Plantation View Hale
Preliminary Information – Full Audit Pending
This buildings features were determined from publicly available data, including MLS listings. While we cross-referenced additional data sources, it still likely contains incomplete or inaccurate information, as it has not yet been personally verified.
Once a building has been fully audited, this page will be replaced with an in-depth analysis featuring verified details and photos of every key feature.
Until then, we provide a data‑driven overview that blends statistical analysis of the checkbox selections agents make in MLS with an AI‑powered read of their public remarks—yielding a clearer picture of the building than raw listings alone.
If this building is important to your search, you can help prioritize it for a full audit by requesting one below. To see what a complete report looks like, check out the example full report.
Plantation View Hale
Building Overview
Plantation View Hale in Waipahu (built 1964) — concrete construction with pool, BBQ area, and resident manager. Window AC; assigned parking.
About Plantation View Hale
Based on MLS data, Plantation View Hale is located in the Waipahu neighborhood and was built in 1964. The MLS records indicate the building is constructed of concrete. Size and unit count are not specified in the available MLS data.
According to available records, on-site amenities include a pool, a BBQ area, and a resident manager. Air conditioning is by window units. The building does not allow pets and short-term rentals are not permitted.
Parking is available with assigned stalls and guest parking. Management company information is listed as unknown in the MLS. This summary is based on MLS data; buyers should verify all details, fees, rules, and current conditions with the listing agent or management.
Building Features & Data Confidence
All features from MLS data with AI-assisted confidence analysis. Click each category to expand and see details.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for a numerical owner-occupancy percentage and descriptions such as "majority owner occupied" or "highly owner occupied." No public remark provides owner-occupancy information, so the percentage remains unknown.
Multiple listings characterize the building as a walk-up community, which strongly supports that it has no elevators. No remarks mention any elevators or contradict the current value of 0.
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.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Common-area expenses are supported by repeated remarks, including “common areas,” “common area expenses,” and “common area maintenance.” The feature also appears in 17/20 current MLS records, indicating strong building-level evidence rather than a single agent's entry.
No analysis available
At least 10 listings explicitly say the maintenance fee includes “electricity,” including multiple independently worded remarks. The 17/20 MLS frequency and prior high confidence strongly confirm this inclusion.
No public remark explicitly states that gas is included in the maintenance fee. Only 5 of 20 listings contain GAS, compared with much stronger and repeatedly described evidence for other utilities, so gas should be omitted as a building feature.
Hot-water inclusion is explicitly mentioned in several listings, including renovated and non-renovated units, indicating a building-level benefit. Although 5 listings also show WTRHTR, the repeated direct remarks and 14/20 HOTWAT records provide stronger evidence that hot water is included.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Multiple agents explicitly describe fees covering “electricity, sewer, and water” or “electricity, hot water, sewer, and common area maintenance.” With 19/20 current MLS records and strong historical support, sewer inclusion is nearly certain.
Water inclusion is repeatedly stated across the remarks, including “cold water,” “water, sewer, electricity,” and “electricity, water, hot water, sewer.” The 19/20 current MLS frequency and prior high confidence make this a strongly confirmed building feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence 88%: 2/12 MLS entries include patio/deck (PATDEC/COVPAT), and remarks reference lanais such as a 'freshly painted lanai' and a 'Private, gated front lanai entry for exclusive use,' which function as patios/decks. Multiple units having lanais indicates the building offers patio/deck-type spaces.
Confidence 90%: Only 1/12 listings has WAJOPA checked, and no remarks across 12 listings mention walking/jogging paths. Such an amenity would typically be promoted, so the solitary MLS indication is likely a mistaken checkbox.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence 90%: Only 1/12 listings shows PUTGRE in amenities, while 11/12 do not, and none of the public remarks for any listing mention a putting green. Given that a putting green is a notable amenity agents typically highlight, the single MLS checkmark is likely an error.
