Oahu Surf 1

MLS property data is unanimous: 13 of 13 listings report the building as built in 1972. No listing text suggests a different construction year or a complete rebuild, so 1972 is accepted with high confidence.

No listing explicitly states the total number of floors, but units are observed as high as the 13th floor and one unit is described as a penthouse. Using the highest observed unit floor, the building is estimated at 13 floors with moderate confidence. No contrary evidence appears in the remarks.

Across 13 listings, there are no remarks indicating how many units are in the building. Because no agent mentions a unit count, the total number of units cannot be reliably determined from the available data.

I searched the remarks for owner-occupancy cues like explicit percentages or phrases such as majority owner occupied. No such language appears, so the current 55% value is retained by default from building context, with low confidence due to lack of remark evidence.

The public remarks directly confirm the building has 2 elevators. Multiple listings reference elevator renovations or overhauls, which is consistent with the current count. This is high-confidence evidence from the listing text.

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.

Listings specifically reference split AC and wall-mounted AC inside units, not a building-wide central system. With 0/13 listings checking central AC in the fee-includes field, it is very unlikely that central AC is a fee-covered utility.

Across 13 listings, none indicate cable TV is included in the association fees and no public remarks reference cable in the maintenance. This strongly suggests residents pay for their own cable service separately.

Across the listings, there is no direct remark support for common-area electricity being included. While current MLS data shows OTCOEX in 10/15 records, the public remarks are mostly silent on this item, so this looks more like inconsistent agent input than a confirmed building-level amenity.

No MLS records indicate cooperative taxes are part of the fees, and the language used is consistent with a condominium rather than a co-op. This makes it highly unlikely that co-op taxes are included in the maintenance fee.

The combination of 0/13 MLS entries including electricity and a remark that the fee is charged 'plus electric usage' is strong direct evidence that unit electricity is not included. Residents appear responsible for their own electric bills.

Gas inclusion is effectively unsupported: only 1 of 15 MLS records checks GAS, and the public remarks contain no gas-related HOA coverage language. This is consistent with the prior high-confidence assessment that gas is not included.

Hot water inclusion is strongly supported by the MLS pattern, with 11 of 15 records showing HOTWAT. The public remarks are mostly silent, but there is no contradictory evidence such as unit water-heater language (WTRHTR), so the building-level inclusion remains likely.

Neither MLS data nor public remarks suggest that internet service is bundled into the maintenance fees. This indicates residents arrange and pay for their own internet separately.

No MLS entries or remarks indicate marina access or boat slip fees are part of the association fees. The building is marketed for its rooftop pool and Waikiki location, not marina amenities, so marina fees are almost certainly not included.

Sewer inclusion is very strongly confirmed. MLS data shows SEWER in 14 of 15 records, and the remarks directly say, 'The HOA fee covers water, sewer, and common area maintenance,' which aligns with the repeated building-level pattern.

Water inclusion is strongly supported and directly stated in the remarks. With WATER in 14 of 15 MLS records and an explicit HOA coverage statement in one listing, this appears to be a consistent building-level feature rather than a copy-paste error.

None of the listings describe any BBQ grills or outdoor cooking areas. The absence of both remarks and MLS amenity flags indicates the building likely does not provide BBQ facilities.

Across all provided remarks, there are no explicit mentions of bike storage, a bike room, or bicycle racks as a building amenity, and MLS amenities show 0/13 listings with bike storage checked. Because agents repeatedly describe key amenities (pool, storage, security, resident manager) but never reference any dedicated bike storage, it is very likely that the building does not offer a formal bike storage facility.

Listings highlight proximity to beaches and Ala Wai Canal views but do not reference any direct boating or dock facilities. Combined with MLS data, this indicates there is no boat dock amenity.

Parking and storage are mentioned, but not any car wash amenity. With no supporting MLS data, it is highly likely the building does not have car wash facilities.

The building’s amenities are consistently described as a rooftop pool, deck, resident manager, storage, and parking, with no reference to a clubhouse. MLS data likewise does not list a clubhouse amenity.

Across all public remarks, there is no mention of concierge, front desk service, or similar services. The only staff role highlighted is a resident manager, indicating the building likely does not offer concierge service.

One listing calls the building "pet-friendly," but there is no indication of a dedicated dog park or run. The absence of both textual and MLS evidence suggests no formal dog park amenity.

