Marina Towers

All available MLS records for this building report 1967 as the construction year. The remarks focus on remodeling but never mention a different build or completion date, supporting 1967 as the correct year built.

The highest unit floor reported in the MLS property data is 15 (across 14 listings), establishing that the building has at least 15 floors. With no remarks indicating additional stories or a taller tower, we infer a 15-floor building based on the maximum observed unit floor.

A listing describes Marina Towers as a 'beautifully maintained, 108 unit building,' giving a clear unit total. No other remarks suggest a different number of units, so 108 is adopted as the building-wide total.

I searched for explicit owner-occupancy statements such as '80% owner occupied,' 'majority owner occupied,' or similar wording and found none. Since the current value exists and there is no remark evidence to change it, the value remains 55 with low confidence.

I searched the public remarks for explicit elevator references such as 'elevator,' 'elevators,' 'lift,' and phrases like 'multiple elevators' or 'four elevators' and found none. Per the rules, the current value of 2 is retained with low confidence because there is no remark evidence to confirm or deny it.

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.

All 14 listings leave the central AC–included checkbox blank, and remarks consistently talk about AC as an optional/unit-level feature that can be installed. There is no mention of a central building AC system or of AC being part of the maintenance fee. This strongly indicates that central air conditioning is not included in the association fees.

Cable TV inclusion is repeatedly confirmed across the remarks, including the direct phrase "The HOA Fee even includes cable tv." Current MLS data is highly consistent as well, so this looks like a real building-level inclusion rather than copy-paste noise.

There is decent MLS support for common-area electricity being included, but the public remarks mostly describe amenities and maintenance fee value rather than naming electric costs directly. This appears to be a building-level checkbox that may be copied by agents, so confidence is only moderate.

Across all 14 MLS listings, the cooperative taxes–included field is never checked. Remarks present the property as a standard fee-simple condo in Waikiki, with no mention of co-op arrangements or co-op tax obligations. This gives very high confidence that cooperative taxes are not part of the maintenance fee.

None of the listings indicate electricity as an included association-fee item in the MLS. Public remarks never say 'electricity included' or similar, which is typically highlighted when present. Given the consistent omission and local norms, unit electricity appears to be separately metered and not included in maintenance fees.

All available MLS records leave the gas-included field unchecked. None of the marketing comments reference gas lines, gas ranges, or gas utilities included in maintenance fees. This strongly indicates that gas, if present at all, is not an HOA-covered utility.

Hot water is very likely not included in the maintenance fee. The strongest evidence is the widespread presence of WTRHTR in MLS data plus the remark about a "brand new hot water heater," which points to in-unit water heating rather than building-provided hot water.

Internet inclusion is confirmed directly in the remarks and is backed by very strong MLS consistency. The repeated phrasing across listings suggests this is a stable building feature, not an agent mistake.

The listings highlight proximity to 'Marinas' and 'Yacht Clubs' but do not suggest that the building’s fees cover marina access or slip costs. MLS fee-inclusion fields for marina are consistently blank (0 of 14). This combination indicates that any marina use is separate and not part of the maintenance fee.

Sewer appears to be included at the building level based on highly consistent MLS association-fee data. Public remarks do not discuss sewer directly, so this is driven primarily by the repeated MLS checkbox pattern.

Water inclusion is strongly supported by the current MLS data and is consistent across nearly all listings. While the remarks do not explicitly mention water, there is no indication that this checkbox is a mistaken copy/paste entry.

This amenity is consistently mentioned across many listings and agents, with phrases like 'BBQ,' 'BBQ area,' and 'BBQ/lounge area.' The MLS history is also extremely strong, making this a high-confidence building feature.

Public remarks for about 9 of 14 listings repeatedly describe on-site bicycle storage, using phrases like 'Locked Bicycle ... Storage rooms', 'Bike rack/storage', and 'dedicated bicycle and surfboard storage rooms'. The consistency and specificity of these descriptions across multiple agents show that Marina Towers offers common bicycle storage/bike rack facilities accessible to residents, even though agents are not checking the formal MLS bike-storage amenity box.

