Iolani Palms
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.
Iolani Palms
Building Overview
Iolani Palms in Makiki-Tantalus (built 1989); pets and short-term rentals are not allowed according to MLS data.
About Iolani Palms
Based on MLS data, Iolani Palms is a condominium building located in the Makiki-Tantalus neighborhood, built in 1989. Specific details on building size, number of units, and construction type are not listed in the available MLS records.
According to available records, the building does not allow pets and does not permit short-term rentals. The management company is listed as unknown in the MLS data. No additional amenity details (such as pool, fitness center, or common areas) are provided in the supplied MLS information.
Parking arrangements, maintenance fees, assessment history, and other occupancy or financial details are not included in the MLS data reviewed. Prospective buyers should verify all building details, rules, and fees with the listing agent, management, or official condominium documents.
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 searched for any owner-occupancy percentage or qualifying language about the resident mix. The remarks do not mention ownership occupancy at all, so no numeric estimate can be derived from this text.
I searched the remarks for an explicit elevator count and only found a reference to a keyed elevator, which confirms an elevator exists but not how many. Because the number is never stated, I cannot reliably assign a count.
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
Cable TV inclusion looks strong and consistent across the building: 3 of 3 current listings include CABTV in association fees. The public remarks do not mention cable either way, so the MLS data is the main signal here and appears reliable.
Common area electricity is supported by 2 of 3 listings showing OTCOEX in association_fee_includes. There are no public remarks addressing this fee item, so this is moderate-confidence building-level evidence rather than explicit confirmation.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Hot water is not supported by the MLS data: 0 of 3 listings include HOTWAT, while 2 of 3 explicitly show WTRHTR, a strong indicator that units have their own water heaters instead of building-supplied hot water. The remarks also do not mention hot water inclusion.
Internet inclusion appears weak and possibly copy-pasted: only 1 of 3 listings includes INTSER in association fees, with no supporting remarks. Based on the current evidence, this does not look like a reliable building-wide amenity.
No analysis available
Sewer inclusion is very strong and consistent: all 3 current listings include SEWER in association_fee_includes. With no remarks contradicting it, this is high-confidence building-level data.
Water inclusion is very strong and consistent across the building: 3 of 3 listings include WATER in association fees. The public remarks do not dispute this, so confidence is very high.
BBQ is strongly supported: 2 of the 3 public remarks explicitly say "BBQ area," and the current MLS data shows BBQ in 3/3 listings. The repeated mention across different listings suggests this is a genuine shared building amenity rather than a copy/paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No public remark references a car wash, vehicle wash station, or similar amenity. Because the MLS checkbox appears in only 1 of 3 listings and there is no supporting description, this looks like weak or possibly copied MLS data rather than a confirmed building feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Evidence for patio/deck is weak: 2 of 3 listings currently have PATDEC/COVPAT checked, but none of the remarks describe a patio, deck, lanai, or similar outdoor amenity. Because the remarks read like standard listing copy and do not confirm an outdoor space, this feature may be an MLS checkbox inconsistency rather than a verified building amenity.
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
There is no public-remarks support for a trash chute system. Since the current listing descriptions are silent on this feature and the MLS checkbox appears only partially present, the evidence is too weak to treat it as confirmed.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Whirlpool/spa is well supported by the remarks: one listing says "jacuzzi" and another describes a "heated pool with spa." With 2 of 3 listings also carrying the WHIRLP amenity, this appears to be a legitimate shared amenity.
2 of 3 listings mention a pool, and one describes it as a 'heated pool with spa.' The references appear consistent across multiple remarks rather than a copy-paste checkbox only, so the building should be treated as having a shared pool amenity.
1 of 3 listings explicitly confirms a heated pool, using the exact phrase 'heated pool with spa.' That is strong direct evidence for the heated-pool feature even though the other remarks only mention a pool generally.
No analysis available
All 3 recent listings mention laundry in the unit, with clear phrases like "in-unit washer and dryer," "full-size washer/dryer," and "Washer and dryer in unit." This matches the MLS inclusion data (3/3 listings), so the evidence is consistent across multiple remarks and does not appear to be a copy-paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
All 3 listings show assigned/reserved-style parking in MLS, and the remarks consistently describe specific parking stalls for the units. Phrases like "includes two covered tandem parking spaces" and "2 tandem covered parking stalls" suggest designated parking rather than open parking. This appears consistent across listings rather than a one-off agent copy.
Covered parking is strongly confirmed by both MLS data and all three public remarks. Multiple listings explicitly mention "covered" stalls/spaces and a "secured garage," so this is high-confidence building-level evidence. There is no sign this is a mistaken checkbox.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Guest parking is directly mentioned in the remarks and also present in MLS data for all 3 listings. The phrase "guest parking" appears clearly in the building description, making this a straightforward confirmation. Evidence looks genuine and building-level, not a copy-paste anomaly.
Secure entry to the parking/building is supported by explicit wording in the remarks, including "secured garage" and "The building is secured with keyed elevator." The MLS also checks SECENT in most listings, so the feature appears to be real. Confidence is strong, though the exact parking-access mechanism is described more broadly than in technical detail.
Tandem parking is confirmed across every listing and reinforced by the MLS data. The remarks repeatedly use direct phrases like "tandem parking" and "tandem covered parking stalls," leaving little ambiguity. This is high-confidence building-level evidence.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Split AC is strongly supported by the public remarks: 2 listings explicitly say "2 split AC units" or "two split AC units." The current MLS data also shows ACSPL included in all 3 listings, so this looks like a consistent building feature rather than a one-off agent mistake.
No analysis available
All 3 of 3 current listings indicate concrete construction in the MLS checkbox data. The public remarks do not describe the building materials directly, so this is based mainly on consistent MLS data rather than agent commentary.
All 3 of 3 listings currently carry the double-wall construction checkbox, which is consistent across the set. The remarks focus on unit upgrades and amenities, so the evidence comes primarily from the repeated MLS construction data.
No analysis available
This feature is not supported by the remarks, and the MLS data is inconsistent at just 1 of 3 listings. With no corroborating comments across multiple listings, masonry/stucco does not look like a reliable building characteristic here.
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
I searched the remarks for HOA insurance language such as fully insured or walls-in coverage. There were no references to building insurance status, so this feature is not evidenced by the remarks.
No analysis available
I looked for any public remark indicating the building passed a fire/life safety evaluation or similar safety certification. Nothing in the remarks supports that, so this remains unconfirmed and is treated as not indicated in the listing text.
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 supported by multiple remarks across the listings. Two of three listings explicitly reference ocean views, and one says the unit has 'a bit of ocean view too,' which confirms at least some units in the building offer this feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
City views are clearly supported by the remarks. Two separate listings mention city views directly, suggesting this is a real building-level view offering rather than a one-off copy-paste error.
No analysis available
Garden views are supported, though less strongly than ocean or city. One listing explicitly states 'garden and city views,' and the building description also references 'charming garden spaces,' which reinforces the theme even if not every unit has a garden outlook.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sunset views are suggested by the MLS view data, with 2 of 3 listings tagged SUNSET, but the remarks themselves do not confirm it directly. This looks plausible for some units, but the evidence is weaker than for ocean, city, or garden views.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
None of the 3 recent listings explicitly describe a resident manager or similar on-site management presence. With only 1 of 3 listings showing the RESMAN amenity and no supporting language in the remarks, the evidence points away from this being 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.