La Casa

MLS property data is fully consistent, with 24/24 listings reporting the building was built in 1976. No remarks contradict or suggest a later reconstruction date.

County and state records both report 23 floors, and the highest well-supported listing/unit-number evidence is 23. A single listing implying floor 24 is insufficient to override these records, especially with no penthouse listing.

County records report 102 residential units, and the single-building state registration independently reports 102 units. The currently stored value agrees with both sources.

Owner occupancy from AOUO registration(s) 867. Refreshed by Real_Estate_Scraper/reb_registry/propagate_owner_occupancy.py, which this lock does not block.

The remarks confirm that the building has multiple elevators and that they have been modernized or updated. Because no exact elevator count is stated, the current value of 2 is retained with low confidence; there is no evidence to confirm or deny that 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.

Public remarks repeatedly mention room/unit AC (window or split-type) and never describe central air conditioning or building-chilled water systems. With 0 of 20 listings checking central AC in the fee-includes field, there is strong evidence that central AC is not provided or included in the maintenance fees. Buyers should assume individual AC, not a central building system.

No supplied public remarks mention cable TV or cable service being included. However, 16 of 20 current listings identify CABTV in the association-fee inclusions, indicating consistent building-level MLS data rather than an isolated agent entry.

None of the supplied remarks explicitly state that common-area electricity or building power is included. The current MLS data shows OTCOEX in 11 of 20 listings, which supports inclusion but may reflect some inconsistent or copied checkbox reporting.

Multiple remarks highlight 'FEE SIMPLE' ownership, which is inconsistent with a co-op structure that would have co-op taxes built into monthly charges. With 0 of 20 listings checking the co-op tax inclusion field, there is overwhelming evidence that cooperative taxes are not applicable here. The building should be treated as a fee simple condo, not a co-op.

None of the reviewed listings indicate that in-unit electricity is part of the monthly maintenance fee, and 0/20 agents marked electricity as included in the MLS fields. Public remarks are silent on any 'all-utilities-included' arrangement, which is usually advertised if present. It is therefore very likely that unit electricity is billed separately to owners/tenants.

Across all listings, there is no indication that the building uses or includes gas service—no agents checked a gas-included field and no remarks mention gas ranges or gas utilities. The building appears to be all-electric, so gas is not an HOA-included utility. Buyers should assume no gas service and no gas charges in the maintenance fee.

No public remarks mention hot water being included in the maintenance fee. Multiple listings instead reference a new water heater, including phrases such as "new water heater," and WTRHTR appears in 16 of 20 current MLS records, strongly indicating unit-level heaters rather than included building hot water.

None of the supplied public remarks explicitly mention internet, Wi-Fi, or internet service in the maintenance fee. Nevertheless, 8 of 20 current listings mark INTSER as included, which supports retaining the feature with moderate confidence but may reflect inconsistent or copied MLS selections.

None of the listings describe marina access, boat slips, or related HOA-covered charges, and 0/20 MLS entries flag any marina inclusion. The building is positioned near beaches and parks rather than a marina facility. There is extremely strong evidence that marina fees or access are not included in the maintenance fee.

None of the supplied remarks explicitly mention sewer charges or sewer inclusion. Nevertheless, 18 of 20 current listings identify SEWER as included, providing strong building-level evidence across multiple listings.

No supplied remarks explicitly state that water is included in the maintenance fee. Current MLS data lists WATER in 18 of 20 listings, a strong repeated pattern supporting inclusion across the building.

None of the listings advertise any BBQ, grill, or outdoor cooking facilities in the building. The complete absence of MLS BBQ checkmarks supports that La Casa does not provide a designated BBQ area.

Across 20 listings, there are no remarks referencing bike storage, bicycle rooms, or bike racks, and 0/20 have a bike-storage amenity checked in the MLS data. Given that agents consistently highlight other building amenities, the complete lack of any bicycle-storage mention provides strong evidence that the building does not offer dedicated bike storage.

Listings emphasize proximity to beaches, parks, and the Ala Wai canal but never discuss dock or mooring access. The MLS data confirms there is no marina amenity associated with the building.

At least 8 current listing remarks mention a "car wash area," including repeated descriptions alongside the building's rooftop, parking, trash chute, and loading-zone amenities. Although some wording appears copied across listings, the feature is consistently supported by the high historical confidence and current MLS data.

Agent remarks focus on rooftop amenities, parking, and pet-friendliness but never reference a clubhouse-type facility. The absence of MLS clubhouse selections strongly supports that there is no clubhouse in this building.

