Ewalani Village
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.
Ewalani Village
Building Overview
Ewalani Village in Ewa, built 1974; pets not allowed and short-term rentals prohibited per MLS.
About Ewalani Village
Ewalani Village is a condominium property located in the Ewa neighborhood. According to available records, the building was constructed in 1974. Size (number of units, square footage) and construction type are not specified in the MLS data provided.
Key policies recorded in the MLS indicate that pets are not allowed and short-term rentals are not permitted at Ewalani Village. The management company is listed as unknown in the available MLS information. No specific common-area amenities or unit-level features are detailed in the provided data.
Information on parking, maintenance fees, assessments, leasing rules, or other community policies is not included in the MLS excerpt supplied. Based on MLS data, prospective buyers should verify current rules, management details, fees, and physical characteristics with the listing agent or association documents before making 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
I looked for explicit owner-occupancy percentages like "80% owner occupied" as well as qualitative descriptions such as "majority owner occupied" or "highly owner occupied." No such language appears in the remarks, so owner occupancy cannot be determined from this data.
I searched the public remarks for any elevator count or even a general reference such as "multiple elevators" or "elevator" and found nothing. The listings describe townhome-style units with parking, patios, and floor plans, but do not provide building amenity details about elevators.
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
Strong MLS checkbox evidence supports this feature: 12 of 14 current listings include OTCOEX, suggesting maintenance fees cover common-area electricity. The public remarks do not directly say “common electric” or similar, but nothing in the remarks contradicts the MLS pattern. This looks more like consistent building-level MLS data than a copy-paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
There is no support in the remarks for hot water being included, and the MLS data is strongly against it: 0 of 13 current listings have HOTWAT checked while 7 of 13 list WTRHTR. That combination points to individual water heaters rather than building-provided hot water, so this is best corrected to false.
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
Several listings for Ewalani Village mention patio/deck-type outdoor spaces, with roughly 5-6 of 13 public remarks explicitly referencing patios, lanais, or enclosed outdoor areas. Phrases like "front and back patios fully fenced in," "fenced in patio," "gated patio area," and "fully enclosed lanai" suggest this is a real building feature rather than a copy-paste MLS checkbox artifact.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Strong evidence the building offers private yard space. At least 5 listings explicitly mention it, including 'private gated yard,' 'fully fenced in' front and back patios, and 'fenced in patio' / 'gated patio area.' The repeated references across multiple remarks support the feature despite only 2/14 current MLS amenities showing PRIYAR.
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
Evidence from the MLS and remarks supports that some units have in-unit laundry: 7 of 11 current MLS listings list WASHER/DRYER in inclusions and at least three remarks explicitly state 'in-unit washer and dryer' or 'Full size washer and dryer included'. Mentions appear across multiple listings/agents rather than being limited to a single copy-paste, so the building should be listed as offering in-unit laundry.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Parking is strongly confirmed across the building. Multiple remarks mention parking in different forms, including '2 Parking Stall directly located at the back entry door,' 'parking stall is located directly in front of the unit,' and 'TWO open parking side by side.' This is consistent with the historical MLS pattern showing parking in every record.
Assigned parking is strongly supported across multiple listings and appears to be a consistent building feature rather than a one-off agent error. At least 8 remarks explicitly mention assigned/reserved/dedicated parking, including detailed references such as "assigned parking for two vehicles" and "TWO assigned parking stalls directly behind your home."
10 listings reviewed: 0/10 public remarks describe covered parking, garages, carports, or enclosed stalls. Multiple remarks explicitly state assigned or open stalls—examples: 'assigned parking for two vehicles', 'parking stall is located directly in front of the unit', 'TWO open parking side by side in front'. Only 1/10 MLS entries checked a covered-parking box, suggesting a likely checkbox error rather than building-level covered parking.
The listings consistently indicate assigned or dedicated stalls, including stalls directly behind or in front of the unit. However, I found no explicit language that the parking is deeded or owned with the unit, so this remains false based on the remarks.
