Niihau Apts Inc

Six out of six listings for Niihau Apts. report the building as built in 1960, with no contradictory remarks. This consistent MLS data supports 1960 as the construction year with high confidence.

Across 6 listings, the highest unit floor reported is 9 and no remarks indicate additional higher floors or a different total story count. Based on current MLS floor data, the building is treated as a 9-story structure.

No listings mention the total number of units in the Niihau Apts., and the MLS unit-total field appears to be a non-informative default (0). The true unit count for this building remains unknown from the available data.

The remarks emphasize short-term rental flexibility, resort zoning, and investment potential, while mentioning suitability for both owner-occupants and investors. They do not state a percentage or other reliable measure of owner occupancy, so the current value of 40.0 is retained with low confidence.

The remarks confirm elevator access but provide no elevator count. No evidence was found to confirm or deny the current value of 1 elevator, so it is retained with low confidence.

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.

0 of 6 listings indicate central AC is included in the HOA, and no remarks mention AC as an included utility. Evidence strongly points to central AC not being part of the fee structure.

No public remarks explicitly mention cable being included. CABTV appears in 3 of 7 current listings, so support is moderate and may reflect inconsistent MLS entry rather than clearly documented building-wide policy.

No public remarks specifically mention common-area electricity or building power. However, 5 of 7 listings include OTCOEX, providing moderate-to-strong indirect support that common expenses are included in the HOA fees.

No listings mark cooperative taxes as included, and the property is consistently described as a resort-zoned condo, not a co-op. Coop taxes are therefore not applicable or included here.

0 of 6 listings show electricity included in the association fee, and no remarks refer to power being covered. Combined with comments about low HOA fees, electricity appears not to be included.

No listings indicate gas is included in the HOA, and gas service is never mentioned in the remarks. The building fees almost certainly do not cover gas.

None of the seven current listings indicate hot water is included, and three explicitly list water heaters. The absence of HOTWAT, presence of WTRHTR, and prior high-confidence conclusion strongly support that hot water is not included in the maintenance fee.

Internet is not checked as included in any of the 6 listings, and no remarks advertise internet-included HOA. The evidence points to internet not being part of the maintenance fee.

No listing data or remarks suggest any marina access or boat-related amenities are included. Association fees clearly do not include marina costs.

No public remarks explicitly mention sewer fees. However, SEWER is included in 6 of 8 current listings and was included in 5 of 7 historical listings, indicating consistent building-level MLS evidence across multiple listings.

No public remarks specifically mention water inclusion or separate water billing. WATER is included in 6 of 8 current listings and was included in 5 of 7 historical listings, providing consistent evidence across multiple listings.

None of the listings describe BBQ or grill facilities or an outdoor cooking area. With 0/6 MLS indications and no textual evidence, the building is very unlikely to have shared BBQ amenities.

0 of 6 MLS listings indicate bike storage, and the remarks never mention any bicycle storage or bike room. Given this repeated omission while other amenities are described, it is highly likely that the building does not offer bike storage.

Remarks highlight proximity to the beach and nearby hotels, not boating or marina access. With no MLS or remarks support, it is very likely that the property does not have a boat dock or marina access.

Parking is discussed (including Hale Koa Hotel parking and covered parking) but a car wash station is never mentioned. The universal MLS omission suggests there is no dedicated car wash amenity.

None of the listings for Niihau Apts mention a clubhouse, community center, or similar facility. Given universal omission in MLS data, the building can be considered to have no clubhouse.

No listing references any concierge or front desk services. Given that 0/6 MLS listings mark a concierge amenity, it is highly likely the building does not offer concierge service.

Listings do not mention a dog park, dog run, or pet exercise area, which are typically called out if present. The consistent MLS omission strongly suggests there is no dedicated dog park.

Listing descriptions focus on location, renovations, parking, and elevator access, but never mention a doorman or lobby attendant. With 0/6 MLS indications of a doorman, the building very likely does not have this service.

No listings or remarks reference a gym, fitness center, or exercise room for this building. With 0/6 MLS amenities indicating an exercise room and no textual mention across multiple agents, it is very likely the building does not offer this feature.

The building is presented as a modest resort-zoned Waikiki condo, not a full-service luxury tower. With no textual or MLS evidence, it is safe to conclude there is no limousine or house car service.

There are no references to conference rooms, board rooms, or community meeting rooms. With consistent MLS omission and no textual support, this feature is almost certainly absent.

At least one listing advertises a 'private lanai,' which is a clear patio/deck-type outdoor space. Despite the MLS amenities checkbox not being used, this remark-based evidence strongly supports that units in the building offer lanai/deck areas.

While the ads emphasize walkability to the beach and Waikiki, they do not mention any dedicated jogging or walking path on the property. With no MLS or textual support, this amenity is very unlikely.