Multiple listings describe building amenities and staff but never mention a doorman or lobby attendant. The focus on a resident manager and electronic access systems suggests the building does not have a doorman service.

Across all provided remarks, there is no reference to a fitness center, gym, or exercise room. Combined with the MLS data showing no exercise-room amenity checked, this strongly suggests the building does not offer this feature.

Despite being a Waikiki building, none of the listings mention limousine or building-operated car service. MLS also does not indicate such a service, so this amenity can be safely ruled out.

Listings focus on residential and rooftop amenities only, without mentioning any meeting or conference space. MLS amenity checkboxes also do not indicate a meeting room exists.

Patio/deck access is strongly supported. Across the listings, roughly 15+ remarks mention outdoor space using phrases like "spacious lanai," "wraparound lanai," "large lanai," "private lanai," "balcony," and "rooftop deck." The evidence is consistent across multiple listings and appears to be a genuine building feature rather than a copy-paste checkbox error.

Although the location is near beaches and parks, listings do not describe any dedicated jogging or walking path within the property. MLS amenity data confirms no jogging path is recorded for the building.

Amenities discussed are adult-oriented (rooftop pool, views, storage, parking) with no reference to children’s play structures or playgrounds. MLS also does not list a playground, indicating this feature is not present.

Across all listings, outdoor space is consistently described as lanais and a rooftop deck/pool, with no mention of any yard or enclosed ground-level outdoor area. Given the high-rise, urban nature of the building and lack of PRIYAR in MLS amenities, it is very unlikely that any units have a true private yard.

No agent remarks describe a putting green or similar golf amenity. MLS data likewise shows no putting-green amenity, so it is very likely the building does not offer one.

Several listings mention a rooftop pool and deck where residents can "relax," "soak up the sun," and enjoy panoramic city, mountain, and ocean views. This shared rooftop deck serves as a common recreation area for residents.

Agents describe unit interiors and rooftop amenities but not an indoor rec or game room. The lack of both textual and MLS evidence points to there being no dedicated recreation room.

Agents emphasize proximity to Waikiki’s restaurants and cafes rather than any in-building dining facility. The lack of on-site restaurant references and MLS flags indicates this amenity is not present.

At least eight listings describe a rooftop pool and/or rooftop deck (e.g., "residents can relax at the rooftop heated saltwater pool" and "Enjoy the rooftop deck with a pool"). This repeated, detailed wording across multiple agents confirms shared rooftop amenities for the building.

Amenities lists are fairly detailed but never include a sauna or steam facility. With zero MLS flags for a sauna, it is very likely this building does not have one.

Storage is clearly present in this building. Multiple listings explicitly mention it in both unit and building contexts, including phrases like 'additional storage,' 'extra storage,' 'storage unit,' and 'Amenities include resident Manager, storage.' This is consistent with the prior MLS data showing storage in many listings, so confidence is very high.

I looked for surfboard storage, board storage, surf storage, or bike-and-surfboard storage wording. The remarks mention only generic storage, which is not enough to confirm surfboard-specific storage.

Listings consistently highlight the rooftop pool and views but never mention tennis courts. With MLS also not showing tennis, it is very likely this building has no tennis court facilities.

Trash chute appears in 9 of 15 MLS records for this building, giving moderate support that the amenity exists. None of the public remarks explicitly mention a trash/garbage chute, so this is based mainly on the MLS amenity pattern rather than descriptive confirmation. Because it is a building-level feature buyers would care about, it should be included with medium confidence.

Parking is described in detail (e.g., "2 parking stalls," "tandem parking," "secure, covered parking stall"), yet valet or valet parking is never referenced. This consistent omission, combined with unchecked MLS valet amenities, strongly indicates there is no valet service in the building.

Listings describe the building as a Waikiki condo with street access and make no reference to gates, walls, or perimeter fencing. With MLS amenities for GATED/WALFEN unchecked, it is very unlikely the property is enclosed by a wall or fence.

The only water amenity described is a rooftop heated saltwater pool; no separate spa or whirlpool is referenced. MLS amenity data supports that there is no whirlpool/hot tub feature.

The pool feature is strongly confirmed by the current remarks and prior MLS data. At least 10+ listings mention a rooftop pool, often with phrases like 'heated rooftop pool,' 'rooftop heated saltwater pool,' and 'rooftop pool and deck,' indicating this is a consistent building amenity rather than a one-off agent error.

