Kulana Knolls 2
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.
Kulana Knolls 2
Building Overview
Kulana Knolls 2 in Waipahu — built 1994; pets allowed; short-term rentals not permitted.
About Kulana Knolls 2
Based on MLS data, Kulana Knolls 2 is a residential building located in the Waipahu neighborhood, built in 1994. Specific details on building size (number of units) and construction type are not provided in the available MLS records.
According to available records, the property allows pets and does not permit short-term rentals. No additional amenities (such as a pool, gym, or community facilities) are listed in the MLS data supplied.
Additional details commonly important to buyers — including parking arrangements, HOA or maintenance fees, and the management company — are not specified in the MLS information (management company listed as Unknown). Prospective buyers should verify parking, fee, and policy information with the listing agent or association 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 searched for explicit owner-occupancy clues such as percentages, 'majority owner occupied,' or 'highly owner occupied.' The remarks do not provide any numerical or descriptive ownership mix information. Because there is no usable evidence, the owner-occupancy rate remains unknown.
I looked for explicit elevator references such as a count ('1 elevator,' 'multiple elevators') or building-access descriptions. The only relevant language was that a ground-floor home has 'no stairs or elevators required,' which suggests elevator-free access but does not directly state the building has zero elevators. Per the rules, I kept the current value because there is no direct count in the remarks.
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
13 of 18 listings include OTCOEX in association fees, suggesting common-area electricity is included for the building. The public remarks do not spell this out, so this is supported primarily by the MLS checkbox data rather than listing text.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No current listings include HOTWAT, and most list WTRHTR instead, which is a strong indicator that hot water is not part of the maintenance fee. Several remarks mention a new water heater or in-unit hot-water-heater type wording, reinforcing that the building is not supplying hot water as a common utility.
No analysis available
No analysis available
All current listings include SEWER in the association fee, making this one of the strongest verified building features. There are no remark-level disputes, and the MLS data is fully consistent across listings.
All current listings include WATER in association_fee_includes, so water coverage appears to be a building-wide standard. No public remarks dispute this, and the MLS data is completely consistent across the set.
Although 5/17 current MLS entries check a BBQ box, remarks do not describe any shared building BBQ or grilling station. Only one listing refers to a unit backyard for 'outdoor BBQs,' which is a private/unit-level note rather than a building amenity. Given lack of building-level mentions across listings and inconsistent MLS checks, we conclude the building does not offer a shared BBQ facility.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No listings' remarks describe a building car-wash or vehicle-wash station, though 5/17 MLS entries have the box checked. Given the complete absence of descriptive mentions across remarks and likely checkbox inconsistencies, we conclude the building does not offer a shared car wash facility.
Moderate evidence that a community clubhouse/community center exists: remarks repeatedly reference a 'recreation center,' on-site office/resident manager and community amenities, and 2/17 MLS boxes check clubhouse. While explicit use of the word 'clubhouse' is limited, the recurring references to a recreation center and on-site community spaces indicate a shared clubhouse-style facility is likely.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Both MLS checkbox data (9 of 16 listings) and numerous agent remarks reference outdoor living areas: examples include "covered porch," "covered lanai," and "private lanai." Mentions appear across multiple listings and agents rather than being a single copy-paste, supporting inclusion of a patio/deck amenity at the building level.
While 7 of 16 MLS listings have a walking/jogging path checkbox checked, no public remarks mention a jogging or walking path or similar phrasing. The lack of any agent remark describing a path suggests the MLS checkbox entries may be copy/paste errors, so the feature is omitted pending stronger confirmation.
No analysis available
MLS data (6 of 16 listings) and multiple public remarks explicitly mention private outdoor areas: "private courtyard," "grassy courtyard," "enclosed yard," and "private, fenced yard." These consistent, repeated remarks across different listings/agents indicate the building offers private yard space for some units.
No analysis available
Strong, consistent evidence: many listings explicitly reference a 'recreation center,' playground areas, open grassy spaces, and 'basketball, tennis courts and park.' Current MLS shows 9/17 listings with the rec area checked and historical confidence was High, so presence of a shared recreation area is well supported across multiple agents' remarks.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Storage is mentioned in 1 of the provided public remarks explicitly ('exterior storage space'), with a second remark referring to 'storage areas' inside the unit. Combined with MLS history showing storage checked in multiple listings, this suggests storage is an available feature for at least some units in the building, though the remarks are not highly detailed and may partly reflect copy-pasted MLS data.
No analysis available
MLS shows 4 of 16 listings with tennis court checked and public remarks include the phrase “recreation center, basketball, tennis courts and park.” Only one distinct remarks block explicitly names tennis courts, so evidence exists but is limited across agents and may reflect partial copy/paste.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
In-unit laundry is strongly supported for this building. Multiple remarks explicitly say “in-unit washer and dryer,” “in-unit laundry,” and list appliances like “full-size front-load washer/dryer,” matching the already high-confidence MLS pattern (17/18 current listings with WASHER/DRYER in inclusions). The evidence appears consistent across multiple listings and agents, so this feature should be included.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Parking is strongly confirmed across the building: 18/18 current listings include a parking feature, and multiple remarks explicitly mention "two open parking stalls," "2 dedicated parking spaces," "two assigned parking stalls," and "2 reserved parking spaces." This is consistent across multiple agents and appears to be reliable, not a copy-paste error.