The building is near marinas and the Ala Wai canal, but amenities are presented as proximity rather than ownership of docks. With no mention of slips or docking and MLS unchecked, the property does not have a boat dock or marina facility.

Car wash facilities are repeatedly listed in the public remarks, not just the MLS checkbox data. Combined with the strong historical pattern, this supports a real building-level car wash amenity.

Agents consistently enumerate the building’s amenities without ever mentioning a clubhouse or community center. This absence, combined with unchecked MLS data, strongly suggests there is no clubhouse.

The building is portrayed as well-managed but not as having hotel-style concierge services. Given the marketing detail and consistent omission of any concierge wording, it is very unlikely a concierge is present.

Pet-related amenities like a dog park are not advertised anywhere in the remarks. Combined with the lack of MLS indication, this supports that the building does not offer a dedicated dog park or dog run.

Staffing is consistently described in terms of management and a resident manager, not a doorman. The repeated, detailed building descriptions with no doorman reference make it highly likely there is no doorman service.

Strong evidence across many listings supports an exercise room/fitness center. Multiple remarks explicitly say 'Workout Area,' 'fitness area,' 'mini workout area with several exercise equipment,' and 'gym,' suggesting this is a real shared amenity rather than a checkbox copy-paste issue.

Even in high-detail descriptions of services like the resident manager and security, there is no reference to limousine or car service. The consistent silence and MLS data indicate there is no limo or house car service.

Despite thorough amenity lists, no listing advertises any meeting or conference room. With only a single MLS instance checked and no textual support, it is very unlikely the building offers a shared meeting room.

Strong evidence across multiple listings that the building offers patios/decks: at least 10 separate remark sections mention lanais/porches (phrases include "open porch", "two lanais", "three lanais", "40 foot lanai", and "oversized lanai doors"). Historical confidence was high and the repeated, detailed lanai references in current remarks (across different agent write-ups) indicate this is a real building feature, even though the MLS amenity checkbox is inconsistently set (5/15 listings).

Remarks talk about proximity to parks and the canal but do not describe any on-site jogging or walking path. With MLS also clear, the building does not appear to offer its own jogging path amenity.

Family/kid amenities are not mentioned even in long amenity lists. The consistent omission and MLS data both indicate there is no children’s playground at this property.

Across all 14 remarks there are frequent mentions of lanais and views, but no references to a private or fenced yard or enclosed ground-level outdoor area. Combined with the high-rise context and lack of MLS PRIYAR, this strongly suggests the building does not offer private yard spaces.

Listings highlight many other amenities but never mention a putting green. The absence from both remarks and MLS confirms there is no putting green at this building.

The building's recreation area is directly referenced in numerous listings using phrases like 'recreation area,' 'rec area,' and 'recreation/lounge area.' The repetition across many remarks and the strong MLS history make this a clear shared amenity.

Agents repeatedly market a 'recreation area' but do not describe an enclosed recreation or game room. Given this consistent phrasing and lack of any 'rec room' mention, the building appears to have only open recreation space, not a distinct recreation room.

All restaurant references are to the surrounding Waikiki area rather than in-building dining. Since this would be a strong marketing point and is never claimed, the building does not have its own restaurant.

Given that rooftop decks are typically highlighted in marketing but never appear here, and MLS data does not show a rooftop amenity, the building likely has no shared rooftop deck or rooftop facilities.

Agents repeatedly itemize amenities without ever referring to a sauna or steam facility. This, plus its absence in MLS, shows that the building does not have a sauna.

Strong, repeated evidence that the building offers storage. Multiple listings mention storage in both building amenities and unit inclusions, including "assigned storage locker," "storage rooms," "additional storage," and "storage space is included"—far more than a one-off copy/paste note. The current remarks are consistent across many listings and align with the already high-confidence MLS history.

