Governor Cleghorn

The MLS property data consistently shows 1966 as the year built for every listing reviewed. No remarks indicate major reconstruction that would alter the original construction year, so 1966 is accepted with high confidence.

Across the available listings, the highest unit floor explicitly or implicitly referenced is the 9th floor (e.g., one unit is stated to be on the 8th floor and property data shows a unit on the 9th). In the absence of remarks specifying a taller structure or a higher 'top floor,' the building is assumed to have at least 9 floors, which is used as the best estimate.

No listing remarks reference the total unit count in the building. Without explicit statements or corroborating MLS fields, the total number of units cannot be determined.

The remarks directly support an owner-occupancy level above 50%, matching the existing 52% figure. I found no conflicting evidence in the listings. This is a clear enough statement to keep the current value with high confidence.

I searched the remarks for explicit elevator counts such as "2 elevators," "multiple elevators," or similar wording. None were found, so the current value is kept. The references to elevators confirm the building has at least one, but they do not verify the number.

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.

There is no MLS or remarks evidence that central air conditioning costs are included in the maintenance fee. Absence across all listings suggests this is not a covered item.

Strong building-level evidence that cable is included in the maintenance fee. MLS data shows CABTV in 8 of 9 listings, and the public remarks directly confirm it with 'includes cable TV,' which looks consistent across listings rather than a one-off agent error.

Moderate evidence: 4 of 8 MLS checkboxes list common area electricity (OTCOEX). Remarks do not spell this out, so the feature is likely present but not explicitly described by agents; confidence is medium (implied from MLS data).

No MLS entries indicate cooperative taxes are included, and the building is marketed as a condominium rather than a co-op. There is no sign that co-op taxes apply or are part of the fees.

Electricity is billed separately to occupants, as directly stated in the remarks, and is not checked in any MLS association_fee_includes fields. This is strong evidence that electricity is not part of the fee.

There is no MLS checkbox or remark evidence that gas is included in the maintenance fee. This consistent absence across listings indicates gas is not covered.

Mixed evidence: 3 of 8 MLS listings indicate hot water is included (HOTWAT), while other listings show WTRHTR (unit water heater) suggesting not all units rely on building‑supplied hot water. Because some listings do list HOTWAT, the feature is included with moderate confidence.

There is moderate evidence that internet is included for at least some units/building listings: 4 of 9 MLS entries check INTSER. No public remark explicitly confirms internet, so this appears to come from MLS checkbox data rather than repeated agent descriptions.

There is no suggestion in MLS data or remarks that the building includes marina access or marina fees in the HOA. The location and marketing focus confirm that marina-related costs are not part of the fees.

Strong evidence supports sewer being included in the maintenance fee. MLS data shows SEWER in 8 of 9 listings, and the public remarks explicitly say 'The low maintenance fee includes ... sewer,' reinforcing the checkbox data.

Water inclusion appears to be a consistent building feature. MLS data shows WATER in 8 of 9 listings, and the remarks explicitly confirm water is included, giving strong cross-listing support.

None of the listings mention BBQ grills or an outdoor grilling area. The MLS amenities consistently omit BBQ, indicating the building likely has no dedicated BBQ facilities.

No listing remarks mention bicycle storage, bike rooms, or racks, and 0 of 5 MLS records list bike storage as an amenity. This uniform lack of evidence across multiple agents and listings supports the conclusion that the building does not offer bike storage.

Remarks emphasize walking distance to Waikiki Beach, not direct waterfront or docking facilities. With no mention of a marina or boat slips and no MLS support, a boat dock can be ruled out.

Across five listings, not a single remark highlights a car wash station, which would typically be noted if present. With only a minority of MLS entries checking this box and no descriptive support, it is more likely the building does not offer a car wash amenity.

None of the listings describe a clubhouse or community center. The clubhouse amenity is unchecked in all MLS records, indicating the building does not provide this feature.

Concierge or staffed front-desk services are not referenced anywhere in the remarks, which instead focus on location, interior upgrades, and the pool. With 0/5 MLS entries marking a concierge feature, it is very likely the building does not offer concierge service.

None of the agents reference a dog park, dog run, or pet exercise area. Combined with the absence of this amenity in MLS, the building almost certainly lacks a dedicated dog park.

Doorman service is a major amenity and would almost certainly appear in remarks or MLS checkboxes. The complete absence of references across all current listings strongly indicates there is no doorman or lobby attendant at this building.

