Ohualani

All available MLS property records (1 of 1) report the building as built in 1968. No remarks suggest reconstruction or a different construction year, so 1968 is accepted with high confidence.

MLS property data for this building shows a unit on the 7th floor and no evidence of higher floors. With only one listing and no explicit 'x-story' description in remarks, we infer the building has at least 7 floors and tentatively use 7 as the total.

No listing remarks reference the total number of units (e.g., 'x-unit building'), and MLS unit-count data is effectively blank (0). The actual total unit count is unknown; 0 is a placeholder rather than a reliable figure.

The listing mentions the unit is owner-occupied, but provides no building-level owner-occupancy percentage. Per the rule, retain the current numeric value when remarks do not confirm or contradict it; confidence is low.

The public remarks do not reference elevators. Per the rule, keep the current value when no remarks mention the field. Confidence is low because there is no explicit confirmation in 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.

The single MLS listing does not show central AC as an included association fee item and the public remarks are silent about AC being covered. This indicates AC costs are likely the responsibility of individual owners or are not centrally provided. Therefore, central AC is very likely not included in the fees.

Across the available listing (1/1), cable is not marked as included in the association fee and there is no textual mention of cable service being covered. This suggests residents contract and pay for cable separately. Given the lack of any indication otherwise, cable is very likely not included in the maintenance fees.

No public remarks mention common-area electricity and only 1 of 2 current listings includes OTCOEX. Historical review previously found no explicit indication that common electric is covered. Because evidence across agents is inconsistent and remarks do not confirm a change, this is treated as not included.

The remarks clearly state 'fee simple ownership,' indicating a condo-style tenure rather than a cooperative. The MLS does not mark co-op taxes as included in fees. Together this strongly supports that there are no cooperative taxes included in the maintenance fees.

The single available listing does not show electric service as part of the association-included utilities. No phrase like 'electricity included' or 'all utilities included' appears in the remarks. This makes it very likely that unit electricity is billed separately and not included in the HOA fees.

The MLS data does not indicate gas as an included utility, and the public remarks do not reference gas service at all. Buildings that include gas typically mention it as a selling point. This strongly suggests gas is not included in the maintenance fees.

No listings state 'hot water included' (0/2 HOTWAT) and one listing lists WTRHTR (water heater) among unit inclusions. Public remarks do not mention building hot water. Strong and consistent evidence across MLS data indicates hot water is not included in the HOA fee.

The building's single MLS listing does not list internet as part of the included HOA services. There is no mention of 'internet included' or 'Wi‑Fi included' in the remarks. This indicates residents likely pay for their own internet and it is not bundled in the maintenance fees.

The building (Ohualani in Waikiki) is not represented as having marina facilities in the MLS data, and the text focuses on location, lanai, parking, and interior features only. There are no suggestions that marina access or fees are part of the HOA. Thus, marina-related costs are almost certainly not included in the maintenance fees.

Both current listings (2/2) include 'SEWER' in association fee inclusions. Remarks do not contradict the MLS checkbox. Given consistent MLS checkbox data across listings and prior high confidence, sewer is included in the association fee.

Both current listings (2/2) list 'WATER' as included in the association fee. There are no remarks disputing this and historical data supports inclusion, so water is treated as included in the HOA fee.

In 1 listing, there is no reference to BBQ areas or grills, and the BBQ checkbox is unchecked (0/1). This strongly suggests the building does not provide shared BBQ facilities.

In 1/1 listing reviewed, there is no indication of bike storage in the amenities and no mention of bike rooms or bicycle storage in the remarks. This consistent lack of reference implies the building does not offer a designated bike storage facility.

The sole listing has MARINA unchecked (0/1) and lacks any description of boat docking or marina facilities. This indicates the building does not provide a boat dock or marina access.

The only listing has CRWSH unchecked (0/1) and lacks any reference to a car wash area. This strongly suggests the building does not offer a car wash facility.

The sole listing has CLUHOU unchecked (0/1) and no mention of a clubhouse. This strongly suggests there is no shared clubhouse in the building.

The single listing omits any mention of concierge or front desk services, focusing instead on in-unit features and price. With the MLS concierge field unchecked, it is very likely the building does not offer concierge service.

With DGPRK unchecked (0/1 listings) and no text about pet exercise areas, the building appears not to have a dedicated dog park or dog run.

In 1/1 listings, there are no references to a doorman or lobby attendant, and the MLS checkbox for doorman is not selected. This strongly suggests the building does not provide doorman service.

Across 1 current listing, there is no mention of an exercise room, fitness center, or gym, and EXEROO is unchecked (0/1 listings). With no corroborating historical evidence, the building is unlikely to offer a shared exercise room.