The listings consistently and explicitly state that the building offers surfboard storage. This appears alongside bicycle storage in multiple remarks, making the evidence strong and repeated.

Across all detailed amenity descriptions, tennis courts are never mentioned even though other amenities are carefully listed. Combined with all MLS records omitting a tennis court, this strongly indicates there is no tennis court at this building.

No current listing remarks mention a trash chute, despite the MLS checkbox being frequently marked. Because historical confidence was only medium and the feature is absent from all provided remarks, this looks like a likely data entry/copy-paste error rather than a confirmed building amenity.

Listings repeatedly describe reserved or covered parking stalls and reference an adjacent parking garage but never mention valet or any staffed parking service. The consistent omission of valet combined with MLS data strongly indicates the building does not provide valet service.

A majority of MLS entries indicate some form of gate/wall/fence, and narrative remarks consistently refer to secured entry and a secured building. While not spelled out as 'gated community', the combined MLS data and security-focused descriptions support that the property has perimeter or gated physical security.

Amenity lists repeatedly highlight a heated saltwater pool only, without any separate spa or hot tub. Given that whirlpools are desirable and would be advertised, the building almost certainly lacks a whirlpool or hot tub.

Strong building-level evidence supports a shared pool at Marina Towers. Across the provided remarks, roughly a dozen-plus listings mention it directly using terms like "swimming pool," "heated salt pool," and "heated saline pool," which appears consistent across multiple agents rather than a one-off copy-paste error.

Very strong evidence shows the building’s pool is heated. Multiple listings explicitly say "heated salt pool," "heated saline pool," or "heated swimming pool," indicating this is a shared building amenity and not just an isolated unit-level claim.

The pool is clearly described as salt-based in several listings, including 'heated saline pool,' 'heated salt pool,' and 'heated saltwater pool.' This is strong direct evidence that the building's pool is salt water.

In-unit laundry is strongly supported across the listings: the MLS inclusions show washer/dryer in 18 of 18 records, and several public remarks explicitly say "Washer/Dryer in the unit" or reference laundry appliances as included/new. The evidence is consistent across multiple listings and appears to be genuine rather than a copy-paste error.

None of the many amenity descriptions for this building mention community or shared laundry, even when listing numerous other facilities. Together with 0/14 MLS entries for community laundry and repeated emphasis on in-unit washer/dryers, it is very likely the building does not offer separate community laundry facilities.

I looked for evidence of coin laundry or any paid laundry system, including 'coin-op,' 'quarters,' or 'card operated,' and found no references. The remarks instead emphasize in-unit laundry in some units, which does not establish a community laundry fee.

I searched the public remarks for phrases like 'laundry on each floor,' 'laundry room on every floor,' and 'floor-by-floor laundry,' but found nothing. The listings mention in-unit washer/dryer in at least one unit, which does not confirm community laundry facilities on every floor.

Strong building-level evidence: 16 of 16 current MLS listings include parking flags and many remarks explicitly state a parking stall is included (quotes: 'A covered parking stall and storage space is included in the sale', 'this unit includes 1 assigned covered parking stall', 'includes a reserved parking space'). Multiple agents and listings consistently mention covered/garage/open parking rather than isolated one-off entries, indicating the building offers parking.

Strong, consistent evidence that parking is assigned/reserved in this building. Multiple listings explicitly say 'one assigned upper deck covered parking space,' 'assigned parking stall,' 'assigned parking and additional storage,' and 'reserved parking stall,' across many different remarks, which looks like genuine building-level information rather than a one-off copy-paste error.

There is very strong evidence that the building offers covered parking. Multiple listings explicitly mention 'covered parking stall,' 'assigned covered parking stall,' 'reserved covered parking,' and 'Parking Garage,' indicating this is a real shared building feature rather than an agent checkbox artifact.

The listings consistently describe parking as assigned, reserved, covered, and included with the sale, which supports deeded or unit-associated parking. I did not find language suggesting rental-only parking for the unit's stall.