The building is marketed for resort/short-term use and proximity to the beach, not family play facilities. With 0/6 MLS checks and no verbal mention, a playground is almost certainly not offered.

Across all provided remarks, there are no references to a yard, fenced yard, or private ground-level outdoor space. The property is positioned as an urban resort-zoned condo, making private yard areas very unlikely.

No listing references a putting green or golf practice area, and all amenities lists leave this unchecked. Given how marketable this would be, its omission indicates it does not exist at the building.

Agents emphasize proximity to the beach and neighborhood attractions rather than any on-site recreation deck. With 0/6 MLS flags and no mention in remarks, a shared recreation area is unlikely.

Listings focus on unit renovations and location but never mention a game room, rec room, or entertainment room. With zero MLS or textual support, the building likely lacks a recreation room.

Agents market nearby dining rather than an in-building restaurant or café. With 0/6 MLS indications and only neighborhood-level restaurant references, the building itself does not have a restaurant.

Agents highlight a private lanai and views of fireworks but do not describe any shared rooftop area. With 0/6 MLS indications and no remarks support, a shared rooftop amenity is very unlikely.

None of the agents describe a sauna, steam room, or similar wellness facility. Given 0/6 MLS flags and no textual evidence, the building almost certainly lacks a sauna.

0 of 6 MLS listings check any storage-related amenity, and none of the remarks reference storage lockers or extra storage. Agents instead highlight features such as covered parking and keyed elevator access, suggesting storage units are not available in this building.

Although the listing highlights the property's proximity to Waikiki Beach, it does not identify any storage facility for surfboards or boards. Beach proximity alone does not establish surfboard storage.

No agent notes a tennis court or tennis facilities, and all MLS amenity checkboxes for tennis are off. Such a feature would almost certainly be advertised, so it can be treated as not present.

Five of eight current listings mark TRACHU in the MLS amenities, but 0 of the 7 provided remarks mention a “trash chute,” “garbage chute,” or “refuse chute.” The feature is retained based on the current majority of MLS records, though the lack of corroborating remarks and prior Medium confidence make the evidence moderate rather than strong.

Multiple listings discuss parking but never reference any valet service or valet parking. Given that valet is a major amenity agents typically promote, its absence in all remarks strongly indicates the building does not offer valet.

Remarks emphasize proximity to the beach and nearby landmarks but do not describe a gated or fenced perimeter. Coupled with the absence of gated/wall-fence checkboxes in all MLS entries, this strongly suggests the property is not enclosed by a wall or fence.

A whirlpool or hot tub would be a key resort-style selling point but is never referenced. The consistent MLS and remark silence makes it very likely that the building has no shared whirlpool or hot tub.

Across 6 current listings, no agent has checked any pool-related amenity and none of the remarks mention a pool, lap pool, or swimming facilities. Marketing focuses on being 400 feet from the beach and on short-term rental potential, which strongly suggests the building does not offer a pool. Given the consistent absence of any references, it's highly likely there is no shared pool in this building.

No listings mark heated pool amenities or mention a heated pool in their descriptions. Combined with strong evidence that the building has no pool at all, this supports a very high-confidence conclusion that there is no heated pool available in the building.

The public remarks do not mention a swimming pool or any saltwater feature. The building context also lists no pool, and there is no contrary evidence in the remarks.

At least one listing explicitly mentions a "W/D combo in unit" and "W/D in unit too!"; the duplicated wording appears to come from the same listing rather than multiple independent agents. Combined with 3 of 7 current MLS listings including washer/dryer, the building offers in-unit laundry in some units.

COMLAU appears in 5 of 8 current listings, providing majority support for community laundry. No listing explicitly says “community laundry,” “laundry room,” or “coin laundry”; several instead state “W/D combo in unit” or “W/D in unit,” so the checkbox evidence may be partly copied or may coexist with shared facilities.

The remarks identify in-unit laundry rather than shared laundry facilities. They do not state that any community laundry requires payment.

The remarks mention a W/D combo or W/D in the unit, but do not describe community laundry facilities. No evidence was found that laundry is available on every floor.

At least three listings explicitly mention parking, including two references to “Covered parking” and one stating the unit “has one parking space.” The evidence is consistent across multiple remarks and supports parking as an available building feature, despite five of eight current MLS records being marked NONE and one remark directing buyers to nearby off-site parking.

One listing explicitly states the condo has "one parking space," while current MLS data marks assigned parking in 3 of 7 listings. The evidence supports assigned parking, though the remarks do not explicitly use terms such as "assigned" or "reserved," so confidence is moderate rather than high.

