Seashore

Consistent MLS data across all listings report the building was constructed in 1967. Remarks only mention interior renovations (e.g., 2021 and 2024) and do not contradict the 1967 build date.

Across listings, unit floor numbers include 3, 8, 9, and 10, with one unit explicitly described as being on the 'top floor'. This strongly indicates the building has 10 floors total. No remarks suggest any higher floor count.

None of the five listings include phrases like 'X-unit building' or 'one of X units'. Without any explicit unit-count references, the total unit number cannot be determined from current data.

Listings emphasize legal short-term and daily vacation rentals and describe the building as a vacation/short-term rental property, suggesting significant non-owner occupancy but without any numeric percentage stated. With no explicit owner-occupancy figure in the remarks, the existing 16% value is kept with low confidence.

Remarks consistently confirm there are two elevators in the building. This matches the current building context, so the value is retained with very high confidence.

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.

None of the 5 listings mention central AC or air conditioning being included in the maintenance fee. Combined with 0/5 MLS entries marking central AC in association_fee_includes, this strongly indicates that central AC is not covered by the fees.

2 of 5 listings clearly state that cable or cable TV is included in the maintenance fee, and another says the HOA includes all utilities, implying cable is covered. Example phrases include 'cable & internet' and 'cable tv, internet'. This repeated mention across different listings suggests cable service is indeed included in the fees.

At least 1 listing states that the monthly fee includes 'common area expenses', and 2/5 MLS records include other common expenses under association_fee_includes. Given the building's shared spaces, this indicates common area electricity is paid through the maintenance fees.

None of the listings reference cooperative ownership or co-op taxes, and the MLS data shows no entries with co-op taxes included. This strongly indicates that cooperative taxes are not included in the maintenance fees for this building.

Electricity being included in the HOA/maintenance fee is directly stated in at least 3 listings, and another notes that the HOA covers all utilities. With 5/5 MLS entries also marking electricity as included, there is very strong evidence that electricity is covered by the fees.

Listings that list utilities included in the fee consistently mention electricity, water, hot water, sewer, cable, and internet, but never gas. Together with 0/5 MLS entries for gas, this indicates gas is not part of the included utilities.

At least 3 listings clearly state that hot water is included in the maintenance or HOA fee. With 5/5 MLS entries marking hot water and no evidence of individual water heaters, hot water is clearly included in the building’s maintenance fee.

2 of 5 listings specify that internet service is included in the maintenance fee. This repeated, explicit mention across different units supports that internet is covered by the building’s HOA fees.

Across all 5 listings, there are no mentions of marina access or boat-related amenities, and no MLS checkboxes indicate marina inclusion. This strongly suggests that marina costs are not part of the maintenance fee for this building.

At least 3 listings list sewer among the included utilities in the HOA/maintenance fee, and another notes that all utilities are included. With 5/5 MLS entries confirming sewer, it is clearly covered by the maintenance fees.

Water is explicitly mentioned as an included utility in several listings, and one emphasizes that all utilities are included. The fact that 5/5 MLS entries also mark water as included confirms that water charges are covered by the maintenance fee.

None of the 5 listings mention BBQ, barbecue, grills, or an outdoor grilling area, and BBQ is unchecked in all current MLS amenity lists. Given how prominently agents market BBQ areas in resort locations, this strongly suggests the building does not have shared BBQ facilities.

None of the 5 provided listings mention any form of bicycle storage (bike room, racks, or bike/surfboard storage) in remarks or amenities, while consistently highlighting other building amenities. This pattern across multiple independent listings strongly suggests the building does not provide dedicated bike storage. With no historical evidence to the contrary, bike_storage is set to false.

The building is repeatedly described as "just a block from Waikiki Beach" and near beach activities, with no indication of direct waterfront, boat dock, marina, slips, or mooring. Given the location description and MARINA being unchecked in every MLS entry, it is almost certain the building does not have a boat dock or marina access.

None of the 5 listings reference an auto wash, car wash station, or vehicle wash area in the building or parking facilities. With CRWSH not selected in any current MLS amenity list, it is very likely there is no dedicated car wash amenity in this building.

All 5 listings omit any reference to a clubhouse, club house, community center, or recreation center, and the MLS amenity checkbox for CLUHOU is never selected. Clubhouses are major amenities that agents typically highlight, so this strongly indicates the building does not have a clubhouse.

Across all listings, there is no mention of concierge or front desk services; only a general 'secured lobby' is cited. With all MLS amenity data also lacking concierge, it is very likely that the building has no concierge service.

None of the 5 listings mention a dog park, dog run, pet area, or any on-site pet exercise space. Given that DGPRK is also not checked in any MLS records, it is very likely this building does not provide a dedicated dog park or pet area.

