, but it still suggests the feature may exist in at least some units or be inconsistently entered.
No analysis available
Only 1 of 3 current listings includes MASSTU, and none of the remarks mention masonry/stucco construction. This is weak, inconsistent MLS evidence, so the feature is plausible but not strongly verified.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Above-ground construction is supported by 2 of 3 current listings showing ABOGRO in construction_materials. No public remarks mention it, so this appears to come from MLS data rather than narrative descriptions, but the repetition across multiple listings gives it moderate confidence.
No analysis available
No analysis available
The remarks mention rental income of "$2210+tax" but do not identify it as short-term rental income or state that STR is permitted. No STR, NUC, TVU, vacation-rental, 30-day-minimum, or owner-occupant language was found.
The remarks do not mention a hotel rental pool, hotel rental program, hotel management, or participation in hotel operations. Because STR permission is not established, this feature is also false.
The remarks do not state that owners must participate in a hotel pool or rental program. Since STR permission is not established and no mandatory-program language appears, this feature is false.
No analysis available
No analysis available
The remarks contain no specific lease-expiry year or language about a land lease. No expiry date can be extracted from the available public remarks.
The remarks do not mention VA approval, VA financing, or acceptance of VA loans. Therefore, there is no public-remark evidence that the building is VA loan approved.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
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
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Garden-view evidence is moderately strong for this building. The current MLS data shows 2 of 3 listings marked GARDEN, and one remark explicitly mentions a "tropical garden area just outside the front door." Another listing references a pool view instead, so this appears to be a feature present in some units rather than every listing.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence levels are based on MLS checkbox data and AI analysis of listing remarks. High = strong evidence, Medium = some evidence, Low = limited or conflicting evidence. Buyers should always verify critical details independently.