Two duplicated current remarks explicitly confirm "Covered parking," directly supporting the feature. This aligns with the previously High-confidence assessment and current MLS entries using covered/garage parking codes, making the evidence strong despite the repeated wording likely being copied between listings.

Parking availability is mentioned, including one covered parking space. The remarks do not establish that the stall is deeded, included in the deed, or separately owned.

Across all available remarks there is no reference to EV or electric vehicle charging, and MLS parking features never include EVCHRG. This consistent absence makes it very likely the building does not offer EV charging stations.

No monthly parking fee or building-specific parking charge is provided. The only parking-rate reference concerns nearby Hale Koa Hotel parking and cannot be applied to this property.

None of the listings advertise guest or visitor parking, and MLS data never flags a guest parking feature. Given how marketable guest parking is, this silence strongly suggests that dedicated guest parking is not available.

Remarks note 'keyed elevator access' but say nothing about gated or secure parking, and MLS parking features never list secured entry. This points to building access being controlled, but not the parking area itself, so secured parking entry is unlikely.

There are no mentions of 'tandem' or similar wording in the remarks, and MLS data never flags tandem parking. This consistent lack of reference indicates the building does not offer tandem-style parking stalls.

No listings mention valet parking or attended garage service, and MLS never marks a valet option. Given how prominently such an amenity would normally be advertised, the building almost certainly does not offer valet parking.

The remarks mention covered parking and one parking space but do not describe a formal waitlist system. There is insufficient evidence that the building has a parking waitlist.

At least one listing clearly advertises "keyed elevator access," indicating controlled elevator entry for the building. Even though MLS checkboxes do not flag an elevator amenity, the explicit remark provides strong evidence that secure keyed elevator access exists.

Keyed elevator access indicates some controlled entry but does not specifically establish a card or fob security system. No qualifying card-access terminology was found.

Across all available remarks, there is no reference to a security guard or staffed security service. Combined with 0/6 MLS listings marking a guard amenity, this strongly indicates the building does not offer guard service.

The remarks discuss location, rentals, parking, and keyed elevator access but do not describe security personnel or patrol services. There is no public-remarks evidence confirming this feature.

No listing remarks mention any video surveillance or security camera system. Together with 0/6 MLS listings indicating a security system amenity, this suggests the building does not provide video security.

No listings (0/6) mark central AC in the MLS data, and none of the public remarks reference central air, forced air, or HVAC. Given this consistent absence in both checkboxes and narrative remarks, it is very likely the building does not have a central air conditioning system.

Split AC is indicated in the MLS inclusions for 1 of 6 listings, with no explicit split/mini-split wording in any remarks. This single data point suggests some units may have split AC, but the evidence is limited and may reflect one agent’s entry rather than a building-wide standard.

Three of seven current listings indicate ACWIUN, while none of the seven provided remarks mention window AC, window units, or wall AC. The feature is included based on the current MLS checkbox evidence, but the lack of explicit remarks across multiple agents makes the support moderate rather than strong.

Concrete construction is supported by all 8 listings through the CONCRE construction-materials code. No public remarks explicitly mention concrete, but the unanimous, repeated MLS designation makes this strong evidence rather than an isolated agent entry.

Double-wall construction appears in 3 of 8 MLS records via the DOUWAL code. No public remarks explicitly confirm it, and the limited coverage suggests this may be selectively entered or copied rather than universally verified.

There is no MLS checkbox or remarks evidence indicating hollow tile construction. Given the consistent concrete designation and absence of hollow tile mentions, hollow tile construction is very unlikely.

None of the listings indicate masonry and stucco construction, and all instead emphasize concrete. The consistent absence of MASSTU and any masonry/stucco language supports that this is not a masonry-stucco building.

There is no MLS or remarks evidence of steel frame construction, while concrete is consistently selected. This makes a steel frame structure highly unlikely for this building.

Only 1 of 8 current listings identifies SLAB, while the historical evidence was strongly against slab construction and some records described the building as above ground. No public remarks confirm a slab foundation, making the lone checkbox insufficient to overturn the prior high-confidence conclusion.

No analysis available

No listings mark wood frame construction, and all instead mark concrete, which strongly indicates the building is not wood-frame. Remarks do not reference wood framing or similar terminology.

Three of 7 current listings identify above-ground construction, compared with 2 of 6 historically. No public remarks explicitly quote 'above ground construction,' so the evidence is moderate and may partly reflect MLS checkbox usage rather than independently verified descriptions.

No listing advertises brick or brick-and-mortar construction, and agents uniformly tag the building as concrete. The lack of any brick references across listings suggests the building is not brick-constructed.

Single-wall construction is never mentioned or checked in MLS data for this building. Given local practice of calling out single-wall when applicable, the lack of any reference strongly indicates it does not use single-wall construction.

