Punchbowl Place
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.
Punchbowl Place
Building Overview
Punchbowl Place in Nuuanu-Punchbowl, built 1986 with concrete construction; pets allowed and short-term rentals not permitted.
About Punchbowl Place
Punchbowl Place is located in the Nuuanu-Punchbowl neighborhood. According to available records, the building was constructed in 1986 and is of concrete construction. MLS-sourced data does not specify unit count, floor plans, or building height, so buyers should verify size and layout details with listing documents or the managing entity.
Based on MLS data, key policies for the building include that pets are allowed and short-term rentals are not permitted. The management company is listed as unknown in the MLS records. No explicit list of amenities (such as pool, gym, or common areas) is provided in the available data.
Additional details such as parking provisions, maintenance or association fees, and specific lease or rental restrictions are not included in the MLS summary. Buyers and agents should confirm parking, fee structures, management contact, and any other property-specific rules directly with the seller, HOA, or management before making decisions. This description is based on MLS data and should be independently verified.
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
I searched for owner-occupancy percentages and descriptive hints about owner-occupied units, but found none. The remarks do mention investors and first-time buyers, but that is not enough to estimate owner occupancy.
I searched the public remarks for explicit elevator language and found none. There is no evidence in the listings to confirm the number of elevators, so this remains unknown.
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
5 of 6 current listings list OTCOEX (common area electricity) in association_fee_includes, but none of the public remarks explicitly state 'common area electricity' or 'common electric.' Evidence is consistent across multiple MLS entries (may be agent-entered checkboxes), so inclusion is likely but not strongly confirmed by remarks.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Across the reviewed listings, none mention hot water being included, while the MLS pattern strongly favors WTRHTR in unit inclusions. The repeated presence of water heaters and absence of HOTWAT suggests the maintenance fee does not include hot water. This appears to be a consistent building-level pattern rather than a one-off agent typo.
No analysis available
No analysis available
All current listings consistently show sewer included in the association fee. Public remarks do not explicitly say it, but the MLS data is unanimous and high-confidence. This looks like a stable building-level inclusion.
All current listings list water as included in the maintenance fee. Although the public remarks do not explicitly mention water, the MLS pattern is fully consistent across listings. This is strong evidence that the building includes water in the fee.
BBQ is supported by the MLS history and at least one public remark explicitly mentioning a "BBQ area." The rest of the remarks do not add conflicting evidence, so this appears to be a real shared amenity rather than a copy-paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No listing remarks reference a car wash facility, so the current evidence does not validate this amenity. The MLS checkbox data showing 3/7 listings with CRWSH looks potentially copy-pasted or unverified, so the feature is not supported from the remarks available.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Evidence comes from 1 of 5 recent listings that explicitly describes a 'spacious outdoor patio' for a ground-floor unit, plus another remark noting a shared 'BBQ area.' MLS checkbox presence is limited (1/5) and historical confidence is not available, so inclusion is based on explicit unit-level remark(s) and implied common outdoor amenity across listings.
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
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
In-unit laundry is strongly supported. Several listings explicitly mention 'in-unit washer/dryer' or 'washer and dryer in the unit,' and the current MLS data shows washer/dryer in inclusions across all listings. The evidence is consistent across multiple remarks and appears to be standard copy-paste MLS language rather than a one-off statement.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Assigned parking is supported by both MLS data and remarks. At least 2 listings explicitly mention an "assigned covered parking stall," while the current MLS set shows 5/7 with ASSIGN. The evidence is strong and consistent across multiple listings, not just a single agent note.
Covered parking is clearly confirmed across the listing set. Multiple remarks mention "secured covered parking stall" and "secured gated covered parking," and the current MLS data shows covered/garage parking in all 7 listings. This is strong building-level evidence with repeated confirmation from different listings.
The listings consistently describe the parking as secured, covered, assigned, or gated. I did not find language indicating the stall is deeded to the unit, so deeded parking is not supported by the remarks.
No analysis available
I searched for any parking cost language, including monthly parking fees or rental charges, and found none. The remarks show parking is included as a feature, but do not specify any separate parking fee.