All five listings describe a secured lobby but omit any reference to a doorman or lobby attendant, and the doorman amenity is unchecked in every MLS entry. This combination strongly indicates the building does not provide doorman service.

Across 5 listings, none mention an exercise room, fitness center, gym, or similar facility, and 0 of 5 current MLS entries have EXEROO checked. In Waikiki, a gym is a major selling point and would typically be highlighted if present, so it is very likely this building does not offer a shared exercise room.

Across all listings, there is no mention of limo service, house car, courtesy car, or chauffeur services; the property is positioned as a small "secured boutique vacation building" rather than a full-service luxury tower. Given this and the absence of LIMSER in MLS amenities, the building almost certainly does not offer limousine or house car service.

Across the 5 sets of remarks, there is no description of a meeting room, conference room, board room, or community/hospitality room. With MEEROO also absent from the amenities in all current MLS entries, it is very likely the building does not offer a shared meeting room.

At least four listings describe units with a 'lanai', including phrases like 'Corner unit with a lanai' and 'With a generous lanai'. This indicates that the building offers patio/deck-style outdoor space on the units, even though agents did not check the patio/deck MLS amenity box. Buyers seeking buildings with balconies/lanai would find this building relevant.

The remarks reference proximity to Waikiki Beach and nearby activities but do not describe any on-site jogging path, walking path, or fitness trail. With WAJOPA not selected in any of the 5 MLS amenity lists, it is very likely the building does not have its own jogging/walking path.

The building is described as a boutique vacation property near Waikiki Beach, with no mention of a playground, children's play area, kids play area, or tot lot. With PLYGRND absent from every current MLS amenity list, it is very likely the building does not have a children's playground.

Across all remarks, there are detailed descriptions of lanais, views, and building amenities but no reference to any yard or private yard areas. Given the high-rise, resort-zoned Waikiki context and the absence of MLS PRIYAR, it is very likely this building does not offer private yard space. This is best treated as not a yard-type property.

Across all 5 listings, there is no reference to a putting green, golf practice area, or similar facility. Because PUTGRE is also not checked in any MLS entry and a putting green would be a strong marketing point, it is almost certain this building does not have a putting green.

None of the 5 listings mention a recreation area, amenity deck, or similar shared outdoor recreation space; they focus instead on proximity to Waikiki Beach and unit features. With RECARE unchecked in 0 of 5 MLS entries, it is very likely the building does not have a dedicated common recreation area.

The 5 listings only mention a secured lobby, two elevators, and community laundry, with no reference to a recreation room, game room, or multi-purpose/entertainment room. Since RECROO is also never checked in the current MLS data, it is very likely there is no shared recreation room in this building.

Several listings note that the building is "conveniently located to shopping and many restaurants," clearly referring to neighborhood dining, not in-building facilities. Since no listing claims an on-site restaurant or café and RESTAU is never checked in MLS, the building almost certainly does not have its own restaurant.

The listings highlight lanai views and proximity to Waikiki Beach but never mention a rooftop deck, rooftop terrace, or any rooftop amenities. Since ROOFDCK is not selected in any of the MLS amenity lists, the building almost certainly does not have shared rooftop amenities.

Across 5 remarks, there is no mention of a sauna, steam room, dry sauna, or wet sauna. With SAUNA absent from all current MLS amenity checkboxes, it is very likely the building does not offer a sauna facility.

All 5 listings omit any mention of storage units or extra storage in both MLS amenities and remarks, even though agents clearly describe other building features like 'secured lobby, two elevators and community laundry.' This consistent omission across multiple agents suggests the building does not offer dedicated storage units or lockers. In the absence of any contrary historical data or explicit remarks, this is likely not a building amenity.

Searched remarks for 'surfboard storage', 'board storage', 'surf storage', and similar phrases. There is no indication that the building itself offers surfboard storage facilities, so this feature is marked as not present based on absence of evidence in the public remarks.

Across 5 separate listings, there is no mention of tennis courts or tennis facilities, and TENCOU is unchecked in every MLS record. Tennis courts are a large, highly marketable amenity, so their complete absence from both remarks and checkboxes indicates the building does not offer tennis courts.

All 5 listings consistently highlight a secured lobby, two elevators, and community laundry as the core building amenities, without mentioning a trash chute or garbage chute. Combined with TRACHU being unselected in all current MLS records, this strongly suggests the building does not have a common trash chute system.

All listings emphasize features like secured lobby, two elevators, and community laundry, with no indication of valet or valet parking. Combined with the absence of the VALET amenity in the MLS, this strongly suggests there is no valet service at this building. Buyers should not expect valet here.