Remarks focus on a resident manager and building security, with no indication of concierge or front-desk services. Combined with all MLS records leaving concierge unchecked, this supports a high-confidence conclusion that no concierge service is offered.

Remarks emphasize that La Casa is pet-friendly but never mention any dedicated dog-park or pet-run facility. The lack of MLS dog-park selections supports that there is no on-site dog park.

Across 20 listings, agents consistently highlight a resident manager and secure entry but never a doorman or lobby attendant. The absence of any such mention plus unchecked MLS data strongly indicates there is no doorman at this building.

Across all provided remarks there are no references to a gym, fitness room, or exercise facilities. Combined with the fact that agents have not checked the MLS exercise-room amenity, this strongly suggests the building does not offer a dedicated exercise room.

Despite being in a luxury-adjacent area, none of the agents describe any limousine, town car, or courtesy car service. The MLS data fully aligns with this, indicating the building does not provide limo or car service.

None of the remarks describe any dedicated meeting or conference space. Together with the MLS data, this indicates that La Casa does not offer a formal meeting room amenity.

Patio/deck amenities are strongly supported across many listings and appear consistently across multiple agents, not merely as checkbox copy-paste. Repeated phrases include "spacious covered lanai," "large usable lanai," "private lanai," "newly installed all-weather interlocking deck tiles," and "spacious rooftop deck" with ocean or sunset views.

The rooftop deck is large enough that an agent suggests you can 'jog around in a closed loop,' but it is not marketed as a formal jogging/walking path amenity. Given the lack of MLS indication of a jogging path, this appears to be casual use of the rooftop, not a dedicated path feature.

Listings do not advertise any children's playground or tot lot, which is typically highlighted in family-oriented buildings. The MLS data corroborates that there is no dedicated playground amenity.

None of the listings describe any private or fenced yard space—only lanais and a rooftop deck are mentioned. Given the high-rise urban setting and absence of PRIYAR in MLS, it is very likely the building does not offer private yard areas.

Agent comments focus on the rooftop deck, views, and proximity to the Ala Wai Golf Course but never mention an on-site putting green. With no MLS support, it is very likely the building lacks a putting green.

Remarks refer to a 'large rooftop deck' and 'serene rooftop amenities' where residents can relax, practice yoga, or jog in a closed loop, indicating a common recreation space. Even though the MLS RECARE box is not checked, repeated detailed descriptions from different agents confirm the presence of a usable recreation deck.

Agents consistently highlight only the rooftop and parking/manager features, with no references to a dedicated recreation or game room. The lack of MLS RECROO selections further indicates there is no separate recreation room.

Agents highlight proximity to many dining options and explicitly reference off-site restaurants and a café in neighboring buildings. Since no one describes an in-building restaurant or dining facility, the building should not be considered to have a restaurant amenity.

Multiple agents explicitly highlight a rooftop deck/area with sunset, ocean, and 360° views and note it as a place to relax, practice yoga, or jog. This repeated, detailed description across many listings provides very strong evidence that the building has common rooftop amenities accessible to residents.

One listing explicitly says, "Check out the great rooftop (with men & women's sauna!)," which is clear evidence of a shared building sauna. The explicit remark, combined with the historical high-confidence determination and current sauna checkbox data, supports inclusion despite fewer written mentions.

No listings' public remarks mention storage lockers, storage units, or dedicated storage areas (0/20). The MLS amenities checkbox shows STORAG/ADDLVSTORAG in 1/20 listings, but this appears isolated and likely a copy‑paste error; historical review was high confidence that the building does not offer storage lockers, so the feature is omitted.

The listings mention parking, rooftop amenities, car wash areas, and proximity to beaches, but not dedicated surfboard or board storage. Searches for surfboard storage, board storage, surf storage, and bike-and-surfboard storage found no evidence.

No agent comments describe tennis courts or tennis facilities. Given that no MLS listings report this amenity, it is highly likely the building has no tennis court.

Multiple current listings describe La Casa amenities as including a "trash chute, car wash area, loading zone," confirming the feature at the building level. The remarks recur across several listings and align with the very strong current MLS support of 18/20 listings.

Multiple remarks emphasize assigned and guest parking in a secured garage but never mention valet service. The combination of description and MLS data strongly indicates there is no valet parking at this building.

Agents specifically reference gated/secured parking and garage access, not a gated or fenced complex or perimeter wall. Given the unchecked MLS gated/wall-fence amenity and the parking-specific context of 'gated,' the evidence points to no building-level wall/fence enclosure.