Across five listings, none reference a gym, fitness center, or exercise room. MLS amenities for this building also never list an exercise room, suggesting the building does not offer this feature.

Listings for this modest Waikiki condo focus on features like parking and a pool, not concierge-style transportation. The absence of limo or house car service in both remarks and MLS strongly indicates it is not offered.

The building is presented as a residential condo without shared meeting or conference facilities. MLS amenities corroborate this by never listing a meeting room.

3 of 5 listings reference a lanai, including phrases like “relax on the lanai of your charming oasis” and “Spacious End/Corner unit with Lanai” and “There is a large lanai with storage closet.” These repeated references across different units and agents strongly indicate the building offers lanai/patio-style outdoor spaces.

Although the building is near Waikiki beach and attractions, there is no indication of a dedicated jogging or walking path as a building amenity. MLS data also does not list such a feature.

There are no references to a children's playground or tot lot in any listing. MLS data also omits this amenity, indicating the building does not provide a playground.

Across all 5 listings, outdoor space is only described as a “lanai” or balcony, with no mention of yards, fenced areas, or private ground-level outdoor spaces. Given the high-rise Waikiki condo context and lack of yard-related language, it is very likely the building does not offer private yard areas.

None of the listings mention a putting green or golf practice area. With all MLS records lacking this checkbox, it is almost certain the building does not have a putting green.

The only common-area amenity explicitly mentioned is a pool. With no references to a recreation deck or amenity area and no MLS checkboxes for this feature, a dedicated recreation area is unlikely.

Remarks describe a pool but do not mention any rec room, game room, or multi-purpose room. MLS amenities also never list a recreation room, so it is very likely absent.

Remarks describe proximity to Waikiki shops and restaurants, not an on-site dining facility. The restaurant amenity is never checked in MLS, so the building likely has no internal restaurant.

Remarks focus on unit lanais and city/mountain views but do not mention a rooftop deck or rooftop amenities. The MLS consistently leaves rooftop features unchecked, so shared rooftop access is unlikely.

All remarks are silent on any sauna or steam facilities. Combined with the lack of a sauna checkbox in MLS, this strongly suggests the building does not include a sauna.

None of the public remarks mention building-provided storage lockers or common storage areas; instead listings consistently reference in-unit or lanai storage ('dedicated lanai storage room', 'lanai storage', 'storage in unit'). Although a minority of MLS checkboxes indicate storage, the remarks across multiple agents do not describe building lockers, so evidence points to no building-level storage units.

The remarks were searched for terms like 'surfboard storage', 'board storage', 'surf storage', and 'bike and surfboard storage' and none were found. Only general or in-unit storage is mentioned, with no indication of a dedicated building facility for surfboards. Based on this absence, it is moderately likely the building does not offer dedicated surfboard storage.

There are no references to tennis courts in any of the remarks. MLS data for all listings also omits tennis courts, so the building almost certainly does not have them.

Every current MLS listing (8/8) marks the building amenity as a trash/garbage chute (TRACHU), and prior data also showed consistent selection (high confidence). None of the public remarks explicitly mention or deny a trash/garbage chute, so the consistent checkbox usage across multiple listings suggests the building has a trash chute despite lack of remark text.

Listings describe “1 assigned parking stall downstairs near the elevator” and “one covered parking stall,” indicating standard self-parking. No remarks among the 5 listings use terms like “valet” or “valet parking,” making it very unlikely that valet service is offered.

Remarks emphasize walkability to Waikiki attractions and do not reference any gated or enclosed community access. Combined with the lack of any gated/wall/fence amenity in the MLS data, this strongly suggests the building is not surrounded by a security wall or fence.

One listing notes a "nice swimming pool" and another says "Building has Pool for residence" without any reference to a hot tub, jacuzzi, or spa. MLS data also omits whirlpool amenities, so the building likely has only a standard pool.

Strong building-level evidence that Governor Cleghorn has a shared swimming pool. At least 5 listings in the provided remarks explicitly mention a pool, with consistent phrasing like "refreshing swimming pool," "nice swimming pool," and "Building has Pool for residence." This looks like corroborated amenity data rather than a one-off copy-paste error.

Across all provided listings, the pool is mentioned but never described as heated, and 0/5 MLS entries mark any heated-pool options. Given that agents highlight the pool itself yet omit any 'heated' language or checkbox, it is highly likely the building does not have a heated pool.

