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.

The highest observed unit floor in MLS data is 23 (with other units on floors 7–22) and no remarks specify a higher or total floor count. This supports estimating the building at 23 floors, though it is only moderately certain since roof amenities are mentioned but not floor-numbered.

No listing remarks state a total unit count (e.g., 'X-unit building'), and no reliable MLS field is provided. As a result, the total number of units cannot be determined from the available data.

Kept current owner_occupancy value of 49.00% because the public remarks contain no explicit owner-occupancy percentage or statements. I searched remarks for phrases indicating percent owner occupancy or descriptors like 'majority owner occupied' and found none.

Kept current value of 2 elevators because no remarks explicitly state a different number. I searched the remarks for explicit counts like '2 elevators', '4 elevators', 'four elevators' and found only references to secured/keyed elevator access, not a numeric 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.

17 of 20 recent MLS listings list CABTV (cable) in association_fee_includes. Public remarks across multiple listings do not mention cable being separately billed or removed; evidence appears consistent across agents (likely copied into MLS checkboxes) indicating the building's association fees include cable.

10 of 20 current MLS listings indicate common area electricity is included in the association fees. Public remarks do not mention electric billing for common areas one way or the other, so inclusion is supported by MLS checkbox data but not explicitly confirmed in remarks; evidence is moderate and may reflect inconsistent agent entry.

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.

Only 1 of 20 MLS listings has HOTWAT checked, whereas 16 of 20 list WTRHTR (unit water heater). Multiple public remarks explicitly state 'new water heater' or 'brand new water heater,' which strongly indicates hot water is supplied by individual unit heaters and hot water is not included in the association fee.

6 of 20 current MLS listings indicate internet service is included in association fees. Public remarks are silent on internet/wifi, so MLS checkbox data supports availability for some units but evidence is inconsistent across listings and may reflect partial or optional building-level service.

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.

18 of 20 recent MLS listings indicate SEWER is included in association fees. Public remarks across listings contain no statements about separate sewer billing or a recent change, so evidence is strong and consistent that sewer is covered by the association.

19 of 20 MLS listings list WATER as included in the association fees. No public remarks contradict this or describe a billing change; the majority of agents consistently report water as covered by the HOA, indicating strong evidence that water is included.

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.

Multiple current public remarks explicitly list a 'car wash area' as a building amenity (appears in at least 6 separate remark blocks), and MLS amenity checkbox data shows CRWSH checked in 9 of 20 listings. The evidence is consistent across different agent remarks and confirms the building offers a car wash area, matching prior high-confidence historical 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.

Multiple current listing remarks consistently describe private lanais/balconies ('spacious 56 sqf open balcony', 'generous 104 sq ft lanai', 'covered lanai') and the building's shared rooftop deck ('rooftop deck', 'large rooftop deck with stunning sunset and Ocean views'). Evidence appears across many different agent remarks (over a dozen listings), matching the historical high-confidence record that the building offers both unit lanais and a common rooftop deck.

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.

At least some current listings (historical MLS: 5/20) explicitly mention a rooftop sauna—one remark even notes 'men & women's sauna!'—and multiple agent remarks reference rooftop amenities. The explicit wording supports inclusion with high confidence, though mentions are fewer than other amenities.

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.

Searched for 'surfboard storage', 'board storage', 'surf storage', and similar phrases. Public remarks and amenity lists contain no reference to surfboard storage facilities.

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.

Strong, consistent evidence: 18 of 20 MLS listings include TRACHU and many public remarks explicitly list 'trash chute' as a building amenity (e.g., 'Building amenities include ... trash chute'), showing the building has a common trash chute/refuse system. The mentions are widespread across different agent remarks, supporting high confidence.

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.

Across 20 listings, none have a pool amenity checked in MLS and none of the remarks mention a pool, lap pool, or swimming pool. Instead, agents consistently highlight a rooftop deck/area, saunas, and guest parking, suggesting these are the primary amenities and confirming the building does not offer a pool.

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.

Confirmed absence of any pool references; building context lists pool=False, so a salt-water pool does not exist.

