Hawaiian Crown

MLS property data is consistent across all 10 listings with year_built=1966. Since no remarks indicate a different build year or a full reconstruction, 1966 is accepted as the building’s construction year.

Remarks in one listing state that 'the Hawaiian Crown is a convenient, nine-floor building.' No remarks contradict this, and observed unit floors up to 7 fit within a 9-story building, so 9 floors is adopted as the building total.

No listing remarks mention how many units Hawaiian Crown has (e.g., 'xx-unit building'), and the MLS property data did not provide a unit_total value. Because there is no explicit or reliable indirect evidence, the total unit count is left unknown.

I reviewed all public remarks for numeric or descriptive owner-occupancy statements and found none. Per the rules, I retain the existing value of 36.0 but with low confidence and note there's no evidence in the remarks to confirm or deny this figure.

Multiple public remarks reference an elevator in the building (supporting at least one elevator), but none specify a number (e.g., '4 elevators', 'two elevators'). Per rules, I will not change the existing numeric value without an explicit number in remarks, so I keep 1 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.

Multiple remarks describe the units as cooled by trade winds and do not mention any central air system. With 0/10 MLS listings indicating central AC in the fee, it is very likely that there is no central AC cost included in the maintenance fees.

At least two independent remarks note that HOA fees include cable, e.g., 'HOA fees at the Hawaiian Crown also includes premium cable & internet services' and 'cable & 300 mb internet package included.' Together with 8 of 13 current MLS records marking CABTV, this strongly indicates cable TV service is part of the maintenance fees across the building.

MLS data indicates 11/14 current listings check common area electricity (OTCOEX) as included in association fees. None of the public remarks explicitly state 'common area electricity' or similar phrasing, so the evidence is strong across MLS checkbox data but appears to be copy/checked by agents rather than repeatedly described in remarks.

The building is explicitly marketed as Fee Simple, not a cooperative. With no MLS indication of cooperative taxes being included, there is effectively no chance that co-op taxes are part of the maintenance fee.

Agents call out included services like cable and internet but never mention electricity, which they typically highlight if covered. Combined with 0/10 MLS entries checking electricity, this strongly suggests electricity is separately metered and not included in maintenance fees.

There is no indication in remarks or MLS data that the building uses or includes gas service. It is therefore very likely that gas is not a utility covered by the maintenance fees.

Multiple remarks mention individual water heaters in the units (e.g., 'tankless water heater,' 'new water heater'), and 4 of 13 MLS entries list WTRHTR in inclusions while 0 of 13 select HOTWAT. This pattern shows hot water is generated by unit-specific heaters rather than a central system included in the maintenance fee.

There are explicit remarks in several listings declaring that HOA fees include internet/cable (examples: 'premium cable & internet services' and 'cable & 300 mb internet package included'), supported by MLS checkbox data (6/14). This is direct agent language indicating internet is included in association fees.

The building is presented as a landlocked Waikiki condo with a pool and city/beach proximity, not as a marina community. With no MLS or remark references to marina access or fees, marina costs are not part of the maintenance fees.

MLS entries overwhelmingly (13/14) indicate sewer is included in association fees, though public remarks do not explicitly mention 'sewer included.' The inclusion is strongly suggested by checkbox data across many listings rather than by explicit remarks.

MLS data consistently shows water included in association fees (13/14 listings), but public remarks rarely if ever mention 'water included.' The evidence is therefore strong based on MLS checkbox prevalence rather than repeated explicit agent remarks.

Remarks highlight a pool, picnic area, lounge area, and convenience store, but none of the 9 descriptive listings reference BBQs or grills. With 1/10 MLS BBQ checks and no text support, the single checkbox is likely an agent error.

The most detailed remark states there is 'parking for mopeds, scooters, bicycles & surfboard storage', implying dedicated on-site bicycle parking/storage for residents. Although only one listing mentions bikes explicitly, its specificity and context (alongside consistent surfboard storage mentions) provide strong evidence that bicycle storage/parking is offered at the building.