The public remarks reference a swimming pool but do not specify that it is salt water. Searched for terms like 'salt water pool', 'saltwater pool', 'salt pool', and 'saline pool' and found none. Based on the absence of any such mentions, the pool is assumed not to be salt water.

In-unit laundry is strongly confirmed. All 9 current listings mention it directly, with multiple agents using clear language such as 'Washer/Dryer in unit,' 'in-unit washer and dryer,' and 'full-sized washer and ventless dryer.' This is consistent across the current MLS data and appears to be a stable building feature rather than a one-off copy-paste error.

None of the 5 listings reference shared or community laundry, and the community-laundry amenity is unchecked in all current MLS entries. Given the consistent emphasis on in-unit washers/dryers and lack of any mention of a laundry room, it is very likely this building does not offer separate community laundry facilities.

Searched for terms such as 'coin laundry', 'coin-op', 'paid laundry', 'card-operated', or 'laundry fee' and found none. Given the consistent emphasis on in-unit laundry and no reference to paid common machines, it is moderately likely that there is no paid community laundry setup.

Searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor', 'laundry room on every floor', and 'community laundry'. All listings instead highlight in-unit laundry, with no indication of floor-by-floor shared facilities. Based on this absence, it is moderately likely that there is no community laundry on every floor.

Parking is strongly supported across the listings: at least 6 remarks mention it directly, including phrases like "secured dedicated parking stall," "secure covered parking stall," "1 assigned parking stall," and "one covered parking stall." The evidence is consistent across multiple agents and does not look like a one-off checkbox error.

Assigned parking is well documented. Multiple remarks reference a "secured dedicated parking stall," "1 assigned parking stall downstairs near the elevator," and "that coveted parking stall," while the MLS data shows ASSIGN in 8 of 9 current listings. This is strong, repeated evidence across listings.

At least 3–4 remarks explicitly reference covered parking (e.g., 'secure covered parking stall', 'one covered parking stall', 'covered parking stall'), supported by MLS parking features (6/8). The evidence is consistent across listings and agents.

I searched for explicit deeded-parking language like "deeded parking," "owned stall," or "parking included in deed." The listings only indicate a dedicated/assigned stall, which supports included parking but not ownership of the stall.

Across all reviewed listings, there is no MLS checkbox for EV charging and no textual reference to EV or Tesla charging. Given that such a feature is typically highlighted when present, the evidence strongly suggests the building does not offer EV charging stations.

I looked for any mention of an extra parking charge, monthly parking fee, or parking rental cost and found none. The remarks describe parking as included or assigned, but they do not state any separate fee.

No public remarks reference guest or visitor parking despite multiple listings; MLS shows only 1/8 with GUEST checked, and historical analysis found consistent absence of guest- parking claims. Therefore the building should be listed as not having guest parking available.

Secured entry for parking is supported by several remarks that tie the parking area to security features, such as "secured building," "secure covered parking stall," and parking located near a "secure keyed elevator." Combined with SECENT appearing in 5 of 9 current MLS listings, the evidence is strong enough to include.

Tandem parking is usually called out specifically because it affects usability, yet neither the MLS fields nor remarks mention it across any listings. This strongly suggests there are no tandem parking stalls in the building.

None of the listings reference valet or attended parking in either checkboxes or public remarks. Given that valet service is a premium amenity that agents nearly always advertise, the evidence strongly indicates the building does not offer valet parking.

I searched for phrases like "parking waitlist," "parking waiting list," or instructions to join a queue for parking and found nothing. The remarks instead suggest parking is available with the unit.

Elevator access is discussed only in terms of convenience to parking, with no language about secured or restricted access. With 0/5 listings indicating any elevator security feature, it is very likely the elevators are standard, non-keyed access.

Public remarks describe location, interior upgrades, amenities like pool and parking, but do not reference any card or fob-based access system. Searched for terms such as key card, keycard, fob, electronic access, and card reader and found no evidence that such a system exists.

Across 5 listings, there are zero mentions of a security guard or staffed security and the SECGUA amenity is never selected. In a Waikiki condo this would be a notable selling point and is likely to appear in remarks if available. Evidence strongly suggests the building does not offer security guard service.

Remarks focus on unit features, building amenities, and proximity to Waikiki, without indicating any security patrol or roving security service. Searched for phrases like security patrol, roving security, patrol service, and patrolled and found no evidence of patrol services.