Across all remarks there is no indication of any shared hot tub or spa facility in the building. Given the brand-name appliance reference and near-universal absence of the MLS whirlpool amenity, it is very likely the building has no whirlpool/hot tub feature.

None of the provided listings mention a pool or swimming pool. Repeated remarks instead highlight rooftop areas/decks, parking, saunas, and proximity to beaches and the Hilton lagoon, so the isolated 2/20 MLS pool-related flags appear likely to be copied or erroneous rather than evidence of a building amenity.

There is no mention of a heated pool or heated swimming facility in any of the 20 listings or remarks, and MLS data shows no pool or heated-pool features checked. Given the clear evidence that the building lacks a pool, a heated pool can be confidently ruled out.

The public remarks do not identify any pool, saltwater pool, salt pool, or saline pool. The existing building context independently reports pool=false, but the remarks provide no confirmation or denial of pool salinity.

In-unit laundry is overwhelmingly supported across the listing set: at least 18 of 20 listings include washer/dryer in MLS inclusions, and numerous remarks from multiple listings explicitly mention “in-unit washer and dryer,” “washer/dryer in unit,” or “stacked washer and dryer.” The repeated detailed references, including a reconfigured laundry area and appliance upgrades, strongly confirm that at least some units in La Casa offer in-unit laundry.

Across all provided remarks, there is no reference to shared/community laundry, even when other amenities are described in detail, and 0/20 recent MLS entries flag a community laundry feature. Given the strong and repeated focus on in-unit washer/dryers instead, it is highly likely the building does not offer a separate community laundry facility. This appears to correct any prior assumptions that such a shared laundry might exist.

The building remarks identify in-unit washers and dryers and do not describe a shared paid laundry facility. Searches for coin laundry, quarters, laundry fees, card-operated laundry, and coin-op facilities found no evidence.

The remarks consistently describe private in-unit laundry rather than floor-by-floor community laundry. Searches for laundry on each floor, laundry rooms on every floor, and floor-by-floor laundry found no supporting mentions.

All 20 current MLS listings indicate the presence of parking, and multiple remarks reference a parking stall or a parking garage for each unit. Buyers can expect the building to provide on-site parking options.

At least 15 of 20 listings support assigned parking, including repeated descriptions of one or three assigned stalls. The evidence appears across multiple listing remarks and confirms the historically high-confidence feature.

At least 19 of 20 listings identify covered parking, with consistent references to covered stalls, garages, and secured covered parking. This is strong, repeated building-level evidence from multiple listings.

Assigned, secured, and covered parking is repeatedly mentioned, but no remark explicitly says the parking is deeded or included in the unit deed. The statement that two stalls were purchased separately is strong evidence against treating parking as deeded with the unit.

Neither the MLS data nor any of the public remarks reference EV charging or stations. This strongly indicates that EV charging is not currently available in the building’s parking facilities.

The public remarks provide a specific monthly parking charge of $40. This direct numeric statement supports very high confidence.

At least 16 of 20 listings mention guest or visitor parking, often specifying eight stalls or availability on the sixth floor. The repeated references across many listings strongly confirm that the building offers guest parking.

At least 14 of 20 listings support secured parking entry, with detailed references to gates, key fobs, keyed access, and secure garage entry. The evidence is repeated across multiple agents and confirms the historically high-confidence feature.

Neither MLS data nor remarks mention tandem or back-to-back stalls, even in listings that describe parking in detail. This makes it very unlikely that tandem parking is a notable or offered configuration in the building.

All descriptions focus on assigned and guest stalls in a secured garage, with no reference to valet service. The consistent omission across all listings strongly indicates the building does not offer valet parking.

Listings repeatedly mention assigned, reserved, secured, covered, and guest parking, but none mention a parking waitlist. The absence of waitlist language provides only low-confidence support for a false value.

Remarks explicitly say keyed access is required for elevator entry, indicating restricted elevator access. This is a clear, detailed, building-level description that outweighs the unchecked MLS amenity box.

Multiple listings confirm controlled access using key fobs, registered security devices, keyed entry, and keyed elevator access. This is strong, repeated evidence of a card or fob access security system.

Across 20 listings, agents describe a resident manager, secure building/garage, and keyed access but never mention a security guard or 24/7 security. With MLS guard amenity unchecked on all listings and consistent omission in remarks, this is strong evidence that the building has no security guard service.

The listings support controlled access, gated parking, and cameras, but they do not identify a security patrol service. Searches for security patrol, roving security, patrol service, and patrolled building found no mentions.