Across 1 listing, LIMSER is unchecked (0/1) with no hint of building-provided car or limo service. This indicates the building does not provide limousine or house car services.

Across 1 listing, MEEROO is unchecked (0/1) and there is no textual reference to meeting or conference facilities. This indicates the building does not offer a shared meeting room.

One listing explicitly describes a 137 sqft lanai and a covered lanai (quotes: "covered lanai," "Relax on the 137 sqft lanai"). MLS checkbox history shows PATDEC/COVPAT in 1 of 2 listings and previous analysis had high confidence, so evidence is strong that the building offers unit-level patio/deck amenities.

The single listing leaves WAJOPA unchecked (0/1) and does not reference on-site jogging or walking paths. This indicates the building does not provide a dedicated jogging/walking path.

The sole listing has PLYGRND unchecked (0/1) and includes no mention of a kids' play area. This suggests the building does not include a shared playground.

The single available listing does not reference any yard, fenced area, or private ground-level outdoor space. With PRIYAR unchecked in MLS amenities and the high-rise Waikiki context, the evidence strongly suggests the building does not offer private yard areas for units.

Across 1 listing, PUTGRE is not selected (0/1) and there is no mention of a putting green. This makes it very likely the building lacks a shared putting green.

With RECARE not selected (0/1 listings) and no language about an amenity deck or recreation area, the building likely does not offer a common recreation area.

1 listing shows RECROO unchecked (0/1) and provides no description of a rec room or game room. This indicates the building probably lacks a shared recreation room.

With RESTAU unchecked (0/1 listings) and no textual evidence of in-building dining, the building appears not to contain a restaurant or similar dining amenity.

The one listing shows ROOFDCK not selected (0/1) and contains no description of rooftop amenities. It is therefore very likely there are no common rooftop features for residents.

With SAUNA not selected (0/1 listings) and no textual mention of sauna facilities, it is very likely the building does not offer a shared sauna.

Across 1/1 recent listing, there is no mention of storage units, storage lockers, or extra storage in either the remarks or the MLS amenities fields. Given the complete absence of any storage-related references or checkboxes, this building is likely not marketed as having dedicated storage units.

The public remarks contain an explicit statement: 'built-in surfboard storage,' which directly confirms the presence of surfboard storage in the building/unit.

The single available listing has TENCOU unchecked (0/1) and no remarks about tennis. This makes it very likely the building has no tennis court.

Across 1 listing, TRACHU is unchecked (0/1) and there is no mention of a trash chute. This suggests the building likely does not have a central trash chute system, though individual floor setups are not described.

1/1 listing simply notes that the unit includes '1 parking space' with no mention of valet or valet parking. Combined with VALET being unchecked in MLS amenities, this strongly indicates the building does not offer valet service.

Across 1/1 listings, there are no phrases like 'gated,' 'fenced,' or 'walled' describing the property, and the relevant MLS amenity is not marked. This indicates the building is not characterized as having a perimeter wall or fence as a notable feature.

The single listing shows WHIRLP unchecked (0/1) and contains no references to a hot tub or whirlpool. This suggests there is no shared whirlpool or spa amenity.

Across 1/1 listings, none check a pool amenity and no remarks reference a swimming pool. Given that agents usually market a pool as a key feature if available, this absence strongly suggests the building does not offer a pool.

Since 0/1 listings indicate any pool and none mention a heated pool, there is no evidence that a heated pool exists in the building. Without a pool at all, a heated pool can be confidently ruled out.

Searched for 'salt water pool', 'saltwater', 'saline pool'. No pool is mentioned in the remarks and the building context indicates there is no pool, so value is false.

Multiple sources confirm in‑unit laundry: 2/2 current MLS listings list washer/dryer in inclusions and the public remarks explicitly state "the unit includes a washer and dryer" and "washer-dryer included." Evidence is consistent across listings and supports that some units in the building have in‑unit washers and dryers.

Across the single available listing, the MLS amenities do not include community laundry and the remarks only highlight in-unit washer/dryer as a rare feature, with no reference to shared laundry rooms or facilities. Given the complete lack of mention or checkbox data, community laundry is treated as absent for this building based on current evidence.

Searched for 'coin-op', 'card-operated', 'quarters', 'paid laundry', and similar terms. The remarks make no reference to any paid or shared laundry facilities; they note an in-unit washer and dryer.

Searched remarks for phrases like 'laundry on each floor', 'laundry room on every floor', and 'floor-by-floor laundry'. The listing instead explicitly states the unit includes a washer and dryer; there is no mention of community laundry facilities on every floor.

Parking is present: 1 listing's remarks states '1 parking space' and the MLS parking_features across current listings indicate stalls/garage. Evidence is strong across MLS checkbox data and confirmed in the agent remarks.