Remarks emphasize walking distance to Waikiki Beach and parks but do not reference direct waterfront dock access or moorings. This urban location and lack of mention make it virtually certain there is no boat dock.

Amenities described include parking for mopeds/scooters/bicycles and a reserved parking stall, but nothing about a vehicle wash area or car wash station. This makes it very likely there is no car wash amenity.

Across all listings, common areas are limited to the pool, picnic/lounge area, laundry, surfboard storage, and convenience store. The absence of any 'clubhouse' or similar facility in both text and checkboxes strongly indicates there is no clubhouse.

The building is repeatedly described as a boutique property with a resident manager and on-site/nearby convenience store but never a concierge or staffed front desk. With no MLS records indicating concierge service, it is almost certain that no concierge is provided.

Several listings note the building is 'pet friendly' but stop at that, listing no dedicated pet facilities. The lack of any 'dog park' or 'dog run' reference across multiple agents indicates no such amenity exists.

Across all available remarks, there is no mention of a doorman or lobby attendant, only a resident manager and secure/locked access. Combined with the doorman amenity being unchecked in all 10 MLS records, the building almost certainly does not have a doorman service.

Across all provided listings, amenities repeatedly include pool, community/on-site laundry, surfboard storage, picnic/lounge areas, and a convenience store, but never an exercise room or gym. Given the small boutique nature of the building and 0/10 MLS entries with EXEROO, it is very likely no exercise room exists.

Listings describe a modest, boutique building rather than a luxury high-rise with concierge-style services. The complete lack of any limo or car service references makes it virtually certain this amenity is not offered.

The building is consistently described as a small boutique property with basic amenities but no mention of any dedicated meeting or conference space. This strongly suggests there is no meeting room amenity.

Building-level outdoor spaces are consistently described across listings: at least 6 separate remarks explicitly mention a lanai (e.g., "tiled lanai with baseboard siding", "its own covered lanai", "private lanai"). Current MLS amenities indicate PATDEC/COVPAT on 9 of 14 listings and historical confidence was high, so there is strong, multi-agent corroboration that the building offers patios/decks/lanai spaces.

Remarks emphasize nearby parks and beaches rather than internal trails, and the building appears to occupy a compact urban lot. This strongly suggests there is no dedicated jogging or walking path as a building amenity.

Agents consistently list the pool, picnic area, and proximity to the Honolulu Zoo and Kapiolani Park but never an on-site playground. This makes it very likely the building does not offer a children's play area.

Across all remarks, outdoor references are limited to lanais, pool, surfboard storage, and a picnic area, with no mention of any kind of private yard or enclosed yard space. Given the high-rise boutique nature of the building and 0/10 MLS entries for PRIYAR, it is very unlikely that any units have private yard areas.

All remarks focus on urban Waikiki conveniences and basic building amenities, with no hint of any golf practice or putting facilities. It is virtually certain there is no putting green.

Several remarks refer to a 'picnic area' and 'lounge area' in conjunction with the pool, indicating a common outdoor recreation space. While the words 'recreation deck' or 'recreation area' are not used explicitly, this combination is consistent with a building recreation area.

Amenities are consistently listed as pool, community/on-site laundry, surfboard storage, picnic area, and a convenience store. The lone 'lounge area' reference is vague and not clearly a recreation room, so a true dedicated rec room is unlikely.

Agents repeatedly highlight a convenience store downstairs and nearby 'restaurants, bars, nightclubs' in the neighborhood. The absence of any mention of an in-building restaurant indicates no such amenity exists.

Listings highlight a ground-level or pool-front orientation and do not reference rooftop access or a roof deck. Given repeated detailed amenity descriptions, it is very likely there is no shared rooftop feature.

Agents detail even relatively minor features like outdoor showers and surfboard storage but never a sauna. The consistent omission indicates there is no sauna facility in the building.

Building-level storage is consistently referenced across listings: at least several listings explicitly mention an “external storage locker,” “storage locker,” or “owner storage,” and many more note surfboard storage/racks. Historical MLS checkbox data also indicated storage in multiple listings (7/14 amenities, 5/14 unit_features), so evidence is strong and appears across multiple agents rather than a single copy/paste.