At least one listing clearly notes 'secured building with cameras,' which is a building-level feature, not unit-specific. Even though agents do not check the MLS security system box, the explicit camera mention provides high-confidence evidence of video surveillance in the building.

Across all provided remarks, cooling is only described via individual air conditioning units in specific rooms, with no mention of central air or a building-wide HVAC system. MLS checkbox data (0/20 for central AC) supports the absence of central AC, so the building is very likely not served by central air conditioning.

No listings explicitly mention split AC, ductless AC, or mini-split systems. The single current MLS split-AC inclusion appears unsupported by the remarks, while other AC references are generic or describe room-level units without identifying the system type.

Window or room air conditioning is strongly supported across the listings: at least 8 remarks explicitly mention AC, including "new window AC," "air conditioning in bedroom," and "Two AC units." The evidence is consistent with the historical high-confidence finding and the current 15/20 MLS inclusion rate, indicating this is a legitimate feature offered in some units rather than a single copied remark.

Concrete construction is strongly supported by the MLS construction-material field in 19 of 20 current listings. None of the provided remarks explicitly mention concrete or reinforced concrete, but the near-unanimous MLS agreement across listings outweighs the lack of descriptive remarks and does not appear to be an isolated copy-paste error.

Limited evidence: 6 of 20 MLS listings list 'DOUWAL' (double-wall). Public remarks do not mention double-wall or related construction details, so include as available/possible with low-to-moderate confidence — could reflect partial building areas or inconsistent agent checkbox usage.

None of the listings reference hollow tile walls or construction, either in checkboxes or narrative remarks. The building is instead repeatedly characterized through amenities (rooftop deck, garage, guest parking) typical of reinforced-concrete towers. This provides strong evidence that hollow tile is not a primary construction type here.

Moderate evidence: 6 of 20 recent MLS listings list 'MASSTU' (masonry/stucco). Public remarks across listings do not mention masonry or stucco (no phrases like 'masonry' or 'stucco'), so include as a possible building material with moderate confidence; may reflect partial or secondary materials or inconsistent agent reporting.

All 20 listings omit any reference to steel frame construction, and 17 instead explicitly mark concrete in the MLS checkboxes. The remarks describe a conventional Waikiki concrete condo tower with no mention of structural steel framing. This makes it very likely the building is not classified as steel frame construction in MLS terms.

1 of 20 current MLS listings explicitly lists 'SLAB' foundation; historical notes indicate a few agents previously selected slab. None of the public remarks discuss foundation type or a recent foundation change, so inclusion is based on limited MLS checkbox evidence and given moderate confidence.

No analysis available

None of the 20 listings mark wood frame construction, and no remarks use terms like 'wood frame' or describe a low-rise house-type structure. The consistent description of a secured, multi-story condo with rooftop deck and structured parking strongly indicates non-wood high-rise construction. This supports confidently excluding wood frame as the primary building construction.

4 of 20 MLS listings identify 'above ground' construction. Public remarks across listings do not describe a raised/pier structure or mention recent changes, so the evidence is limited to MLS checkbox entries across several agents and is treated as implied (moderate confidence).

Across all public remarks there are no references to 'brick exterior', 'brick construction', or similar wording. In the MLS materials data, brick is never selected for this building. Given local building norms and the lack of any brick-related descriptions, brick construction can be safely ruled out.

No listing identifies single wall construction, and none of the remarks use phrases like 'single wall' or 'old Hawaiian style'. Instead, they describe a secured, elevator-served condo with garage parking and rooftop amenities, which is inconsistent with single wall construction. This makes it virtually certain the building is not single wall.

The repeated 30-day minimum rental language explicitly rules out short-term rentals. No listing mentions vacation rentals, NUC, TVU, or another short-term-rental authorization.

The prerequisite for hotel-pool participation is not met because short-term rentals are not allowed. Searches for hotel rental pool, hotel rental program, Hilton pool, Trump pool, Ritz pool, and similar language found no supporting remarks.

A mandatory hotel rental pool cannot apply when short-term rentals are not allowed. No listing states that owners must participate in a rental program or cannot opt out.

Multiple listings describe fee-simple ownership, including one stating 'Don’t miss this opportunity to own FEE SIMPLE one bedroom.' Among the 20 listings reviewed, none are marked leasehold, indicating the building offers fee-simple units and appears predominantly fee simple.

Across all provided listings, there are no mentions of leasehold tenure or lease terms, and the land tenure field never indicates LH. Combined with explicit fee-simple marketing, this strongly suggests the building does not have leasehold units.

No specific leasehold or lease-expiry year was found. The repeated fee-simple descriptions indicate that no applicable lease expiry is present.