Multiple listings directly confirm that short-term rentals are permitted. The property is also repeatedly described as resort-zoned and suitable for vacation-rental investment.

Short-term rentals are allowed, but the remarks do not indicate that units participate in a hotel rental pool. References to Hilton, Trump Towers, Outrigger, and Hale Koa Hotel do not establish a rental-pool arrangement for this building.

The remarks describe flexibility for both owner occupancy and investment, but do not state that owners must join a hotel rental program. There is no evidence of mandatory pool participation.

None of the available remarks mention 'fee simple' or land ownership, and the MLS tenure data does not clearly indicate FS for any of the 6 listings. With no positive evidence of fee simple units, the building is not currently recorded as offering FS tenure.

No listing remarks reference leasehold terms or lease rent, and MLS data does not mark any of the 6 listings as LH. Because there is no direct evidence of leasehold tenure, the building is not currently recorded as offering LH units.

The remarks do not identify the property as leasehold or provide any ground-lease terms. No specific four-digit lease expiry year can be extracted.

The remarks discuss investment potential, resort zoning, and short-term rentals but do not address VA loan eligibility. There is no evidence that the building is VA approved.

The remarks do not discuss building or HOA insurance coverage. No explicit statement of full or walls-in insurance was found, so the feature remains unsupported.

Across all provided listings, there are no remarks or amenity checkboxes indicating a sprinkler system. Due to this lack of evidence, the presence of building fire sprinklers is not recorded at this time.

The remarks were searched for fire/life safety evaluation, FLSE, fire inspection, certification, and life-safety compliance language. Nothing relevant was found, so there is no evidence that the building has passed an FLSE.

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

0 of 6 MLS listings checked any ocean-related view, and none of the public remarks mention an ocean or water view even though they stress being 400 feet from the beach. In Waikiki, ocean views are heavily marketed when available, so the consistent omission strongly suggests there are no meaningful ocean-view units in this building.

0 of 6 listings selected a mountain view, and no remarks reference mountain or mauka views. Given multiple agents’ descriptions, this consistent omission suggests the building does not offer recognized mountain-view units.

No listings checked Diamond Head view and no remarks mention Diamond Head or crater views. Because agents almost always promote Diamond Head views when present, this pattern indicates there are no Diamond Head–view units here.

City views are indicated in 6 of 7 current MLS listings, providing strong building-level checkbox evidence. Remarks are largely repetitive and do not explicitly use phrases such as “city view” or “cityscape,” though one mentions distant Hilton fireworks visible from the lanai.

0 of 6 listings checked any coastline-related view and the remarks only reference being 400 feet from the beach, not seeing it. This pattern suggests the building does not offer coastline-view units.

0 of 6 listings advertise garden or courtyard views, and no remarks mention landscaped outlooks. This consistent lack of mention suggests there are no notable garden-view units in the building.

No listings checked a golf course view and no remarks reference any fairway, greens, or Ala Wai Golf Course outlook. This strongly indicates the building has no golf course–view units.

0 of 6 listings selected marina/harbor/canal view, and remarks do not describe any harbor or Ala Wai vistas. The consistent absence across multiple agents’ listings indicates marina views are not a feature of this building.

None of the listings checked sunrise or similar exposure, and no remarks highlight sunrise or morning sunshine. With other view aspects (like fireworks) explicitly described instead, sunrise views do not appear to be a building feature.

Three listings explicitly mention that Hilton's Friday night fireworks are viewable or visible from the lanai, including phrases such as “perfectly viewable right from your lanai” and “catch glimpses.” This is strong, repeated listing-agent evidence of evening/western views and supports retaining sunset views rather than treating the MLS checkbox data as authoritative.

No listings indicate a cemetery view and no public remarks reference a cemetery. Given that such a view would typically be noted or disclosed, this strongly supports that the building has no cemetery-view units.

The remarks explicitly state that Friday night fireworks are viewable from the unit's private lanai. This directly confirms a fireworks view from the building.

No analysis available

None of the listings reference pets or pet policies in any way. Because the building’s stance on pets is not documented in the remarks, this is treated as not confirmed/advertised rather than clearly pet-friendly.

No listing descriptions or MLS amenity notes indicate a resident or on-site manager at Niihau Apts. In the absence of such mentions across multiple listings, a resident manager is not currently recorded for this building.

Remarks emphasize 'resort-zoned condo' and the ability to do short-term rentals but never describe any hotel management or front-desk services. This pattern across several listings indicates it is a standard resort-zoned condo, not a condotel.

The building is consistently marketed as a condominium with fee simple-style language and no mention of shares or co-op structure. Given how rare and distinctive co-ops are, this strongly confirms the building is not a cooperative.