Surfboard storage is explicitly and repeatedly advertised across listings, including references to surfboard racks and a small monthly fee in some remarks. This feature is clearly stated in many of the public remarks.

All listings focus on a pool, laundry facilities, surfboard storage, and proximity to Waikiki and Kapiolani Park, with no indication of on-site tennis facilities. Given the small footprint of this boutique Waikiki building, it is almost certain there is no tennis court.

Listings talk about community/on-site laundry, storage, and a convenience store but do not mention trash chutes, which some agents will highlight when present. With most MLS entries not checking TRACHU and no textual support, it is somewhat likely the building lacks a trash chute system.

Multiple listings describe conventional parking (“1 assigned parking stall,” “ground-floor parking stall,” “on street parking”) but never mention valet, which would typically be advertised. With no VALET MLS flags and no textual evidence, the building appears not to offer valet service.

One listing notes entry 'through the back gate' to reach the unit and shared amenities, suggesting a fenced or gated boundary around parts of the property. With 3 of 10 MLS listings also marking a gated/wall/fence amenity, there is moderate, multi-agent evidence that the building has some perimeter fencing or gating.

Multiple listings enthusiastically promote the pool and pool-front units but never mention a separate hot tub or spa. This strongly suggests there is only a standard pool and no whirlpool amenity.

All MLS listings (14/14) list a pool amenity and multiple public remarks explicitly reference it — examples include 'heated pool', 'swimming pool', 'refreshing pool with a lanai', and 'pool-front unit'. Evidence is consistent across many agent remarks rather than a single isolated mention, supporting high confidence that the building has a pool.

At least two separate remarks clearly describe a "heated pool" among the building amenities, not just a generic pool. This matches the MLS data where 2/13 listings have the heated-pool amenity code, while no remarks contradict or specify an unheated pool. Given prior high confidence and consistent recent mentions, it is very likely the building’s shared pool is heated.

The building's pool is repeatedly mentioned and described as heated, but there is no mention that it is a saltwater pool. I searched for 'salt', 'salt water', and 'saltwater' with no matches.

Across all provided remarks, there are no references to in-unit washers/dryers (no 'in-unit laundry', 'washer/dryer in unit', or similar phrases). Instead, agents repeatedly describe shared facilities such as 'community laundry', 'laundry room', and 'on-site laundry', and 11/12 MLS entries are aligned with shared laundry only. Given the strong, consistent emphasis on common-area laundry and the isolated, unsupported MLS checkbox, in-unit laundry is very unlikely to be a building feature.

Strong evidence that the building has shared laundry: 12 of 14 current MLS listings list COMLAU and many public remarks explicitly state 'community laundry', 'on-site laundry', or 'laundry room'. Mentions are consistent across multiple agent remarks (not limited to a single listing), supporting inclusion of the feature.

Listings reference a community laundry facility repeatedly but do not specify whether it is paid or free. I searched for 'coin', 'coin-op', 'quarters', 'card operated', and similar terms and found no mentions.

Multiple listings consistently advertise a community/on-site laundry, but none state laundry is available on every floor. I searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor', 'laundry room on every floor', and 'floor-by-floor laundry' and found no matches.

Multiple current remarks (at least 7 separate listings) explicitly reference parking: phrases include "A deeded parking stall is included," "with one parking space," "1 assigned parking stall," and "one sought-after RESERVED parking stall." Remarks also note rented parking leases, ground-floor stalls, and moped parking. Evidence is strong and consistent across multiple agent listings rather than a single outlier, confirming the building offers parking.

Multiple listings clearly describe assigned or reserved stalls, including '1 assigned parking stall' and 'one sought-after RESERVED parking stall.' Another unit references a specific 'parking space' rented long-term and 'not deeded with the unit,' consistent with designated but separately controlled stalls. This repeated, detailed language across different listings confirms that the building offers assigned/reserved parking spaces.

When parking is mentioned, it is described only as a “ground-floor parking stall” without any reference to being covered, enclosed, or in a garage. MLS checkbox data for all 10 listings shows no covered or garage parking features selected. Given how often agents emphasize covered parking when present, the consistent absence implies the building does not offer covered car parking.