None of the 5 listings mention security cameras or video surveillance, and the MLS security-system checkbox is never used. Given that agents highlight safety features when present, the absence of any such references indicates the building likely does not have a notable video security system.

Across 5 listings, zero indicate central air in the MLS data and no remarks reference central AC, HVAC, or a building-wide cooling system. The consistent absence of any central AC mentions, combined with multiple listings showing window units instead, strongly suggests the building does not have central air.

The MLS data for all 5 listings shows no split AC inclusions and no remarks reference mini-split, ductless, or individual split systems. Given the repeated indication of window AC instead, it is very likely the building does not offer split AC systems in its units.

Window AC is supported by the historical MLS pattern and current remarks. Across the provided remarks, 1 listing explicitly says 'A/C,' while the broader MLS data shows 8 of 9 current listings with ACWIUN checked, suggesting this is a real building feature rather than a one-off agent error. The evidence is strong enough to keep the feature included for buyers searching for units with air conditioning.

Concrete construction is strongly supported by the MLS record: 9 of 9 current listings list CONCRE in construction_materials. There are no remarks suggesting a different structure type, and the historical pattern has been consistently concrete, making this a very high-confidence building-level feature.

Only 2 of 8 current listings include DOUWAL in construction_materials and none of the public remarks reference "double wall" or similar phrasing. Because historical data has flagged this at times but narrative remarks do not corroborate, inclusion is cautious (implied confidence) pending owner/site verification.

None of the public remarks or MLS checkboxes point to hollow tile construction. Agents consistently label the building as concrete only, which is typical for this area and era. The lack of any hollow-tile indicators across multiple listings suggests hollow-tile construction is not a defining feature here.

Across five listings, there are no mentions of stucco or masonry construction, and agents do not check the masonry/stucco option in MLS. The building is consistently characterized simply as concrete. This pattern indicates masonry-stucco is not a primary construction descriptor for this property.

One listing shows steel frame checked, but all five show concrete construction and none describe a steel structural system in the remarks. Given Waikiki’s typical reinforced-concrete condo towers and the lack of corroborating text, this isolated MLS entry is likely incorrect. The building is best characterized as concrete, not steel frame.

Just 1 of 8 current listings lists SLAB in construction_materials and none of the listing remarks include phrases like "concrete slab" or "slab-on-grade." Given the scant and inconsistent MLS checkbox presence and lack of narrative confirmation, slab foundation is possible but only weakly supported.

No analysis available

Zero listings (0/5) mark wood frame construction, while all consistently mark concrete, which is standard for this type of Waikiki condo building. The remarks focus on interior upgrades and never mention wood-frame structure. This combination makes wood-frame construction highly unlikely here.

Most listings (4/5) do not mark above-ground construction, and none of the remarks describe an above-ground or post-and-pier structure. Instead, the building is presented as a standard concrete condominium with a parking structure and pool. The lone ABOGRO checkbox appears inconsistent with the building type and is likely erroneous.

There are no mentions of brick in any of the five listing remarks, and the MLS data never flags brick construction. In Honolulu, brick high-rise condo buildings are rare compared to reinforced concrete. This consistent absence across agents makes brick construction very unlikely for this building.

No listing flags single-wall construction or uses phrases like “single wall” or “old Hawaiian style,” which are normally called out when present. Instead, every listing identifies the building as concrete construction. Given the building type and location, single-wall construction can be confidently ruled out.

I looked for public remarks indicating short-term rentals are allowed, including terms like "legal vacation rental," "NUC," "TVU," or minimum-night rules, and found none. Since there is no evidence STR is permitted, this is marked false; under the rules, the related hotel-pool fields must also be false.

I searched for hotel rental pool references such as "hotel pool," "managed by hotel," or branded pool programs and found none. Because the remarks do not support STR being allowed, this must also be false.

I looked for language indicating required participation, such as "mandatory pool," "must be in rental program," or "cannot opt out," and found nothing. With no evidence of STR or a hotel pool program, mandatory participation is not supported.

Across all reviewed listings, the tenure field is never coded as Fee Simple and no remarks use fee-simple terminology. Given the complete absence of FS indicators, we treat Fee Simple availability as not evidenced for this building based on current data.

None of the listings identify the units as leasehold or mention any land lease details. With no LH codes or lease-related remarks, Leasehold availability is not supported by the present data.

I looked for ground lease or leasehold wording such as "lease expires 2050," "ground lease ends," or any renewal/extension date and found none. Because the remarks do not mention a lease expiry year, the value cannot be extracted.