Across all reviewed remarks, amenities are detailed (pool, BBQ, workout area, storage, etc.) but there is no reference to EV charging or charging stations. Combined with the complete absence of the EVCHRG checkbox in current MLS data, this strongly suggests the building does not offer dedicated EV parking or chargers.

I searched for a specific monthly parking charge, but the remarks do not provide a numeric fee. The only fee-related reference is that additional motorcycle/moped parking may be available for a monthly fee and the adjacent garage may offer monthly parking, without a stated price.

Agents repeatedly list building amenities and nearby conveniences but never mention 'guest parking' or 'visitor parking'. Given that guest parking is usually advertised when present and the GUEST checkbox is unused in all MLS entries, it is very likely the building does not provide dedicated guest parking stalls.

Remarks describe building security (e.g., 'secured building with video monitoring', 'secured access') but do not reference a gated garage, key/card-controlled parking, or 'secured parking'. The consistent lack of the SECENT checkbox and absence of any explicit 'secured parking' language suggest the parking itself does not have a distinct secured entry feature.

Where stalls are described, they are referred to as 'standard assigned covered parking stall', 'reserved parking space', or similar, without any indication they are tandem. The complete lack of tandem terminology in remarks and MLS data supports that tandem parking is not a building feature.

Agents highlight many services and amenities (resident manager, recreation area, pool, storage, etc.) but never reference valet or attended parking. Given that valet is a prominent feature when present and is not reflected in either MLS checkboxes or remarks, it is almost certain the building does not offer valet parking.

I searched the remarks for "waitlist," "waiting list," and similar parking queue language and found nothing. The listings instead describe assigned or reserved stalls and optional additional parking availability.

Agents highlight multiple security elements but never reference a keyed or restricted elevator, which is typically marketed if present. Combined with the absence of any MLS indication, this strongly suggests there is no keyed/fob elevator security system.

I searched for card/fob access terms such as 'key card access,' 'fob access,' and 'card reader,' but found no explicit mentions. The remarks only refer to secured access, video monitoring, and a resident manager, which do not confirm card-based entry.

Multiple independent remarks detail the building’s security features but only reference a resident manager and secured access, never a security guard or staffed security service. Given the marketing emphasis on security elsewhere, the consistent omission of a guard strongly indicates there is no security-guard service.

I looked for any public-remark references to a patrol service or roving security presence and found none. The building is described as secured with video monitoring and a resident manager, but that is not the same as security patrol.

Video security is clearly confirmed by the phrase 'secured building with video monitoring.' This explicit mention in the remarks outweighs the unchecked MLS amenity box and supports that the building has camera/monitoring systems.

No listing remarks mention central air, HVAC, or a building-wide system, and 0/14 MLS entries check the central AC field. Instead, remarks consistently frame AC as an optional, unit-specific feature, indicating the building relies on individual units rather than central air.

No listings' public remarks (0/15) specifically mention 'split', 'mini-split', or 'ductless' AC. One listing has ACSPL checked in inclusions, but multiple listings only reference generic 'AC' or that 'ACs are new,' which does not confirm split/ductless systems. Given prior absence across listings and lack of explicit remarks, there is strong evidence the building does not offer split/ductless AC.

Strong evidence that Marina Towers has window AC in some units. Multiple listings explicitly mention it, including 'window air conditioner,' 'two ac's,' and 'There's even AC,' while one remark says 'For those who prefer ac, it can be installed,' suggesting unit-level variability but clear building availability. This is reinforced by the MLS checkbox trend (13/18 recent listings with ACWIUN), so the feature should be retained with high confidence.

Concrete construction is strongly supported. The current MLS data shows 14/18 listings with CONCRE, and at least one public remark explicitly says 'Concrete high rise building built in 1967.' The evidence is consistent across multiple listings and does not appear to be a one-off agent typo.

A notable portion of listings (6/14) identify double‑wall construction and none explicitly contradict it. This suggests that at least some portions (often interior walls) of the building use double‑wall assemblies.