Although some lines reference 'deeded' or 'assigned' stalls elsewhere, a clear explicit statement in the remarks says the parking space is rented and 'not deeded with the unit', so parking_deeded is set to false with high confidence.

Across all listings, there is no mention of electric vehicle charging or charging stations, even in detailed amenity descriptions. MLS data also never marks EV charging for this building. This consistent lack of reference supports that the building does not provide EV charging facilities.

Remarks explicitly identify a recurring parking rental cost of $225/month and note an existing lease through Dec 31, 2026, so the monthly parking fee is recorded as $225 with high confidence.

Agents do not advertise guest or visitor parking anywhere, which would normally be highlighted as a strong selling point in Waikiki if available. Instead, remarks mention “Some residents have rented parking in nearby buildings” and “Plenty of on street parking,” indicating on-site stalls are limited and not set aside for guests. Combined with MLS data, this strongly suggests there is no dedicated guest parking.

Security is repeatedly referenced for the building itself (e.g., “Secured entry to building,” “secured, pet-friendly building”) but not for the parking area. No agent claims gated or controlled-access parking, which would typically be promoted. The absence of such mentions and of SECENT in MLS data indicates the parking area itself does not have separate secured entry.

Parking, when mentioned, is described only as a single “ground-floor parking stall” or “RESERVED parking stall,” with no indication of back-to-back or tandem arrangements. MLS checkbox data never marks TANDEM for this building. This consistent pattern supports that tandem parking is not a feature here.

The building is repeatedly described as a “boutique” property with modest amenities like a pool, community laundry, and a convenience store, but never valet or attended parking. MLS data also does not indicate valet service. Given the building type and complete lack of mentions, valet parking is effectively ruled out.

I searched for terms like 'parking waitlist' or 'waiting list' and found none. Remarks mention some residents rent parking elsewhere, but no formal waitlist is described, so parking_waitlist is set to false with low confidence.

Listings mention an elevator but never describe it as keyed, fob-access, or otherwise restricted. With 0/10 MLS listings indicating elevator security and no textual support, a secure keyed elevator system is very unlikely.

Listings consistently note secured entry/lobby but do not specify card or fob access. I searched for 'key card', 'fob', 'card reader', and 'keycard' and found no mentions.

Across 9 listings, none mention a security guard or 24/7 security; agents instead highlight a resident manager and secured/locked entry. With 0/10 MLS entries marking a guard amenity, the evidence strongly indicates there is no dedicated security guard service at this building.

There is no indication of a security patrol service in the public remarks. I searched for 'security patrol', 'roving security', 'patrol service' and similar phrases and found none.

None of the 9 public remarks mention cameras or video surveillance, focusing only on secured entry and a secure lobby. Given that 0/10 MLS listings mark a security system and such a feature is typically marketed when present, building-wide video security is very unlikely.

Across all available listings for Hawaiian Crown, no MLS checkboxes or remarks indicate central air conditioning, and 0/10 listings carry any central AC-related codes. Multiple agents instead emphasize natural cooling like 'pleasant ocean breezes' and 'tradewind breezes flow through this home,' suggesting the building relies on passive airflow and window units rather than a central HVAC system. In this context, central AC is very unlikely to be present in any units.

None of the reviewed listings for this building mention or checkbox split, ductless, or mini-split AC, despite multiple detailed renovation descriptions that would normally call out that upgrade. Given 0/10 MLS inclusions for split AC and repeated emphasis on natural breezes and older-building characteristics, the evidence points to units not being equipped with split AC systems. It is therefore highly likely that split AC is not currently a feature offered in this building’s units.

Evidence is strong that some units have window air conditioning: 7 of 14 current listings include the ACWIUN code and 11 of 21 combined historical/current listings included it. Public remarks explicitly state 'a window A/C unit' in one listing, and multiple listings reference renovated windows/trade-wind breezes consistent with mixed AC solutions. The ACWIUN checkbox appears across several agent entries (suggesting building-wide availability for some units) rather than a single isolated error.