I searched the public remarks for explicit VA language such as "VA approved," "VA financing," or "VA loans accepted" and found nothing. With no public remark evidence, this remains unconfirmed and is treated as not supported by the listings.

I searched the remarks for insurance-related wording such as fully insured, full insurance, walls-in coverage, or comprehensive building coverage. The listings do not mention the building’s insurance status, so there is no evidence to support this feature.

No listing remarks reference fire sprinklers or a sprinkler system, and the corresponding MLS amenity checkbox is unchecked in every case. This consistent absence across multiple listings indicates the building is unlikely to have a noted fire sprinkler system.

I looked for public-remark language about fire/life safety evaluation passed, FLSE, fire safety certification, or compliance approval. Nothing in the listings references any such status, so there is no evidence to mark this true.

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 confirmed by multiple current listings, including explicit phrases like "peek-a-boo ocean view," "crack at the ocean," and "breathtaking views of the turquoise Pacific Ocean." This is consistent with the historical MLS pattern showing ocean in some listings, so view_ocean should be included for the building.

Several unit remarks call out mountain/Koolau views — e.g., "Koolau mountains" and "Skyline and Mountain Views." Multiple agents mention this feature, supporting that mountain views are available from some units.

At least one listing explicitly mentions Diamond Head: "a peek-a-boo view of iconic Diamond Head." While not ubiquitous across all listings, this direct statement indicates some units offer Diamond Head views.

City views appear to be a building-wide characteristic in the MLS data, with 9/9 listings showing CITY in view descriptions. Current remarks reinforce this with phrases like "after a day in the city," "a nice view of the city," and "Skyline and Mountain Views," indicating strong, repeated evidence across listings.

While agents describe ocean views and proximity to Waikiki beaches, they do not use coastline/shoreline language. The building offers ocean/viewing opportunities, but explicit "coastline"/shoreline vistas are not clearly documented in the remarks.

Even when detailing views, agents mention skyline, mountain, and ocean but not gardens or courtyards. The lack of any garden-view references in remarks or MLS strongly indicates the building does not offer garden views.

No listing remarks reference a golf course or fairway view. Given the absence of any descriptive language about golf vistas across the provided remarks, the building should not be characterized as offering golf-course views for most units.

Listings repeatedly describe ocean, city, and mountain views but contain no mention of a marina or harbor. With no agent remarks supporting marina/harbor views (despite 1/8 MLS entries checking MARCAN), evidence suggests marina views are not a typical feature.

Listings emphasize sunsets and ocean views but contain no mention of sunrise or eastern exposure. With no agent remarks supporting sunrise views (and only minimal MLS checkbox presence), sunrise views are not a commonly offered feature.

Multiple listings reference sunsets directly — e.g., "perfect for sunset cocktails" and "sunsets on the beach" — indicating some units have western/evening exposure suitable for sunset views.

Across all available listings, there is no reference—positive or negative—to a cemetery view. Combined with zero cemetery view checkboxes in MLS, this strongly indicates the building does not overlook a cemetery.

View descriptions are limited to skyline, mountain, city, and a 'crack at the ocean'. I searched for any mention of watching or seeing Friday night fireworks from the unit or lanai and found none, so a fireworks view is unlikely based on current remarks.

No analysis available

There are no explicit references to pets, dogs, or cats in the public remarks, but also no statements like “no pets allowed.” MLS data shows 0/5 listings with a NOPET restriction, which, combined with the absence of prohibitive language, suggests the building permits pets with some confidence.

All 7 current MLS listings for this building have the RESMAN amenity flag, indicating a resident/on-site manager, and this pattern is consistent across multiple agents. None of the public remarks explicitly mention a resident manager, but there is also no indication that the feature has been removed. Given the uniform MLS data and prior high confidence, the building is still treated as having a resident manager on-site.

One listing notes “over half of the building is owner occupied” and calls it perfect for a buyer seeking a mortgage, which is atypical for condotels. No remarks mention hotel programs, front desk, nightly rentals, or the term “condotel,” and 0/5 MLS entries use a CONDOT architectural style code, strongly indicating it is not a condotel.

Across all 5 listings the property is described as a “condo” with conventional association fees, and there is no mention of shares, proprietary leases, or cooperative ownership. MLS data shows 0/5 listings with COOTAX in association_fee_includes, so it is very likely not a co-op building.