No analysis available
I searched for terms like parking fee, monthly parking charge, or parking rental, but found none. The remarks describe stall location and assignment, not any separate parking cost.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for any reference to a parking waitlist, joining a waitlist, or parking scarcity procedures and found nothing. The remarks only describe assigned/dedicated parking stalls.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
0 of 10 remarks mention 'central air' or 'central AC'; 2 listings explicitly state 'Split AC' (unit-level). MLS checkbox appears in only 1/10 listings, suggesting a data-entry error rather than a building-wide central system. Evidence indicates the building does not offer central air conditioning to units.
No analysis available
Two of the 11 current listings include the ACWIUN inclusion (indicating window/wall AC units). None of the public remarks explicitly state 'window AC', 'window unit', or 'wall AC' (remarks instead reference 'Split AC' in a couple units), so the feature is indicated by MLS checkbox entries for some units but not corroborated in agent remarks.
Across the public remarks reviewed, there are no explicit mentions of concrete, reinforced concrete, or a concrete building. The current MLS checkbox data shows CONCRE in 7/13 listings, but the remarks themselves are silent, suggesting possible copy/paste checking rather than verified construction details.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No public remarks explicitly mention masonry or stucco, so there is no textual confirmation from agents. However, the current MLS data shows 6 of 14 listings flagged MASSTU, which is enough to suggest this may be a real building construction classification rather than a one-off mistake. Because the remarks are silent, the confidence remains moderate rather than high.
No analysis available
Five of the ten current MLS listings for this building have 'SLAB' checked in construction materials, but none of the public remarks include phrases like 'concrete slab' or 'solid concrete foundation.' The evidence is mixed (multiple listings show the checkbox) but uncorroborated by agent remarks, so inclusion is tentative and should be verified with owner/site visit.
No analysis available
Across the provided public remarks, 0 listings explicitly mention wood frame construction. The only evidence is weak current MLS checkbox activity (2/14 listings), which is not reinforced by agent remarks and is likely copy-paste noise. Based on the absence of supporting remarks, this feature should be treated as not confirmed for the building.
There is no explicit public-remarks evidence for above-ground construction. Because only 1/13 listings carry the ABOGRO checkbox and none of the remarks support it, this feature is not validated from the available listing text.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched the remarks for short-term rental indicators such as STR permitted, TVU, NUC, vacation rental language, or 30-day minimum rules. Nothing in the public remarks suggests STR is allowed, so this defaults to false.
I looked for hotel pool terms like hotel rental pool, managed by hotel, or branded rental programs, but found none. Since there is also no evidence that short-term rentals are allowed, this must remain false.
I searched for language indicating a mandatory rental pool, such as required participation or cannot opt out, and found nothing. With no STR allowance evidence and no rental-pool language, this is false.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for leasehold wording such as 'lease expires,' 'ground lease ends,' or any renewal/expiry year, but nothing was stated. There is no specific lease expiry year to extract from these remarks.
I searched the public remarks for explicit VA-loan approval language and found none. Because VA status is only determined from the remarks, there is no basis to mark this building as VA-approved.
I searched for language such as "fully insured," "full insurance," "walls-in coverage," or similar HOA insurance wording and found none. The remarks discuss condition, parking, and renovations, but do not mention building insurance coverage.
No analysis available
I looked for phrases like "fire life safety evaluation passed," "FLSE passed," "fire safety certified," and "passed fire inspection," but none appeared in the remarks. There is no public-remark evidence confirming that this building has passed a fire/life safety evaluation.
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
Evidence for garden views is limited but present: 1 of 13 listings is marked GARDEN in MLS view data, while 10 of 13 are NONE. The public remarks mostly describe garden-like outdoor spaces such as 'private garden spaces' and fenced patios, but do not explicitly confirm a garden view, so this appears to be a minority-unit feature rather than a widely advertised building trait.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No listings (0 of 12) mention 'sunset' or western/exposure language and 4 listings explicitly list View=NONE. None of the public remarks reference 'sunset view', 'evening sun', or similar phrases, suggesting the feature is not present rather than omitted by agents. Given the MLS checkbox data and absence of any supporting remarks across multiple listings, we conclude view_sunset = FALSE with high confidence.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Across the sampled listings, 0 listings explicitly describe a resident manager or on-site management. Given the lack of remark support and only partial checkbox usage (5/13), the resident_manager amenity does not appear to be reliably present in the building. This looks more like inconsistent MLS entry than a confirmed building feature.
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.