11 of 14 current MLS listings mark the building's construction as 'CONCRE' and prior data showed 10 of 11 entries indicating concrete. None of the public remarks explicitly mention a different construction type (remarks reference 'thick stone walls' but do not contradict concrete), and there is no agent note correcting the material, so the weight of MLS records supports concrete construction.

A minority (3 of 10) of MLS records report double-wall construction, with no contrary indicators. This pattern suggests that some building components or units use double-wall construction, though it may not be consistently reported by all agents.

Across the broader MLS history, listings for this building have consistently not reported hollow tile construction, supporting that it is not a hollow-tile-structured property. The single recent MLS entry with HOLTIL appears to be an outlier with no backing in remarks, so hollow tile construction is not treated as a building feature here.

Masonry/stucco is reported in just 1 of 10 MLS records, versus a strong majority reporting concrete construction. With no remarks mentioning masonry or stucco, the balance of evidence suggests the building is not classified as masonry/stucco construction in practice.

None of the MLS entries identify steel frame construction. The strong consensus on concrete construction, combined with local building norms, makes a primary steel frame structure unlikely.

Only one MLS entry explicitly reports slab construction, but the building’s scale and concrete structure make a concrete slab foundation highly likely. In the absence of any conflicting information, it is reasonable to treat slab construction as present.

No analysis available

No listings report wood frame construction, and nearly all instead report concrete. Given the building’s size and location, a wood-frame structural system would be atypical, so this is very likely not a wood-frame building.

Multiple MLS entries over time, including 5 of 13 current listings, explicitly tag the building’s construction as above ground (ABOGRO), supporting continuity of this feature. None of the public remarks suggest any reconstruction or change to the building’s fundamental structure, so the prior high-confidence assessment remains valid.

No MLS records describe the building as brick construction, and brick mid/high-rise condos are atypical in this market. The evidence strongly indicates the building is not brick-constructed.

No MLS entries indicate single-wall construction, and the building type (multi-story concrete condo) is inconsistent with traditional single-wall methods. This strongly supports that the building is not single-wall construction.

Multiple remarks specify a 30-day minimum rental policy. Per the feature definitions, a 30-day minimum means short-term/nightly STRs are not allowed, so str_allowed is false with high confidence.

I looked for 'hotel rental pool', 'hotel rental program', or hotel brand management and found none. Because short-term rentals are not allowed, hotel pool participation is false.

I searched for 'mandatory hotel pool', 'required to participate', or 'must be in rental program' and found no evidence. With STRs disallowed (30-day minimum), mandatory pool is false with high confidence.

At least 2 of the 10 listings explicitly state the units are 'fee simple' (e.g., 'Fee Simple value in Waikiki,' 'One Bedroom fee simple unit'), and none mention leasehold or lease rent. Although the MLS tenure checkboxes are blank (0/10 marked FS), the repeated explicit 'fee simple' language from different listings indicates the building has Fee Simple units and is likely entirely Fee Simple (FS: at least 2 of 10; LH: 0 of 10).

Across all 10 listings, there are no references to 'leasehold,' 'lease rent,' or lease expiry dates, and none of the tenure fields are marked LH. In contrast, multiple listings highlight 'fee simple' status, so it is concluded with high confidence that the building does not offer leasehold units (LH: 0 of 10 vs FS mentions in at least 2 of 10).

Remarks explicitly call the property 'Fee Simple', indicating no ground/leasehold; therefore there is no lease expiry year. I looked for phrases like 'lease expires' or 'land lease to' and found none.

I searched the remarks for phrases like 'VA approved', 'VA financing', or 'VA loans'. No listings reference VA loan approval or acceptance, so financing_va is set to false with low-medium confidence.

Several public remarks explicitly state the building is 'FULLY INSURED', which matches the definition of comprehensive building/HOA (walls-in) insurance. This explicit language provides high confidence the building is fully insured by the HOA.

No listings mention 'fire sprinklers' or similar terms, and the FIRSPR amenity is unchecked in all 10 MLS entries. This suggests the building likely does not have a documented fire sprinkler system, but the conclusion is made with only moderate confidence due to common under-reporting of this feature.

