Oahu Surf 2

The MLS property data for all four listings unanimously lists the building’s construction year as 1971. With no remarks indicating a different build or full reconstruction date, 1971 is highly reliable as the year built.

County assessor records and the state registration both report 14 floors. Listings reach only floor 12 and have no penthouse listings, so they do not establish the top residential floor and are set aside.

The county assessor reports 58 reconciled residential units, and the state registration independently reports 58 units for one building. The stored value is supported.

Owner occupancy from AOUO registration(s) 264. Refreshed by Real_Estate_Scraper/reb_registry/propagate_owner_occupancy.py, which this lock does not block.

The remarks were searched for explicit elevator counts such as '2 elevators,' '4 elevators,' 'multiple elevators,' or similar references, but none were found. Per the numeric-field rule, the current value of 2 is retained with low confidence because there is no evidence in the remarks 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.

One listing notes “AC is allowed in this unit,” indicating individually installed AC rather than a building-supplied central system. With no ACCEN box checked and no mention of central AC being included, maintenance fees almost certainly do not include central AC.

One of six current listings checks CABTV in the association_fee_includes. None of the public remarks mention 'cable' or 'cable TV included', and historical notes warn of copy/paste. The evidence for cable being included is weak (1/6 MLS checks), so this is marked true with moderate confidence.

OTCOEX appears in 9 of 12 current listings, supporting inclusion of common-area electricity in the maintenance fee. No public remark explicitly mentions common-area power, so this conclusion relies primarily on the consistent MLS inclusion data rather than independent agent descriptions.

No listing marks co-op taxes as included and the building is marketed as a condo (not a cooperative). This strongly indicates there are no co-op taxes included in the maintenance fees.

All 12 listings identify electricity as included in the maintenance fees. At least two remarks independently and explicitly confirm this, making the evidence strong across both MLS data and public descriptions.

Across 4 listings, the GAS field is never selected and there is no mention of gas utilities in the remarks. This strongly suggests gas is not included in the maintenance fees (and likely not provided by the building).

Hot water is marked included in 10 of 12 listings, with only one listing showing WTRHTR as an exception. Public remarks do not mention hot water, so the conclusion is based primarily on the strong current MLS majority and historical high confidence.

No listing checks the internet-service-included field, and there are no phrases like “internet included” or “Wi-Fi included in HOA” in the remarks. This pattern indicates internet is not included in the maintenance fees.

The building is described as being by the Ala Wai Canal but not as having marina facilities or boat slips. With 0/4 marina checkboxes and no textual references, marina-related costs are almost certainly not included in the maintenance fees.

All 12 listings report sewer as included in the maintenance fees. The explicit remark listing sewer among the included charges confirms the consistent MLS data across multiple sources.

All 12 listings identify water as included in the maintenance fees. The public remark specifically confirms that water is included, providing direct support beyond potentially copied MLS checkbox data.

No listing remarks mention BBQ or grilling areas and agents consistently do not mark BBQ in the amenities. This indicates the building likely does not have BBQ facilities.

Across 4 listings, there are no mentions of bike storage, bike room, or bike racks in the building, and MLS amenities never flag bike storage. The sole bike reference is to nearby Biki bike-share, which is off-site, so current evidence indicates the building does not provide its own dedicated bicycle storage.

Despite the canal-side location, no listing advertises boating or docking facilities. This suggests the building does not provide a boat dock or marina access.

None of the 11 listings mention a car wash, auto wash, or vehicle wash area. Although 1 of 11 current MLS records includes CRWSH, the absence of any supporting description across multiple agents and the prior high-confidence finding indicate the checkbox is likely inaccurate.

No listing describes or checks a clubhouse amenity. This is strong evidence that the building does not have a clubhouse.

The remarks market location, pool, parking, and layouts but never mention any concierge or front desk service. With all MLS entries also leaving concierge-related amenities unchecked, the building almost certainly does not offer concierge services.