No analysis available
The MLS checkbox appears in 1/20 listings, but 0/20 public remarks mention a recreation/rec/game/multi-purpose room. Remarks repeatedly reference pool, courtyard, community laundry and resident manager, but contain no explicit "recreation room" language — likely the checkbox was added in error rather than reflecting a building amenity.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence 72%: 1/12 listings have storage in building amenities and 1/12 have storage in unit_features, indicating that at least some units are assigned storage or have designated storage areas. While remarks do not highlight it, repeated MLS coding from different listings implies the feature exists.
Confidence 90%: No listing mentions any storage specifically for surfboards.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
At least 5 listings explicitly mention a building or community pool, including “the building features a pool,” “community pool,” and “swimming pool (empty at this time). This strongly corroborates the current MLS data, which marks pool-related amenities in all 20 of 20 listings, across multiple agents.
No analysis available
Confidence 80%: The building is said to have 'a pool' but there is no indication that it is a saltwater pool.
No analysis available
Community laundry is strongly supported across the listing data: 14 of 20 current listings include the COMLAU amenity, and one explicitly describes "community laundry." The checkbox appears across multiple listings and is consistent with the building-level amenity, rather than being contradicted by the remarks.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Parking is strongly supported across the building: at least 16 listings explicitly mention a parking stall, open parking, guest parking, or parking situated outside the unit. Key remarks include “one parking stall,” “1 open parking,” “ample street parking,” and “designated parking space,” confirming this is a building-wide offering rather than an isolated claim.
Assigned parking is consistently supported by both MLS data and remarks from many agents, with at least 13 listings explicitly describing an assigned or dedicated stall. Representative phrases include “one assigned parking stall,” “1 dedicated parking stall,” “assigned open parking stall,” “designated parking space,” and “assigned parking stall is not too far from the unit.”
No analysis available
I searched for deeded parking, owned parking, parking included in the deed, and owned-stall language. Assigned parking does not establish deeded ownership, and no explicit deeded-parking statement was found.
No analysis available
I searched for monthly parking fees, parking charges, and additional parking costs. The remarks discuss assigned and guest parking but identify no fee for parking.
Guest parking is available in parts of the project: 7/20 MLS entries list GUEST and multiple unit remarks mention '3 guest stalls' or 'visitor/guest parking' and 'visitors parking stalls and street parking are plentiful'. Evidence is consistent though not universal, so confidence is high but slightly lower than for building parking/assigned stalls.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched the listings for parking waitlist and waiting-list language. The remarks describe assigned stalls, guest stalls, and street parking, but no waitlist system.
No analysis available
Confidence 80%: None of the remarks mention card/fob access, keyed elevators, or controlled entry via cards.
No analysis available
Confidence 80%: Listings mention a resident manager but do not mention any security patrols.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
At least 9 of the building's MLS listings and numerous agent remarks explicitly mention window A/Cs and the $75/month charge (e.g., "Association charges $75 per window AC (utility assessment)", "window AC in living room", "AC can be added for an additional $75/month"). Evidence is consistent across multiple listings and agents, indicating some units have or are allowed to install window air conditioners.
Concrete construction is strongly supported by current MLS data, with 16 of 20 listings reporting CONCRE. Remarks describing "CMU walls" and "clean tapered CMU walls" further support concrete masonry construction, although agents do not consistently state the construction type in public remarks.
Historical data supported double-wall construction (prior high confidence) and 7 of 20 current MLS listings check DOUWAL, but none of the public remarks explicitly state 'double wall' or 'double-wall construction'. Evidence is mixed: historical/MLS checkbox support exists, but remarks do not confirm, so confidence is moderate.
No public remarks reference 'hollow tile' (0 of 20), despite 10 of 20 MLS records checking HOLTIL; given the historical low confidence and absent supporting remarks, there is weak evidence for hollow tile construction and it is likely an MLS checkbox inconsistency.
Masonry/stucco construction is supported by 9 of 20 current MLS records listing MASSTU. Several independent remarks explicitly reference "CMU walls" and "clean tapered CMU walls," making the evidence stronger than checkbox data alone, though the feature is not mentioned in every listing.