Majority of MLS listings (12/17) mark assigned parking and many public remarks (at least ~10 listings) explicitly state 'assigned' or 'reserved' stalls such as '2 assigned parking stalls' and 'two reserved parking spaces.' This provides strong evidence the building offers assigned parking.
No analysis available
I looked for explicit deeded/owned parking wording such as 'deeded parking', 'owned stall', or 'parking included in deed'. The listings consistently confirm parking availability, but only as assigned/open/dedicated stalls, so deeded parking is not established from the remarks.
No analysis available
I searched for pricing language around parking, including 'parking fee', 'monthly parking charge', 'parking rental', and similar terms. The remarks discuss parking stalls but never mention a separate fee, so no parking cost can be confirmed.
Guest parking is supported by both MLS checkbox data and listing remarks. 10/18 current listings include GUEST in parking_features, and at least one remark states "access to ample visitor stalls" while another explicitly says "guest parking." The evidence is moderate-to-strong and appears consistent across multiple listings.
Several listings describe the community as gated and one or more remarks explicitly note 'secured entry,' and MLS has 4/17 with secured-entry checked. This indicates moderate evidence that parking/access is in a secured/gated setting, though specifics (gate type, card access) are not extensively detailed across listings.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I checked for 'parking waitlist', 'waiting list', or instructions to join a parking list. Nothing in the remarks suggests a waitlist system, and the listings imply parking is already available.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Window air conditioning is strongly supported across the remarks: at least 3 separate listings explicitly reference window AC, including 'new window AC in the main bedroom' and 'new window air conditioners in both bedrooms.' This aligns with current MLS data showing ACWIUN included in 13/18 listings, so the evidence is consistent and high confidence.
No public remarks mention concrete or reinforced concrete. Only 4 of 17 current MLS listings have the CONCRE construction checkbox checked, while the majority do not; evidence is weak and inconsistent across agents, so concrete construction is not supported by the remarks.
There is direct public-remarks support for double wall construction, including the phrase 'double wall construction for added privacy and sound insulation.' Combined with the strong MLS pattern (14 of 18 current listings) and prior high confidence, this is solid evidence the building has double wall construction.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I did not find any public remarks explicitly describing wood frame or wood frame construction across the provided listings. Because the MLS checkbox appears in only 8 of 18 current entries and there is no prior confidence or corroborating text, the evidence is weak and looks like possible copy-paste data rather than verified construction.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for public-remark indicators of short-term rental permissibility such as 'STR allowed', 'vacation rental', 'NUC', 'TVU', or similar language. None were found, so the remarks do not support that short-term rentals are allowed.
I searched for hotel pool language such as hotel rental pool, managed by hotel, Hilton/Trump/Ritz pool, or similar program references and found none. Since there is no evidence that STR is allowed, this must also be false.
I looked for wording indicating mandatory participation in a rental pool, such as required hotel program membership or no opt-out terms, and found none. With no evidence of STR permission or any pool program, this is false.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched the remarks for lease-related language such as 'lease expires', 'ground lease ends', 'leasehold expiring', and renewal terms like 'extended through'. Nothing in the public remarks indicates a land lease or any expiry year, so the lease expiration remains unknown.
There is strong direct evidence that the building supports VA financing. Multiple listings mention VA-approved status and VA assumable loans, which is sufficient to mark this as true with very high confidence.
I reviewed the remarks for insurance language that would indicate full building or walls-in coverage by the HOA. There were no such statements, and no references to comprehensive insurance, full coverage, or similar wording. The remarks do not support marking the building as fully insured.
No analysis available
I searched for fire/life safety wording such as FLSE passed, fire safety certified, life safety compliant, or passed fire inspection. Nothing in these public remarks indicates the building has passed a fire/life safety evaluation. Since there is no evidence either way, the feature remains unconfirmed.
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
At least three separate listing remarks explicitly mention coastal/harbor/ocean views: "View of Pearl Harbor", "sweeping views of Honolulu and the coast", and "views of Diamond Head and the ocean." MLS checkbox data is inconsistent (2/17 COASTL, 7/17 NONE), but multiple agents explicitly describe coastline views for some units, so the building should be listed as offering coastline views.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sunset views appear in a small minority of current MLS records: 2 of 18 listings are marked SUNSET, while 8 of 18 explicitly show NONE. Public remarks across the listings mostly mention park, greenery, Pearl Harbor, or ocean/Diamond Head views, with no clear sunset wording, so this looks like limited unit-specific MLS data rather than strong agent-confirmed building-wide evidence.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
MLS amenities indicate RESMAN on 11/17 current listings and public remarks across listings explicitly mention an "on-site office" and "resident manager." Evidence is present across multiple listings and agents (MLS checkbox support plus explicit remarks), so the building is reported as having a resident/on-site manager with fairly high confidence.
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.