The heated pool feature is directly and repeatedly advertised in the remarks, with several listings using the exact wording 'heated rooftop pool' and 'rooftop heated saltwater pool.' Combined with the historical MLS pattern, this is high-confidence evidence that the building’s pool is heated.

Several listings directly call the pool a saltwater pool, including heated saltwater pool wording. This is strong public-remark evidence that the building pool is salt water.

In-unit laundry is strongly confirmed for this building. Multiple listings explicitly mention it in different phrasings—"in-unit washer/dryer," "washer and dryer," "in-unit laundry," and "private washer/dryer"—showing this is not a one-off copy-paste error. The historical MLS data also shows 15/15 listings with washer/dryer in inclusions, so confidence is very high.

There is no indication of shared/community laundry facilities in either the MLS amenity checkboxes (0/13 listings) or in any of the detailed remarks, which instead consistently highlight in-unit laundry. This absence across many listings and agents, combined with the focus on in-unit washer/dryers, supports concluding that the building does not have community laundry.

I looked for coin-op, card-operated, quarters, paid laundry, or laundry fee language. The remarks mention only in-unit washer/dryer and do not indicate any community laundry system or payment requirement.

I searched the public remarks for language like "laundry on each floor," "laundry room on every floor," and similar floor-by-floor laundry wording. The remarks only mention in-unit washer/dryer, which does not support community laundry on every floor.

Parking is clearly available for this building across the listings. Multiple remarks explicitly mention parking in varied forms, including '2 parking unit,' '2 PARKING STALLS,' 'one parking stall,' and 'covered parking stall,' confirming this is not a copy-paste anomaly.

Assigned parking appears to be a real building-level feature. One listing explicitly states '1 assigned parking stall,' while others mention exact stall counts such as '2 parking unit' and '2 PARKING STALLS,' supporting that parking is reserved/assigned rather than merely open.

Covered parking is strongly supported by both MLS data and public remarks. At least 2 listings explicitly say 'covered parking stall' / 'secure, covered parking stall,' and the historical MLS trend shows 7/15 listings with covered/garage-type parking features. This looks like consistent building-level information rather than a one-off agent copy-paste.

I looked for direct wording like deeded parking, owned stall, or parking included in the deed. The listings consistently mention assigned or included parking, but they do not say the stalls are deeded, so there is no public-remarks basis to mark this true.

Across all provided listings, there are no references to EV charging or stations, and no MLS entries show EVCHRG. Given the number of independent listings and the marketing value of EV amenities, it is very likely this building does not offer EV charging.

I searched for parking rent, parking fees, monthly charges, or separate parking costs. The remarks only describe parking availability and stall counts, with no explicit fee mentioned.

The listings discuss resident stalls in detail but never mention 'guest parking' or 'visitor parking,' and the MLS data shows no GUEST flag for any unit. This consistent absence strongly suggests the building does not provide designated guest parking.

Multiple units reference secured parking, including phrases like 'secure, covered parking stall' and '2 secured tandem parking stalls,' and building security features like FOB access are mentioned. Together with some MLS SECENT flags, this indicates the parking area has secured entry.

Tandem parking is very well supported. Multiple listings explicitly mention 'rare tandem parking,' '2 PARKING (tandem),' and '2 secured tandem parking stalls,' and the MLS data shows 9/15 listings with TANDEM checked. The evidence is consistent across several remarks and appears to reflect a real building feature.

Across all listings, there is detailed discussion of stall type and security but no mention of 'valet' or 'attended' parking, and the MLS data never flags VALET. This consistent omission indicates the building does not offer valet parking.

I looked for phrases like parking waitlist, parking waiting list, or join-the-waitlist language. The listings instead describe available parking stalls and assigned parking, with no indication of a waitlist system.

One listing specifically describes 'FOB entry' and 'secured elevator access,' implying that elevator access is controlled by a key or fob. This strongly supports that the building has secure, restricted-access elevators.

The public remarks clearly reference fob-based entry and secured elevator access. That is consistent with card/fob access security for the building.

Across all listings, there are no references to a security guard, 24/7 security personnel, or on-site security staff. Security is instead described in terms of secure entry, FOB access, and security cameras, making it unlikely that the building offers a staffed guard service.

I searched for security patrol, roving security, patrol service, or patrolled building language. The remarks mention secure entry, cameras, and a resident manager, but nothing about a patrol service.

At least one listing clearly notes 'security cameras' as part of the building's security. Even though other listings don’t repeat this phrase, this explicit mention is strong evidence that the building has a video security system.