Hollow tile is not supported by the public remarks. Although 6/18 current MLS records have HOLTIL, no listing copy mentions 'hollow tile' or anything similar, and the remarks that do discuss construction point to concrete instead. This looks like checkbox drift or copy-paste error rather than a verified building feature.

Masonry/stucco is not corroborated by the public remarks. While 10/18 current MLS records have MASSTU, none of the agent remarks mention masonry or stucco construction, and one explicitly calls the building a 'Concrete high rise.' The MLS checkbox appears likely to be unverified or copied from template data.

No listings mark steel‑frame construction and many mark concrete instead, suggesting concrete is the primary structure. Given local building norms and the absence of any steel references, steel‑frame construction can be ruled out with high confidence.

Concrete slab foundation is not supported by the listing remarks. Only 6/18 MLS records currently show SLAB, and none of the public descriptions mention a 'concrete slab' or similar foundation detail. This appears to be unverified MLS data rather than a confirmed building feature.

No analysis available

None of the 14 MLS listings identify wood‑frame construction, and most explicitly indicate concrete. For a mid‑century high‑rise building of this scale in Waikiki, wood‑frame construction would be highly unlikely.

The above‑ground construction checkbox is never used, whereas data points instead to a slab foundation. Given the building type and MLS patterns, it is very unlikely to be classified as an above‑ground construction building.

There are zero references to brick construction in the MLS data, and this building type/location almost always uses concrete systems. The consistent absence across agents strongly indicates it is not a brick building.

The MLS data never indicates single‑wall construction, and the building’s size and type are inconsistent with that method. It is therefore very unlikely that this building uses single‑wall construction.

I looked for explicit STR permission terms such as short-term rental allowed, NUC, TVU, or hotel-style vacation rental references and found none. The remarks only discuss ordinary ownership and rental possibilities, so there is no public evidence that short-term rentals are allowed.

I searched for hotel pool references like hotel-managed rentals, branded rental programs, or participation in a hotel operation and found none. Since STR is not evidenced in the remarks, hotel-pool participation is also not supported.

I looked for language indicating a required rental pool, mandatory participation, or that owners cannot opt out, but found no such remarks. There is also no evidence of any STR program in the first place, so mandatory pool status is not supported.

Across all provided listings, agents never describe the property as leasehold or mention lease rent or expiry, which is standard practice when marketing leasehold units in Hawaii. The consistent omission of leasehold language, combined with references only to maintenance fees, indicates that the building has fee simple units.

Despite numerous listings and very detailed remarks, there are zero references to leasehold terms, lease rent, or lease expiration—information that is normally emphasized when present. This consistent absence across many agents and listings indicates that Marina Towers almost certainly does not have leasehold units.

I looked for leasehold language such as lease expiration years, ground lease terms, and renewal dates, but the remarks instead identify the property as fee simple. That means this is not a leasehold building based on the public remarks, so there is no lease expiry year to extract.

I searched the public remarks for VA-related terms such as "VA approved," "VA financing," and "VA loans accepted" and found none. The listings discuss conventional ownership and sale details, but there is no public evidence that the building is VA-approved.

The remarks repeatedly and explicitly confirm full insurance coverage, including phrases like 'is 100% insured' and 'Building is Fully Insured.' This is strong, repeated evidence across multiple listings, so the feature is set to true with very high confidence.

Listings repeatedly list amenities like a heated salt pool, BBQ, recreation area, workout area, storage, and security, but never mention fire sprinklers. Combined with the unchecked sprinklers field in all available MLS records, this strongly indicates the building does not have a fire sprinkler system.

I looked for explicit fire/life safety evaluation language including 'FLSE passed,' 'passed fire inspection,' 'fire safety certified,' and 'life safety compliant,' but found nothing in the remarks. With no current value provided and no supporting remark evidence, this is set to false at medium confidence under the stated rules.