There are no references to pet or dog exercise facilities in remarks, and the MLS amenities never indicate such a feature. This strongly suggests there is no dog park in the building.

None of the listings reference a doorman or lobby attendant, and the MLS amenity is consistently unchecked. This makes it very likely the building does not provide a doorman service.

Across 4 listings, there is no mention of a gym or fitness center and the MLS amenity for EXEROO is never selected. This strongly suggests the building does not offer an exercise room.

The property is presented as a standard Waikiki condo without high-end chauffeur or house-car services. The absence of any such mention strongly indicates no limo or car service is offered.

Agents do not advertise or select a meeting room amenity and remarks focus strictly on residential and pool features. This indicates there is no dedicated meeting room.

Outdoor space is strongly supported across the listings, with at least 11 of 12 remarks mentioning a lanai, patio, or deck. Key phrases include “spacious covered lanai,” “316 sq. ft. wrap around lanai,” “private lanai,” “large lanai,” and “patio running around the outside of unit,” providing repeated evidence from multiple listings rather than a single copied checkbox.

While the location is walkable to Waikiki and Ala Moana, no listing describes dedicated jogging or walking paths on-site. This supports that there is no formal jogging path amenity.

The building is marketed mainly for adult/urban use with pool and lanai features; playground-related terms never appear. This indicates the building does not offer a children's playground.

Across all remarks, outdoor space is described only as lanais/patios, never as a yard or fenced/private yard. Given the high-rise configuration and 0/4 MLS PRIYAR flags, it is very unlikely the building offers private yard areas.

Neither MLS data nor remarks suggest any putting green or golf practice area. It is almost certain the building has no putting green.

While there is a rooftop pool, no listing calls it a recreation or amenity deck and most agents leave RECARE unchecked. This points to the absence of a distinct, advertised recreation area beyond the pool itself.

Agents do not mark a recreation room amenity and remarks focus on the pool and lanais only. This suggests the building lacks a dedicated recreation room.

Listings emphasize proximity to Waikiki restaurants but never state an in-building restaurant or café. MLS amenities also omit RESTAU, indicating there is no on-site restaurant.

Remarks state 'Take a dip in the sparkling rooftop pool' and 'The building features a roof top pool with views in all directions', and another says 'take a stroll up to the rooftop pool'. This provides clear, repeated evidence that the building has rooftop amenities.

Listings highlight the rooftop pool but omit any reference to a sauna or steam facility. This indicates the building does not have a sauna.

Storage appears to be a real building feature. Across the provided remarks, 1 listing explicitly says "extra storage," while the MLS data also shows storage checked in multiple current listings (amenities and unit features). The evidence is consistent and likely reflects a genuine building amenity rather than a copy-paste error.

Several listings confirm general unit or parking-related storage areas. No public-remark evidence establishes dedicated surfboard storage facilities.

There are no references to tennis courts in any remarks and MLS data shows no agents selecting TENCOU. Given the small Waikiki condo context, the building almost certainly has no tennis court.

No listings explicitly mention a trash chute, garbage chute, or refuse chute in their remarks. Nevertheless, 11 of 12 current MLS records include TRACHU, consistent with the previously high-confidence building data, though the lack of narrative confirmation suggests the checkbox should be treated cautiously.

The remarks reference '2 secured parking', '1 covered, secured parking', and a 'tandem parking stall' but never valet or valet parking. This consistent description across listings strongly suggests there is no valet service at the building.

Three listings do not mark any gated or walled feature and none of the remarks describe the property as gated or fenced. The lone gated/wall/fence checkbox without supporting remarks appears inconsistent, so the building is unlikely to have a notable perimeter wall or gated enclosure.

Descriptions focus on a rooftop pool with views and do not reference any separate hot tub or spa feature. This supports that there is no whirlpool amenity.