No listing remarks mention central air or HVAC, and instead describe individual systems such as 'split AC' and 'wall-mounted AC' in specific units. Only 1 of 13 MLS records checks a central A/C box, which conflicts with the consistent remark pattern and strongly points to a checkbox mistake rather than a true building-wide feature. Based on this, central air conditioning is treated as not present in the building.

Split AC is clearly present in this building/unit set. At least 2 listings explicitly say "split AC" or "3 split AC systems," and the historical MLS pattern showed ACSPL appearing in most listings. The evidence is consistent across multiple remarks and aligns with the existing MLS inclusion code.

A small minority of MLS records (2 of 13) indicate window A/C via checkboxes, but no listing remarks describe window units explicitly. The narrative descriptions instead focus on split and wall-mounted systems, suggesting the window A/C entries may be inconsistent or erroneous. Because of this, window A/C is not considered a confirmed feature of the building.

Concrete construction is strongly supported by the MLS history, with all current listings marking the building as CONCRE in construction materials. None of the public remarks dispute this, and the listings read like a consistent Waikiki high-rise condo. This appears to be stable building-level data rather than a copy-paste error.

Most agents do not mark double-wall construction, and all mark concrete, suggesting the building is not considered a double-wall structure. Double-wall is mainly used to describe wood-framed houses, not reinforced-concrete Waikiki condos like this one.

No agents have marked hollow tile in the MLS, and none of the listing narratives mention hollow tile. Given the consistent concrete classification, hollow tile construction is very unlikely here.

A small minority of listings mark masonry/stucco, but the vast majority do not, and none of the remarks mention stucco or masonry walls. This pattern, combined with consistent concrete classification, indicates the building is not treated as masonry-stucco construction in practice.

Agents consistently classify the building as concrete, not steel frame, across all recent listings. Listing remarks focus on finishes and amenities but never mention steel framing, which would likely be highlighted if it were a defining construction type.

Only one listing marks slab construction, while the overwhelming majority do not, and no remarks reference slab-on-grade or similar terms. Following the guidance to disregard sparsely checked features without remark support, this building is not treated as having a notable slab-construction attribute in the MLS data.

No analysis available

No listings indicate wood frame construction, and this is a high-rise condo with features like rooftop pool and elevators, which in Waikiki are almost exclusively concrete rather than wood frame. Remarks never mention any wood frame structure or similar terms.

The above-ground construction flag appears in a small minority of MLS entries and is not supported by any narrative remarks. Given the concrete high-rise form, it is more consistent with a standard tower on a structural foundation than a raised above-ground structure.

There is no MLS or remarks evidence that the building has brick construction. In a Waikiki high-rise context, brick construction would be atypical and likely called out if present.

No MLS records or remarks indicate single-wall construction. The high-rise style, elevators, and rooftop pool are fundamentally at odds with the single-wall construction method used in older Hawaiian cottages.

I searched for explicit STR permission, NUC/TVU language, vacation rental approval, or hotel-style rental wording. The remarks support long-term rental potential only and do not provide public evidence that short-term rentals are allowed, so this is best treated as not confirmed/likely not allowed from the public remarks.

I looked for hotel pool references such as Hilton pool, hotel rental program, managed-by-hotel language, or participation in a resort rental pool. None appears in the remarks, and without STR permission this feature cannot be true.

I searched for mandatory hotel-pool language like required participation, cannot opt out, or owner must enroll units in a rental program. Nothing in the remarks indicates a mandatory pool, so this is false.

None of the 13 listings mention 'fee simple' or similar language in the remarks, and the provided tenure fields are blank for both FS and LH. Because tenure is not discussed in the text, the presence of fee simple units remains unknown and is defaulted to false with low confidence.

Listing remarks do not reference leasehold status or any land lease terms, and the structured tenure data provided does not show LH on any of the 13 listings. Leasehold tenure for this building therefore cannot be confirmed and is treated as absent with low confidence.

I searched for leasehold language such as lease expiry years, ground lease end dates, renewal dates, or phrases like "lease expires 2050/2065." Nothing in the remarks gives a specific building lease expiration year. The month-to-month note is about a current lease arrangement, not a land tenure expiry year.

The remarks repeatedly advertise VA assumable financing and VA loan eligibility, which is direct public evidence the building supports VA financing. This is strong, repeated confirmation across multiple listings.