Strong evidence that some units at La Casa have in-unit laundry: roughly 18 of 20 recent MLS listings mention washer/dryer in the unit. Public remarks repeatedly state phrases like "in-unit washer and dryer", "washer and dryer in unit", and "stack washer/dryer" across listings from multiple agents, indicating the feature is widely available in the building (though some copy-paste is possible). Buyers searching for units with in-unit laundry should consider this building.

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.

Searched for terms such as 'coin laundry', 'coin-op', 'paid laundry', 'quarters', and 'card operated'. Listings consistently reference in-unit laundry and contain no language indicating paid/coin community laundry.

Searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor', 'laundry room on every floor', and 'floor-by-floor laundry'. All public remarks describe in-unit washer/dryer and contain no indication of community laundry facilities on every floor.

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.

High-confidence evidence: 17 of 20 recent MLS records list assigned parking and many remarks explicitly state phrases like 'one assigned, secure garage parking stall', 'assigned covered parking', and 'three assigned, secure, covered parking stalls.' These statements appear across multiple agent remarks and confirm the historical MLS checkbox data.

Historical MLS records strongly indicated covered/garage parking (17 of 20 listings). Current public remarks repeatedly state 'secured covered parking', 'secure, assigned garage parking stall', and 'covered secured parking stall' in numerous listings, showing consistent confirmation across multiple agent remarks rather than a one-off entry. Evidence is strong that the building offers covered/garage parking.

Multiple remarks reference assigned/secure/covered parking stalls and one remark states two stalls 'were purchased separately', which indicates at least some stalls were sold/purchased (deeded) with units. I searched for explicit 'deeded' language; while 'deeded' is not verbatim, the 'purchased separately' wording supports deeded/owned parking.

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.

A remark explicitly identifies a $40 monthly parking fee. I searched remarks for 'parking fee', 'monthly parking', and found the exact $40 figure.

There is strong corroboration that guest parking is available: 15 of 20 MLS records list guest parking and the remarks contain repeated, specific mentions like 'secure and ample guest parking spots', 'guest stalls', and 'guest parking available on the 6th floor,' appearing across multiple listings/agents.

Evidence indicates secured-entry parking is offered: 14 of 20 MLS records list secured entry and multiple remarks explicitly reference gated/secured access (e.g., 'access to gated parking', 'gated parking garage', 'keyed access required'), with consistent language across many listings rather than a single copy-paste instance.

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.

I searched all remarks for 'waitlist', 'waiting list', 'join waitlist' and found no references. Absence of mention suggests no waitlist noted in listings, but this is not definitive from listings alone.

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.

Searched for 'key card access', 'fob access', 'card reader' and found explicit statements about keyed/registered security access for building and elevators, supporting presence of card/fob-style access.

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.

Searched for terms such as 'security patrol', 'roving security', and 'patrol service'. Listings emphasize secured access, cameras, and an on-site resident manager but do not describe a security patrol service.

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.

None of the listings explicitly describe split or ductless mini-split systems, and the dedicated MLS checkbox for split AC is never selected. The recurring references are to standard room AC units, so it is very unlikely that the building’s units use split AC systems.

MLS checkbox data indicates 16 of 20 listings include window AC and historical confidence was high. At least 6–8 separate public remarks explicitly mention AC—quotes include "air conditioning units in the living room and bedroom", "LG a/c in the bedroom", and "Two AC units"—showing consistent agent reporting and specific unit-level detail rather than a single copy-paste line.

17 of 20 recent MLS listings list 'CONCRE' in construction materials, indicating the building is very likely concrete/ reinforced concrete construction. None of the public remarks explicitly mention construction type, but the high consistency across agents' MLS entries provides strong building-level evidence; risk of copy/paste error exists but is low given the quantity of listings reporting it.

5 of 20 MLS listings list double-wall construction, suggesting some units or portions of the building are recorded as double-wall. No public remarks reference double-wall or describe a recent change, and the evidence appears limited to a subset of MLS checkboxes (possible agent copy/paste). Included at moderate confidence because some listings explicitly check the box.

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.