Assigned parking is indicated by MLS: 2 of 2 current listings show ASSIGN in parking_features. While the public remarks do not say 'assigned' explicitly, the consistent MLS checkbox data and prior high-confidence history support including assigned parking.

In the single listing, the MLS parking_features do not include any covered, carport, or garage codes, and the narrative only mentions '1 parking space' without describing it as covered. Given agents typically highlight covered or garage parking, this strongly suggests the building’s stalls are uncovered/open.

Searched for phrases like 'deeded parking', 'owned parking', or 'stall included in deed' but found none. The listing only mentions '1 parking space' without ownership details.

There are no references to EV charging or stations in the sole listing’s remarks, and the EVCHRG checkbox is not selected in the MLS data. Because EV charging is a notable amenity that agents almost always highlight, this is strong evidence the building does not offer EV charging at this time.

Searched for 'parking fee', 'monthly parking', or 'parking rental' and found no references. Cannot determine a monthly parking cost from the remarks.

The single MLS record does not include the GUEST parking feature, and the public remarks are silent on guest or visitor parking. Since guest parking is typically marketed when available, this strongly indicates the building lacks dedicated guest parking.

No secured or gated parking is mentioned in the listing remarks, and the SECENT checkbox is not marked in MLS. With 0/1 listings indicating secure entry, the balance of evidence suggests there is no dedicated secured-entry parking area.

The only listing just notes '1 parking space' and omits any reference to tandem or back-to-back parking. Given the TANDEM feature is not checked in MLS and tandem stalls are usually explicitly disclosed, it is very likely that the building does not use tandem parking.

Neither the checklist data nor the narrative remarks for the single listing mention valet or attended parking. Because valet service is a high-profile amenity that agents reliably advertise, this is extremely strong evidence that the building does not offer valet parking.

Searched for 'parking waitlist', 'waiting list', or similar terms; none were found. The listing simply notes one parking space without referencing a waitlist.

The sole listing does not mention a keyed or fob-access elevator or any restricted elevator security. With the related MLS amenity unchecked, this indicates the building likely does not have secure/keyed elevator access.

Searched for 'key card', 'fob access', 'card reader', 'electronic access'. The remarks focus on unit features and location and do not reference card/fob security.

Across 1/1 current listings, no remarks mention a security guard, on-site security personnel, or 24/7 security. The MLS amenities also do not indicate security guard service, suggesting the building does not offer staffed guard security.

Searched for 'security patrol', 'roving security', and similar terms. The listing does not mention any patrol or security guard services.

In 1/1 listings, there are no mentions of security cameras, CCTV, or video surveillance. Combined with the unchecked MLS security system field, this suggests the building does not advertise or provide video security as a feature.

Across 1 listing, no MLS checkboxes for central AC are selected and the remarks never mention 'central air', 'central AC', or 'HVAC'. Given that central AC is a major selling point that agents almost always advertise, this strongly suggests the building does not have central air conditioning. Evidence is limited to one agent but is consistent between the structured data and remarks.

In the single available listing, no split-AC-related inclusions (ACSPL) are marked and the narrative remarks contain no terms like 'split AC', 'mini-split', or 'ductless'. Agents generally highlight split systems when they exist, so the absence of both checkbox and textual mentions points to no split AC in this building. Evidence is limited but internally consistent.

The single listing has no ACWIUN flag set and contains no phrases such as 'window AC', 'window unit', or 'wall AC'. Given that other minor features are highlighted but AC is not, it is more likely that window AC is not a defined feature of the building. The conclusion is based on one consistent but limited data point.

Both current MLS listings (2 of 2) explicitly check 'CONCRE' in construction_materials, indicating a concrete/reinforced-concrete building. Public remarks do not mention construction materials, but the consistent checkbox across listings provides strong evidence this is a concrete building; no owner/site-visit verification contradicts this.

The single current listing omits double-wall construction and instead identifies concrete as the construction type. No remarks mention double-wall construction.

No current listings (1/1) indicate hollow tile construction, and remarks are silent on it. This makes hollow tile construction very unlikely for this building.

The single MLS listing does not list masonry/stucco and provides no textual support for it. This indicates the building is not categorized as masonry/stucco construction in MLS.

1/1 listings mark concrete construction and do not check steel frame. With no remarks indicating steel-frame construction, it is very likely this is not a steel-frame building in MLS terms.

The 1/1 current listing does not identify slab construction and provides no textual support for a slab foundation. Therefore, the building is very likely not recorded in MLS as slab construction.

No analysis available

1/1 current MLS listings omit wood-frame construction and instead mark concrete as the construction type. No remarks mention wood-frame construction, so it is very likely not applicable for this building.