I looked for any public remark indicating the HOA provides full or walls-in insurance coverage. The listings only mention standard HOA fee coverage items like water, sewer, and common area maintenance, which is not enough to confirm full insurance.

Across all 13 listings, neither the MLS amenities nor the public remarks mention fire sprinklers. This consistent absence strongly suggests that a building-wide fire sprinkler system is not present.

I searched the remarks for fire/life safety evaluation language, FLSE references, fire safety certification, and fire inspection pass statements. Nothing in the listings indicates that the building passed a fire/life safety evaluation, so this remains unconfirmed from public remarks.

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 supported across the listings. At least 7 listings mention ocean-related views, including phrases like 'stunning ocean views,' 'ocean facing corner unit,' 'ocean peeks,' and '270 degree view from the ocean.' This appears to be consistent building-level marketing, not a one-off copy-paste error.

Mountain views are clearly present in multiple listings, with at least 5-6 remarks referencing mountains directly. Key phrases include 'Ko'olau mountains,' 'green mountain & Ala Wai views,' and rooftop views that include mountains. The evidence is consistent across several agents and unit types.

Across many listings, agents detail a wide range of views (ocean, Fort DeRussy, Ala Wai canal, Tantalus, St. Louis Heights) but never mention Diamond Head. Combined with 0 of 13 MLS records checking DIAHEA, there is strong evidence that Diamond Head views are not a notable building feature.

City views are strongly established for this building. At least 6 listings mention city views directly, such as 'views of the city' and rooftop views of the 'city, park and sea.' This is repeated often enough to treat as a building feature available to some units and common areas.

Even in highly detailed view descriptions such as '270 degree view from the ocean and Fort Derussy to Tantalus', agents stop at 'ocean views' and do not claim specific coastline/shoreline vistas. With only one MLS checkbox for COASTL and no textual corroboration, coastline view is likely not a consistent selling point.

Agents highlight 'palm trees' and Fort DeRussy Park, but not in the sense of a dedicated garden or courtyard view. Given the lack of any explicit garden-view language and zero MLS checks for GARDEN, this is not treated as a distinct garden-view building feature.

Although the building is near Ala Wai Golf Course and that course is mentioned as a nearby amenity, none of the many detailed view descriptions mention a golf course or fairways. With 12 of 13 MLS listings not checking GOLCOU and no textual support, golf course views are unlikely to be a meaningful building feature.

Marina-style waterway views are supported by remarks referencing the Ala Wai canal, which fits the canal/harbor definition in the feature guidance. While fewer listings mention it than ocean/mountain/city, the explicit 'Ala Wai canal' reference is enough to include it with high confidence. The evidence suggests some units have canal-facing exposure.

Sunrise views are directly confirmed in current remarks. At least 3-4 listings mention sunrise or morning light, including 'sunrise to sunset views' and 'the sun rising over the ocean.' This is strong evidence that some stacks have eastern exposure or sunrise-facing outlooks.

Sunset views are very well supported, with at least 5-6 listings referencing sunset, evening views, or rooftop enjoyment at sunset. Phrases like 'sunrise to sunset views,' 'admiring the sunset,' and fireworks from the lanai reinforce the evening exposure. This appears to be a reliable and recurring building feature.

Across numerous listings covering many orientations and high-floor units, no agent mentions a cemetery in the view description. Combined with zero MLS records checking a cemetery view, this feature can be confidently excluded.

The remarks repeatedly and directly state that units can view Friday night fireworks from the residence or lanai. This is strong, consistent evidence that the building offers fireworks views from units.

No analysis available

A listing states clearly that this is a "pet-friendly building," which directly confirms pets are allowed. No remarks or MLS restrictions contradict this, so the evidence supports that pets are permitted, possibly with standard building rules.

Strong, repeated evidence across the listings indicates this building has an on-site resident manager. At least 2 listings explicitly mention a "resident manager," and the historical MLS pattern (12/15 listings with RESMAN) suggests this is a consistent building feature rather than a one-off agent entry. The wording appears consistent across agents and is reinforced by the current remarks.

Remarks focus on residential and long-term use (e.g., "ideal investment" with "long term rental potential," "first time home buyers") and do not reference nightly rentals or hotel programs. The absence of any condotel language across many listings and in MLS strongly indicates this is not a condotel building.

All descriptions treat the property as a standard fee-simple condo with HOA fees, not a share-based cooperative. The complete lack of co-op terminology in remarks and MLS data makes it very likely this is not a cooperative building.