The building pool is strongly validated across the listings: 6 of 12 current remarks explicitly mention a rooftop or shared pool, while all 12 listings include pool-related MLS amenities. Repeated descriptions such as "rooftop pool with panoramic Waikiki views" and "Inviting pool with huge views" indicate a building amenity rather than isolated copy-paste.

Across four separate listings, the pool is described multiple times but never as heated, and no heated-pool options are selected in MLS. This consistent omission strongly suggests the building’s rooftop pool is not heated.

Multiple listings confirm a rooftop pool with views. No public-remark evidence indicates that the pool is saltwater.

At least 5 of the provided listings explicitly mention in-unit laundry, using phrases such as "in-unit Full size washer and dryer," "full size stacked front-loading washer and dryer," and "Washer and dryer in unit." This strongly confirms the feature across multiple listings and is consistent with the current MLS data showing WASHER/DRYER in inclusions for all 12 of 12 listings.

None of the four listings mention shared or community laundry (e.g., laundry room, coin laundry), and all 4/4 MLS entries omit the community laundry amenity. Given that building-level amenities are typically marked consistently when present, this provides strong evidence that there is no community laundry in the building. Therefore, the feature is set to false with high confidence.

The listings provide evidence of in-unit laundry rather than shared laundry facilities. No paid-laundry terms such as coin, card, quarters, or laundry fees were found.

The remarks repeatedly describe full-size or stacked washers and dryers inside the units. No evidence was found of community laundry rooms on every floor.

Every listing for this building includes at least one parking stall in MLS parking_features, and the remarks reference stalls with the units (e.g., '2 secured parking', '1 tandem parking stall'). This strongly indicates the building offers on-site parking for its units.

At least four listings explicitly mention assigned parking, including '2 assigned covered tandem parking' and 'one assigned covered parking stall #12.' This is strongly supported by 7 of 12 current MLS records and consistent remarks from multiple listings.

At least five listings explicitly reference covered parking, including 'secured covered tandem-style parking' and '1-assigned covered parking.' All 12 current MLS records contain covered or garage-related parking designations, making this feature consistently confirmed.

Multiple listings mention assigned or secured covered/tandem parking. None states that the parking stall is deeded, owned, or included in the unit deed.

There is no mention of EV charging in any remarks and no EVCHRG checkbox used in MLS for any listing. Given the complete absence of references, the building likely does not offer dedicated EV charging stations.

The remarks describe one or two assigned covered parking spaces but do not identify a parking rental fee. No evidence confirms that parking is separately paid.

No public remarks mention guest or visitor parking across the provided listings. Although 1 of 11 current MLS records has a GUEST designation, the consistent absence of supporting remarks and the prior high-confidence conclusion that dedicated guest parking is not provided weigh against including this feature.

At least four listings explicitly mention secured parking or entry, including 'secured entry' and 'remote-controlled garage access.' The feature is supported by 5 of 12 current MLS records and consistent language across multiple listings.

At least four listings explicitly describe tandem parking, including '2 tandem parking' and 'secured covered tandem-style parking.' Six of 12 current MLS records contain the TANDEM designation, with strong corroboration in remarks from multiple listings.

No listing references valet service or attended parking, and the VALET option is never selected in MLS data. This strongly suggests the building does not offer valet parking.

The listings describe assigned and secured parking, including tandem configurations. No parking waitlist language was found.

Elevator security is never mentioned in remarks and is not reflected in the amenity checkboxes in any listing. This consistent absence indicates the building does not use keyed or fob-access elevators as a notable feature.

The remarks establish controlled or secured building and parking access. They do not establish that access uses a card or fob system.

Across 4 listings, there are no references to a security guard or on-site security staff. Given the repeated omission in both amenities and remarks, it's highly likely the building does not offer a staffed security guard service.

The listings reference secured entry and secured parking only. No evidence was found of on-site or roving security patrol service.

The listings describe multiple building amenities but never mention video surveillance or security cameras, and agents are not checking any related amenity fields. This strongly suggests the building does not have a formal video security system advertised to buyers.