Repeated listings directly confirm VA approval and VA financing eligibility. The evidence is consistent across multiple remarks, supporting very high confidence.

Full building insurance is directly and repeatedly confirmed across numerous listings. The explicit statements provide very strong evidence that the HOA building is fully insured.

Historic MLS data previously flagged the building as having FIRSPR (high prior confidence), but across ~30 public remarks provided no listing text mentions 'sprinkler', 'sprinkler system', or 'fire suppression'. Only 1 of 20 current listings shows the FIRSPR amenity checkbox. Given the lack of explicit remarks and the isolated checkbox, the feature’s presence is uncertain—kept as possible but with low confidence.

I searched for references to fire/life safety evaluation, FLSE, fire safety certification, life-safety compliance, and passed fire inspections. None of these were found, so this feature is recorded as false with medium-low confidence based on absence of evidence.

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 strongly confirmed across the listing set, with 10 of 20 current MLS records mentioning OCEAN and numerous detailed remarks from multiple listings. The evidence includes both unit-specific lanai views and shared rooftop views, so this is not dependent on a single copied description.

Mountain views are overwhelmingly supported, appearing in 14 of 20 current MLS records and recurring in detailed remarks from multiple listings. References include private lanai views, Diamond Head views, and mauka-facing views.

Diamond Head views are explicitly mentioned in at least one current listing, with the phrase “Gorgeous Diamond Head and city views.” Although less frequently reported than other views, the direct agent remark and historical high confidence support including the feature for the building.

City views are the most consistently documented feature, with 17 of 20 current listings mentioning CITY. Multiple agents describe city, downtown, Waikiki, or city-light views from individual lanais and the rooftop deck.

Coastline-related views are supported by 3 current MLS records and numerous remarks describing ocean views from private lanais or the rooftop deck. While agents generally say 'ocean' rather than 'coastline,' the repeated coastal-view descriptions across multiple listings support including this building-level feature.

Across all provided listings, no agent ever references garden, courtyard, or landscaped views despite frequently describing other view types in detail. Combined with 0/20 GARDEN in MLS, this strongly indicates garden views are not a notable or distinct feature of this building.

Golf-course views are directly documented in a current listing that says, “Enjoy the sunrise, mountain, city and Ala Wai Golf Course and canal views.” The feature is less common than city or ocean views but is supported by explicit remarks and the historical MLS data.

Marina-related views are supported by 8 of 20 current listings, primarily through repeated references to the Ala Wai canal. The canal-view language appears across multiple detailed listings and is paired with city, mountain, or ocean views, confirming that the building offers units with marina/canal views.

Sunrise views are confirmed in approximately 5 current MLS listings, particularly for east-facing units with covered lanais. Multiple remarks explicitly use 'Enjoy the sunrise' and reference morning light or coffee, providing strong evidence that the building offers sunrise-view units.

Multiple current public remarks (at least 8 separate listing remarks in this batch) explicitly mention sunset views — key phrases include 'stunning sunset and Ocean views', 'rooftop deck perfect for panoramic sunsets', 'sweeping ocean and sunset views', and 'enjoy the sunset every day'. These sunset claims are repeated by different listing remarks and align with prior high-confidence historical data that rooftop and some lanais were marketed for sunset views, so evidence is strong and consistent across agents rather than a single copy/paste instance.

Multiple listings describe the immediate surroundings and views in detail, but no cemetery is ever referenced. Combined with 0/20 MLS cemetery flags and the urban Waikiki location, this strongly supports that the building does not have cemetery views.

The rooftop deck is explicitly described as a place to view Friday night fireworks from the building. Additional remarks mention the famous Friday night fireworks in connection with the building, supporting this feature.

No analysis available

No analysis available

Over ten listings call the building 'pet friendly', including one specifying 'PETS ALLOWED - no restrictions' and several repeating 'Pet Friendly (verify)'. This consistent language across different agents confirms that pets are allowed in the building.

At least 11 current listings explicitly mention a resident manager, including "on-site resident manager," "resident manager," and "resident manager and guest parking." The repeated references across multiple listing descriptions and the prior high-confidence history strongly support that La Casa has a building-level resident manager; this is not limited to a single copy-pasted remark.

Listings market the property as a residential condo with at least a 30-day minimum rental and make no reference to hotel operations or a condotel program. Combined with MLS data, this strongly supports that the building is not a condotel.

The building is described as fee simple and there are no cooperative-ownership terms in any of the listings. MLS coding also lacks co-op indicators, so this building is almost certainly not a co-op.