No analysis available
Limited, mixed evidence: 3 of 20 MLS records list SLAB but no public remarks explicitly state "concrete slab" or similar. Because a small number of listings indicate slab foundation, the building may offer slab foundations for some units, but the evidence is only implied and not strongly corroborated in remarks.
No analysis available
Minimal evidence for wood-frame: only 2 of 20 MLS records list WOOFRA and none of the public remarks describe 'wood frame' or 'wood frame construction' (remarks repeatedly reference CMU). Given the lack of corroborating remarks and low checkbox prevalence, wood-frame construction is unlikely but not conclusively ruled out.
Only 3 of 20 current MLS records check ABOGRO, but 0 of 20 public remarks mention 'above ground' or similar phrasing. Without remarks or historical support, evidence is weak and the building should not be treated as having a documented 'above ground' construction feature.
Confidence 88%: Only 1/12 listings marks BRICK in construction_materials, whereas the majority reference CONCRE and MASSTU, and remarks describe 'CMU walls' (concrete masonry units), which are typical for this type of low-rise in Hawaii. The lone brick indication conflicts with the broader data and is likely an input error.
No analysis available
I searched for short-term-rental authorization, vacation rentals, NUC, TVU, legal STR, and minimum-stay rules. No qualifying authorization was found; general references to renting do not establish STR permission.
I searched for hotel pool and hotel rental-program terminology, including managed-by-hotel and branded programs. Nothing indicates participation, and the STR prerequisite is not satisfied.
I searched for mandatory rental-pool, required participation, and no-opt-out language. None was found, and mandatory participation cannot apply without established STR and hotel-pool participation.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for leasehold, ground lease, lease expiration, and renewal language. The listings instead identify the ownership as fee simple, so no lease-expiry year applies.
I searched for explicit VA approval, VA financing, and VA-loan acceptance language. The references to VA buyers are marketing language and do not establish building approval.
I searched for statements that the building is fully insured, comprehensively insured, fully covered, or provides walls-in coverage. The remarks discuss maintenance fees and included utilities but do not address HOA building insurance.
No analysis available
I searched for explicit references to a fire/life safety evaluation, FLSE passage, fire safety certification, life-safety compliance, or passed fire inspection. None of the public remarks mention this feature, so there is no evidence to confirm that the evaluation passed.
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
No analysis available
Across the remarks provided, there are 0 explicit mountain-view mentions. The visible view references are to Diamond Head, Makai, neighborhood, and city views, which do not establish a mountain view feature for the building. This appears to be absent from the current remarks rather than a copy-paste building amenity.
No analysis available
City views are explicitly mentioned in at least 1 listing, with the phrase 'Enjoy city views from your private lanai.' Historical MLS context also previously indicated city-view listings, so the evidence is consistent and credible. This looks like a real building-level offering present in some units, not a copy-paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence 88%: 0/12 listings have SUNRIS in view_descriptions, and none of the remarks reference sunrise-facing or morning sun views despite detailed marketing text for many renovated units. If notable sunrise views were present, they would likely be highlighted, so their complete absence suggests this is not a recognized feature.
None of the provided public remarks mention sunset views, evening sun, western exposure, or Friday night fireworks. Some listings mention Diamond Head, makai, city, neighborhood, or general lanai views, but these do not establish sunset exposure; the 2 SUNSET checkbox entries are outweighed by 7 NONE entries and the consistent historical absence of supporting remarks.
No analysis available
Confidence 90%: No remarks mention viewing fireworks from the building or units.
No analysis available
No analysis available
The building should be marked as having a resident manager. Historical MLS data shows RESMAN in amenities on 6 of 20 listings, and one current remark explicitly says "Amenities include an on-site resident manager." This is consistent with a genuine building-level feature rather than a one-off copy-paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence levels are based on MLS checkbox data and AI analysis of listing remarks. High = strong evidence, Medium = some evidence, Low = limited or conflicting evidence. Buyers should always verify critical details independently.