Across 4 listings, no remarks mention central air or HVAC, and 0/4 MLS entries check any central AC fields. One agent says 'AC is allowed in this unit,' suggesting cooling is not centrally provided. Together this strongly indicates the building does not have central AC.

None of the 4 listings check the split AC field or describe mini-split/ductless systems in the remarks. Agents instead talk about trade winds and AC being merely 'allowed,' not an installed split system. This pattern suggests the building is not characterized by split AC in its units.

Evidence supports window/wall AC availability in some units. At least 2 listings reference it directly: one says "wall ac unit in living room" and another says "AC is allowed in this unit." The repeated mention across separate remarks, along with the current MLS checkbox activity, suggests this is not just a copy-paste error.

Current MLS data identifies concrete construction in 11 of 12 listings, a strong and broadly distributed signal. Public remarks do not explicitly mention concrete construction, but there is no contradictory evidence and the current data confirms the prior high-confidence determination.

Three of 12 current listings identify double-wall construction in MLS data, while no public remarks explicitly mention a double wall or two-wall construction. Because the feature has a prior high-confidence record and current MLS support, it is retained, though the evidence is less widespread than for concrete construction.

Across all available listings, hollow tile construction is never mentioned or selected in MLS. This consistent omission strongly indicates the building is not identified as hollow-tile construction.

Masonry/stucco is supported in a minority of current MLS records, with 2 of 8 listings checked MASSTU. The public remarks do not mention construction materials, so this is driven mainly by MLS data rather than narrative confirmation; it looks like an occasional agent-entered building material entry rather than strong copy-paste consensus.

MLS data never identifies the building as steel frame, while consistently identifying concrete construction. In the absence of any remark-based evidence of steel framing, it is very likely not classified as a steel-frame building in MLS terms.

Only one listing out of seven has 'SLAB' checked in MLS, but prior data showed no slab foundation identification and none of the public remarks mention 'concrete slab' or 'solid concrete foundation.' The weight of evidence indicates no slab designation for the building and the lone checked box is likely an error.

No analysis available

Across all listings, agents consistently select concrete construction and never select wood frame. For a Waikiki condo tower of this type, that strongly indicates the building is not wood-frame construction. No remarks reference any wood-frame elements.

At least one agent explicitly notes above-ground construction in MLS, and none contradict it. Given the building’s multi-story condo form, it is reasonable to treat above-ground construction as present despite inconsistent checkbox use.

No listing suggests any brick construction, and the MLS checkbox for brick is never used for this building. Given the building type and location, brick construction would be unusual and likely highlighted, so it is very likely not a brick building.

No MLS entry or remark references single-wall construction, and the building type is inconsistent with that method. This strongly indicates the building is not single-wall construction.

Several listings describe possible vacation, investment, or rental use. However, there is no explicit statement allowing STRs, NUCs, TVUs, or vacation rentals, so STR permission is not established.

The referenced pool is an ordinary rooftop amenity with views and is not described as a hotel rental pool. Because STR allowance is not established, the hotel-pool prerequisite is also unmet.

The remarks contain no evidence of hotel rental-pool participation, much less mandatory participation. The absence of STR authorization and hotel-pool language supports a false value.

No listing remarks refer to fee simple ownership or land being included, and the MLS tenure flags show 0 of 4 as Fee Simple. Because the same MLS summary also shows 0 of 4 as Leasehold, the tenure situation cannot be determined confidently from available data.

None of the public remarks mention leasehold status, lease rent, or expiration dates, and the summarized MLS data shows 0 of 4 listings as Leasehold. With land tenure fields not clearly indicating either FS or LH, the presence of leasehold units remains uncertain.

The remarks were searched for leasehold, ground lease, lease expiration, and renewal language. No specific four-digit lease-expiry year was found.

The remarks directly advertise a VA assumable loan at 2.25%. This is strong public-remarks evidence that VA financing is associated with the property.