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/water views are frequently mentioned across the aggregated remarks (about 8 distinct listings/remarks), with quotes like 'Ocean views', 'Pacific Ocean beyond' and 'peek-a-boo ocean and canal views.' Historical MLS data already had high confidence for ocean view and current remarks from multiple agents consistently confirm the building offers ocean-view units.

Mountain views are cited in at least 7 of 15 listings, including phrases such as 'Panoramic Mountain, Valley, and Water Views' and 'Mountain, Valley and Canal Views'. Multiple agent remarks consistently list mountain outlooks, supporting that the building offers mountain-view units.

Across all provided listings, agents describe a wide range of views but never reference Diamond Head or its crater. Combined with 0/14 MLS entries including Diamond Head, this strongly indicates that Diamond Head views are not a notable feature of this building.

City views are well supported across the building. Current remarks include explicit phrases like 'city skyline' and 'OCEAN & CITY,' matching the strong MLS pattern where 16/18 listings show CITY in the view field. This looks consistent across multiple listings rather than a one-off agent copy.

Coastline/ocean-facing views appear in a smaller subset of units but are clearly present. Remarks describe 'Pacific Ocean beyond,' 'ocean views,' and other beach-facing outlooks, which is consistent with the MLS history showing 3/18 listings with COASTL. The evidence suggests this is an available view type for some units, not a universal one.

Listing remarks focus on ocean, canal, marina, mountain, city, and sunset views, with no agent marketing garden or courtyard vistas as a feature. Combined with 0/14 MLS entries for garden views, this suggests garden views are not a significant or distinct building view feature.

Across 14 listings, agents never mention golf course or fairway views, even though they consistently detail other views like ocean, canal, mountains, city, and sunset. Together with 0/14 MLS entries for golf course view, this strongly indicates the building does not offer golf course views.

Marina/harbor/canal views are repeatedly confirmed in the remarks. Listings mention 'Ala Wai Canal,' 'canal and mountain views,' 'ocean, canal, marina,' and even 'harbor' views, aligning with the strong MLS history of 14/18 listings showing MARCAN. The evidence is broad and consistent across many remarks.

Agents consistently highlight 'sunset' views and western exposures but never reference sunrise or morning sun in any listing. With no MLS entries marking sunrise views, it is unlikely that sunrise views are a notable selling point for this building.

Sunset views are directly called out in multiple remarks (quotes include 'sunset views', 'spectacular sunset views', and 'OCEAN, SUNSET & CANAL VIEWS!'). Combined with historical high confidence, the remarks support that some units in the building offer sunset/west-facing views.

Agents describe many view types—ocean, canal, marina, city, mountains, and sunset—but never refer to any cemetery outlook. This, plus the absence of cemetery in all MLS view fields, strongly indicates the building does not have notable cemetery views.

I searched for direct references to watching fireworks from the building or units, such as 'fireworks view' or 'see fireworks from lanai,' but found none. The remarks discuss ocean, canal, marina, and sunset views, but not fireworks views.

No analysis available

No analysis available

There are no explicit references to pets, dogs, or cats in the remarks, but there are also no statements of 'no pets' and the MLS shows 0/14 units marked with NOPET. Given the policy that only explicit 'no pets' makes this feature false, the building is treated as allowing pets with moderate confidence.

Resident manager is confirmed across the current MLS set: 18/18 listings have RESMAN, and many remarks explicitly describe an on-site or full-time resident manager. The language is consistent across multiple agents and does not appear to be a one-off copy-paste anomaly; several listings use phrases like "beloved Resident Manager," "attentive resident manager," and "full-time resident manager."

Remarks focus on long-term residential living, views, amenities, and location, with no mention of hotel-style services or a rental pool. The complete absence of condotel-related language across many agents and 0/14 MLS CONDOT flags strongly supports that this is not a condotel building.

All listings speak of the property as a conventional condo unit and never mention cooperative ownership structures or share-based ownership. The absence of any co-op terminology and 0/14 COOTAX flags indicate the building is a condominium, not a cooperative.