No analysis available
Multiple listings' remarks (phrases like "secured building," "secured building entry," and "gated parking") and prior high-confidence data support that the building has secured/gated parking or a secured entry. Evidence appears across several agents' remarks and aligns with MLS checkbox data.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for references to a parking waitlist, parking waiting list, or joining a list for parking. The remarks do not mention any waitlist system, so there is no evidence of one.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Window AC is strongly supported for this building. At least 4 separate public remarks explicitly mention "window A/C" / "window ac," and the current MLS data has ACWIUN checked in all 7/7 listings. The evidence is consistent across multiple listings and agents, so this appears to be a real building/unit feature.
Concrete construction is strongly supported by the MLS data: 7 out of 7 current listings indicate CONCRE in construction_materials. None of the public remarks explicitly mention construction type, but there is also no evidence contradicting the MLS, so this appears to be a stable building-level attribute rather than a copy-paste anomaly.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Two of six current MLS listings include SLAB in construction_materials, but none of the public remarks mention 'concrete slab' or similar foundation details. With no historical confidence and no remark evidence, the slab foundation is not sufficiently confirmed as a building-level feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Only 1 of 6 current MLS listings lists ABOGRO and none of the public remarks reference 'above ground' construction or materials. With no historical confidence and no remark corroboration, the evidence does not support including this as a building-level feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for explicit short-term rental approval language as well as restrictions like minimum-stay rules or owner-occupant-only rules. The public remarks do not address STR policy, so I cannot confirm STRs are allowed.
I looked for hotel pool or hotel rental program language such as Hilton pool, Ritz pool, or managed-by-hotel references. None appear in the remarks, and there is no evidence of hotel-pool participation.
I searched for statements indicating mandatory participation in any rental pool program. There are no such remarks, and because STR support is not established, mandatory pool participation is also not supported.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for phrases such as lease expires, ground lease ends, leasehold, or any 4-digit expiry year. Nothing in the remarks indicates the building is leasehold or provides a lease expiration date.
I searched the listings for any reference to VA loan eligibility, VA approval, or similar financing language and found none. Based on the public remarks, there is no evidence that the building is VA-approved.
I searched the remarks for HOA insurance or walls-in coverage language and found no references. There is no evidence to confirm the building is fully insured.
No analysis available
I looked for any fire/life safety compliance language in the remarks and found nothing explicit. Without a direct statement, I cannot confirm that the building passed FLSE or a similar inspection.
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 listings mention ocean or water views (0/5). Remarks reference '180 degree views' and 'island breezes' but do not say 'ocean', 'water', 'Pacific Ocean' or 'makai', and MLS view_descriptions list OCEAN = 0, suggesting no building-level ocean view feature.
No listings mention mountain views (0/5). Remarks note expansive '180 degree views' but contain no 'mountain', 'Koolau', or 'mauka' language, and MLS view_descriptions show MOUNTA = 0, so mountain view is not supported.
No analysis available
No listings explicitly state a city/downtown view (0 of 6 current listings). Remarks reference '180 degree views' and proximity to 'Downtown Honolulu' but never use 'city view' or 'downtown view', so the language is ambiguous and likely descriptive rather than a confirmed building feature. Given prior high-confidence absence and current MLS data, the building should not be marked as having a city view.
0/5 listings explicitly mention coastline or shoreline views. Remarks include '180 degree views' but do not reference the coastline or shoreline, and MLS view_descriptions show COASTL = 0, so coastline view is not supported.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
One of seven current listings explicitly includes SUNSET in the MLS view description, while four list NONE. The public remarks only mention broad phrases like '180 degree views' and 'views and ambiance like this,' without directly confirming sunset or western exposure. This looks like a limited but plausible building-level feature rather than a strong, repeatedly confirmed one.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Evidence for a resident manager is present in 1 of 7 public remarks and in the current MLS amenities on 2 listings. The clearest phrase is "resident manager on property," which directly matches the feature definition. The MLS checkbox appears to be partially populated, but the explicit remark supports that the building does have an on-site manager.
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.