The remarks explicitly state that the building has 100% hurricane insurance, supporting comprehensive building insurance coverage. This confirms the previously reported fully insured status, although the remarks do not specifically use the term walls-in coverage.

No listing remarks reference fire sprinklers or a sprinkler system, and none of the four MLS records have the fire-sprinkler amenity flagged. Given the lack of direct evidence either way, the presence or absence of a building-wide sprinkler system is unknown.

The remarks contain no statements that the building passed a fire/life safety evaluation, FLSE, fire inspection, or is life-safety certified or compliant. Because there is no current true value and no supporting evidence, this is recorded as false with medium-low confidence.

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

At least one unit remark says 'Ocean views from all over the apartment,' and rooftop pool comments describe wide Waikiki/South Shore vistas. This confirms the building offers ocean-view units and common-area ocean views.

Mountain views are strongly supported across the building, with 9 of 12 current listings tagged for mountain views. Multiple independent remarks explicitly describe mountain views, including sweeping mountain vistas and mountain views from the lanai, confirming this is not merely unsupported checkbox data.

Across four listings, agents highlight ocean, mountain, and broad Waikiki/South Shore views but never mention Diamond Head. Given the specificity of other view descriptions, Diamond Head views are unlikely to be a notable feature.

City views are well supported, with 8 of 12 current listings tagged CITY. Several remarks directly cite city views or skyline vistas, including "sweeping city and mountain views" and "sweeping mountain and city vistas," indicating the building offers city-view units.

Listings speak of 'huge views of the whole S Shore and all of Waikiki' plus extensive ocean views. These descriptions strongly suggest visible stretches of shoreline/coastline from the building’s higher levels.

Garden-view evidence is limited but present in the MLS data: 2 of 9 listings are tagged with GARDEN in the view description. None of the provided public remarks explicitly call out garden, courtyard, or landscaped views, so this looks like a small subset of units rather than a commonly marketed feature.

Listings discuss ocean, mountain, skyline, canal, and broad Waikiki views but never reference a golf course. Given agents' tendency to highlight golf views when present, golf-course views are unlikely to be a notable feature.

Marina or canal views are supported by 5 of 12 current MLS records tagged MARCAN. One listing explicitly identifies the building as being on the Ala Wai Canal, while the building's rooftop pool is described as having views in all directions; this is consistent with the established historical evidence for canal or marina views.

Across four listings, there are no mentions of sunrise or east-facing views, while other view types are described in detail. This indicates sunrise views are not a notable selling point for the building.

At least two listings point to sunset-oriented views, including "watch Friday night fireworks" and "heading out for a sunset walk along the beach." The rooftop pool and Waikiki exposure reinforce the sunset/evening-view interpretation.

All remarks highlight proximity to beaches, canal, shopping, and Waikiki amenities with no reference to a cemetery. Given the location and silence on this point, cemetery views can be safely ruled out.

The remarks explicitly connect Friday night fireworks viewing with the building's rooftop pool. This confirms that fireworks can be viewed from the building.

No analysis available

No analysis available

None of the remarks discuss whether pets are allowed or restricted. With no explicit 'pets allowed' or 'no pets' language and no MLS NOPET flags, the building’s pet policy cannot be confirmed and is treated as not verified/likely restricted for now.

None of the 11 current public remarks explicitly mention a resident manager or on-site building manager. However, RESMAN appears in 7 of 11 current MLS listings and was previously supported by 6 of 9 listings, indicating consistent building-level MLS evidence rather than a single agent entry.

The units are marketed simply as condos suitable as a primary residence, vacation home, or investment, without any mention of hotel management or programs. The absence of condotel-specific language across all listings and MLS supports that this is not a condotel building.

Remarks describe the property as 'a 699 sqft condo at Oahu Surf II' with no reference to co-op structures. Combined with the lack of any COOTAX or co-op indicators in MLS, this strongly indicates the building is not a cooperative.