Above-ground construction is not checked in the only MLS record and is not mentioned in remarks. This strongly suggests the building is not flagged as above-ground construction in MLS.

Brick construction is not checked in the 1/1 MLS listing and is not mentioned in remarks. This strongly suggests the building is not classified as brick construction.

Single-wall construction is not selected in the 1/1 MLS listing and is incompatible with the recorded concrete construction. No remarks suggest single-wall construction.

Reviewed remarks for STR-related terms; none are present. The listing emphasizes owner-occupant and investor use but does not state that short-term rentals are permitted.

Searched for 'hotel rental pool', 'hotel program', or brand-managed rental references; none found. Because STR was not indicated, hotel-pool participation is not supported by the remarks.

Looked for phrases like 'mandatory hotel pool', 'required to participate', or 'must be in rental program' and found none. The remarks contain no evidence of a mandatory rental-pool requirement.

The single available listing describes the unit as 'fee simple ownership.' Thus, the building clearly offers fee simple units (1 of 1 listings observed are Fee Simple), though other tenures may also exist.

The only available listing is explicitly fee simple and does not reference any lease or lease rent, and MLS tenure data shows no leasehold flag. With limited data, we treat leasehold as not evidenced in this building, but with moderate (not absolute) confidence.

The remarks say 'fee simple ownership', so land is not leasehold and there is no lease expiry year to extract.

Searched remarks for 'VA approved', 'VA financing', or 'VA loans'; none found. Because there is no mention in the listing remarks, VA approval cannot be confirmed.

The remarks do not discuss the building's insurance coverage level. With no explicit statement that the HOA provides full (walls-in) insurance, this is set to false with medium-low confidence.

No current listing or remarks indicate the presence of a fire sprinkler system, and the relevant MLS checkbox is unchecked. Because agents frequently omit this detail even when present, this is a low-confidence 'false' based on lack of evidence rather than proof of absence.

There is no indication in the remarks that the building has passed a fire/life safety evaluation. Absence of any explicit statement leads to a default negative assignment 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

Across 1 listing, no remarks or MLS view fields mention ocean, water, or makai views. Evidence is limited to a single unit description focused on location and interior features, so ocean views cannot be confirmed.

Both current MLS listings include MOUNTA in view fields and the public remarks explicitly say "unobstructed views ... and Mountains," indicating mountain views are offered in the building. Evidence comes from multiple MLS view fields plus the agent's remarks, so confidence is high.

For the single listing reviewed, there are no mentions of Diamond Head, DH, or crater views in remarks or view fields. There is insufficient evidence that any units offer Diamond Head views.

One of the two current MLS listings lists CITY in the view fields (1/2), but the public remarks do not mention a city or downtown view. Because only a single MLS entry references city views and remarks are silent, evidence is moderate that the building offers city views in at least some units.

The single listing provides no indication of coastal or shoreline vistas. Thus coastline views are not verifiable at this time.

The single listing does not reference garden, courtyard, or landscaped views in remarks or view fields. There is no clear evidence of garden views in this building.

Across 1 listing, nothing indicates a golf course outlook. The absence of golf-related view terms means golf course views are not currently verifiable.

Both current MLS listings indicate MARCAN (marina/canal) views and the public remarks explicitly state "unobstructed views of the Ala Wai," confirming marina/harbor/canal views are available. Multiple sources (MLS view fields and agent remarks) consistently support this feature.

With only 1 listing and no references to sunrise or morning light, sunrise views cannot be established for this building.

For the 1 listing, there is no explicit or implied reference to sunset or evening views. Current evidence does not support confirming sunset views for the building.

Across 1 listing, there are no mentions of a cemetery, which agents usually disclose due to sensitivity. Given this and the lack of any cemetery view codes, it is very likely the building does not have cemetery views.

Searched for phrases like 'fireworks view', 'see fireworks from lanai', or 'watch fireworks from unit'. The remarks describe views of the Ala Wai, golf course, and mountains but do not mention fireworks.

No analysis available

No analysis available

The only listing provides no information about pets and MLS does not mark a 'no pets' restriction. With no explicit language either allowing or prohibiting pets, there is insufficient evidence to confirm that pets are allowed, so this field is treated as not confirmed/false by default.

The available listing does not reference a resident/on-site manager, and the corresponding MLS amenity is not selected. Given typical underreporting of this feature, we currently assume no resident manager with low confidence.

1/1 listing frames the property as owner-occupied with no language about hotel rental pools, front desk, or condotel/condo-hotel operation. With CONDOT not selected in the MLS style data, it is very likely the building is not operated as a condotel.

The listing clearly notes 'fee simple ownership,' which aligns with condominium, not co-op, ownership. With no cooperative terminology in the remarks or MLS fee-includes data, the building is almost certainly not a co-op.