Several listings (6/20) mark masonry/stucco in the construction materials, and the remaining listings generally omit this field instead of specifying an alternative construction type. Although no remarks mention stucco explicitly, the repeated selection by multiple agents suggests the building incorporates masonry/stucco elements over its concrete structure.

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.

Multiple remarks state the building enforces a 30-day minimum rental policy, which means short-term rentals (under 30 days) are not allowed. I searched for 'short-term', 'STR', '30-day', and found clear 30-day minimum rental language.

Because listings enforce a 30-day minimum (STRs not allowed) and there are no remarks about a hotel rental pool or hotel-managed program, hotel-pool participation is not present in the remarks.

No remarks indicate any hotel rental pool or mandatory participation; combined with the 30-day minimum prohibition on STRs, mandatory hotel-pool participation is not applicable.

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.

Remarks describe the unit as fee simple, not leasehold, so there is no land lease expiry year to extract. I searched for phrases like 'lease expires', 'land lease to', and found none.

Multiple public remarks explicitly identify La Casa as VA-approved, indicating VA financing is accepted. I searched the remarks for 'VA approved', 'VA financing', and found direct statements confirming VA approval.

High-confidence true: several listing remarks repeatedly and explicitly state the building is fully insured (walls-in coverage). Example quote: 'La Casa is FULLY INSURED' and '100% Insured as of 2026'.

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.

No evidence in the public remarks that the building has passed a fire/life safety evaluation (FLSE). I searched for phrases such as 'fire life safety evaluation passed', 'FLSE passed', 'fire safety certified', and 'passed fire inspection' and found none, so set to false with medium confidence (absence of mention).

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

Multiple listing remarks across the provided public_remarks explicitly mention ocean or ocean-facing views (I count ~15 remarks referencing ocean or 'ocean views', including phrases like “stunning sunset and Ocean views,” “Ala Wai, Ocean,” and “spectacular ocean views” on the rooftop). Evidence is consistent across many agent remarks and aligns with prior high historical confidence, so the building offers ocean-view units.

Strong building-level evidence: multiple listing remarks repeatedly mention mountain/mauka/Diamond Head views (e.g., 'mountain view', 'mauka view', 'Diamond Head and city views'). These statements appear across many agent remarks and confirm the historical high-confidence classification.

There is at least one clear listing remark stating “Gorgeous Diamond Head and city views from the spacious lanai,” supporting that some units provide Diamond Head views. While not ubiquitous across all remarks, the explicit mention plus prior high confidence indicates the building offers Diamond Head-view units.

Clear and consistent evidence across listings: numerous remarks cite city or Waikiki views (e.g., 'sweeping city', 'Waikiki views', 'city light up') from lanai and rooftop areas, aligning with prior high-confidence data.

While many remarks mention ocean and rooftop ocean/sunset views, none of the current remarks use the specific 'coastline/shoreline/coastal' terminology. Given consistent absence of that exact descriptor across multiple agent remarks, 'view_coastline' is not supported.

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.

There are explicit mentions of views of the Ala Wai Golf Course in several remarks (notably “Ala Wai Golf Course and canal views”), indicating some units overlook the golf course.

Multiple listings/remarks explicitly mention views of the Ala Wai canal/harbor (e.g., 'Ala Wai canal view', 'Ala Wai and canal views'), providing good building-level evidence that some units offer marina/canal/harbor views.

Several listings explicitly promote sunrise/eastern exposure (phrases like 'enjoy the sunrise', 'east-facing lanai', 'morning sun'), indicating multiple units/building orientations provide sunrise views.

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.

Searched for explicit phrases like 'watch fireworks from lanai', 'see fireworks from unit', or 'fireworks view from building'. Although the fireworks are mentioned as a nearby attraction, listings do not explicitly say they are visible from the unit, lanai, or rooftop.

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.

Historic MLS data indicated High confidence that La Casa has a resident/on-site manager. In the current batch of public remarks at least 12 separate listing remarks explicitly mention a resident or on-site manager—phrases quoted include "on-site resident manager", "resident manager", and "on-site manager"—showing consistent confirmation across multiple agents rather than an isolated mention.

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.