I searched all public remarks for phrases such as 'fire life safety evaluation passed', 'FLSE passed', 'fire safety certified', and 'passed fire inspection' and found no references. With no current value recorded, absence of mention leads to a default false with medium confidence.

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

One of ten recent listings explicitly checked OCEAN in the MLS view description, and the building is described multiple times as being only a block from Waikiki Beach. Even though remarks focus on proximity rather than ‘ocean view,’ the combination of height and location makes it credible that some units have ocean views.

Two of ten listings have the mountain view checkbox selected in MLS data, indicating at least some units face the mountains. Although the public remarks do not spell out ‘mountain view,’ the view data and building height strongly support that some units enjoy mountain views.

Across all provided remarks, Diamond Head is mentioned only as a place you can easily access, not something visible from the units. With 0/10 MLS view descriptions checking Diamond Head, it is very likely this building is not marketed as having Diamond Head views.

MLS data shows 4 of 14 listings flag CITY in the view_descriptions while 2 of 14 list NONE. None of the provided public remarks explicitly mention a 'city view', 'downtown view', or 'cityscape', so the evidence is mixed — several listings indicate city views across agents, but remarks do not confirm, giving moderate overall confidence that some units offer city views.

Listings repeatedly stress proximity to Waikiki Beach but never claim a coastline or shoreline view, and the MLS view checkboxes are consistently negative for this attribute. This strongly indicates that coastline views are not a feature of the building.

The building is portrayed as a compact, pool-front, urban condo with community amenities but not as a garden or courtyard setting. With 0/10 MLS view entries indicating garden and no textual references, it is unlikely that garden views are a recognized feature here.

Although Ala Wai Golf Course exists in the broader area, no listing remarks or MLS view selections refer to a golf course view for this building. This consistent absence across all listings makes it very likely that no units have notable golf course views.

The building is described as central Waikiki, near beach, zoo, parks, and shopping, but never in relation to a marina or harbor. With 0/10 listings marking a marina-type view, it is very likely that no units in this building are marketed as having marina or harbor views.

Agents emphasize breezes, pool, and central location but never highlight sunrise or morning sun views. The complete lack of both MLS and narrative references suggests sunrise views are not a marketed feature of this building.

Across the provided remarks for numerous units in this building, no listing mentions sunset views, evening sun, western exposure, or fireworks views. Current MLS data similarly shows 0/11 listings with sunset-related view descriptions and some with view explicitly set to NONE. This repeated omission across multiple agents and listings supports that sunset views are not a feature of this building.

Neither MLS data nor agent remarks mention any cemetery nearby or in the view, and the building’s central Waikiki location makes such a view very unlikely. It is therefore almost certain that no units in this building have cemetery views.

There is no explicit mention that units or the building have views of fireworks. I looked for phrases like 'watch fireworks from lanai' or 'see fireworks from unit' and found none.

No analysis available

At least 5 listings clearly describe the building as pet friendly, including specific language like “Pet friendly (30 lbs or less)” and “secured pet-friendly building.” The absence of any NOPET restriction codes in MLS further supports that pets are allowed in this building, likely with weight limits.

Across these remarks, at least five listings explicitly reference a resident or on-site manager with phrases like 'Resident manager lives on site' and 'an on-site resident manager.' Current MLS amenities (RESMAN checked in 8/13 listings) and prior high-confidence history are consistent, indicating the building continues to have an on-site resident manager. Evidence is strong, repeated, and comes from multiple independent listings rather than a single copy-paste source.

Listings describe the property as a fee-simple condominium with 30-day minimum rentals and do not reference any hotel management, front desk, or rental pool. The lack of CONDOT coding and any “condotel” or “condo-hotel” language indicates it does not operate as a condotel.

Multiple listings use condominium and fee-simple terminology such as “FEE SIMPLE VALUE IN WAIKIKI” and “fee simple unit,” and none mention co-op or share-based ownership. Combined with the absence of COOTAX indicators, this strongly supports that the building is a condo, not a cooperative.