No remarks describe the property as gated, fenced, or otherwise enclosed, and MLS amenity data does not indicate any wall or fence features. This strongly suggests the building does not have a perimeter wall, fence, or gated property amenity.

The listings do not mention a whirlpool, hot tub, jacuzzi, or spa among the building amenities, focusing instead on the lanai, views, and proximity to Waikiki Beach. Since WHIRLP is not checked in any MLS amenity list, it is very likely the building does not have a shared whirlpool or hot tub.

Five separate listings for this building emphasize being a block from Waikiki Beach and mention features like secured lobby, elevators, and community laundry, but none mention a pool. MLS amenities data also show 0/5 listings with any pool-related amenity checked. This consistent absence across multiple agents and listings strongly indicates the building has no pool.

No listing remarks reference a heated pool or similar feature, and MLS data show 0/5 listings with HEAPOO or HEATED pool features. Combined with the strong evidence that the building lacks any pool at all, this supports concluding that there is no heated pool.

Public remarks were searched for any indication of a salt water/saltwater/saline pool and none were found. Because this feature is only determined from public remarks, and there are no references to a pool at all, the building is assumed not to have a salt water pool, but with low confidence.

None of the 5 listings mention in-unit washer/dryer or 'in-unit laundry', and the MLS inclusions show 0/5 with washer/dryer. Remarks instead highlight a community laundry, suggesting laundry is shared rather than inside units. Based on consistent data across multiple units, in-unit laundry is very unlikely to be present in this building.

Three listings explicitly state 'secured lobby, two elevators and community laundry' or 'building has ... a community laundry'. All 5 MLS entries have the community laundry amenity checked, and the language appears to come from multiple agents, not just a single copy-paste. This provides strong, building-wide evidence that shared/community laundry facilities are available.

While community laundry is mentioned, there is no indication that it requires payment, such as 'coin-op' or 'card-operated.' I looked for any reference to coins, cards, or laundry fees and found none. In the absence of explicit evidence, the laundry is treated as not confirmed paid-use.

Listings repeatedly mention that the building has 'community laundry' but never specify that it is located on each floor. I searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor,' 'laundry room on every floor,' or 'floor-by-floor laundry' and found none. Given the lack of explicit wording, this feature is assumed not to exist.

Across 5 listings, parking_features is consistently set to NONE and there are no mentions of on-site parking, garages, or stalls in the remarks. Agents emphasize location, views, and secured lobby but never reference parking options. This pattern strongly suggests the building does not provide on-site parking.

None of the 5 listings mention assigned or reserved parking, and MLS parking_features never include ASSIGN. Given parking itself is marked as NONE, there is no evidence of any assigned or deeded stalls in this building.

All 5 listings lack any COVERE/CO1/CO2/CO3PLUS/GARAGE flags and make no reference to covered or enclosed parking. With parking itself absent, there is strong evidence that the building does not offer covered parking.

None of the public remarks reference deeded or owned parking, included stalls, or parking conveyed with the unit. Based on this absence and no prior data, deeded parking is assumed not to be included, but this is not certain.

Across 5 listings, there are no mentions of EV charging, Tesla chargers, or similar amenities, and EVCHRG is never selected in parking_features. This consistent absence indicates the building does not provide EV charging facilities.

The remarks describe utilities covered in the maintenance fee but do not mention parking fees or rental costs. Without explicit information, the existence or amount of any parking fee is unknown.

The 5 listings consistently omit any reference to guest or visitor parking, and GUEST is never checked in MLS parking_features. This suggests the building does not have dedicated guest parking areas.

Several listings highlight a 'secured lobby,' but none describe gated or access-controlled parking, and SECENT is never selected in parking_features. The security appears limited to the building entry, not to any parking facility, so secured parking entry is not present.

Across all 5 listings, there is no mention of tandem parking configurations and TANDEM is never flagged in MLS data. Combined with the absence of any on-site parking, this indicates the building does not offer tandem parking.

The remarks focus on short-term vacation rental zoning, views, and secured lobby, but never mention valet or attended parking, and VALET is not checked in any listing. This consistent omission shows the building does not provide valet parking services.

Listing descriptions do not reference any system for assigning parking via a waitlist. In the absence of any mention and no prior data, a parking waitlist is assumed not to exist, but this cannot be confirmed from the remarks alone.

Remarks repeatedly note 'two elevators' but never mention key, fob, or restricted elevator access. With all MLS amenity data lacking any keyed elevator indication, it is very likely the building does not offer keyed/fob elevator security as a distinct feature.

I searched for explicit phrases like key card access, fob access, card reader, electronic access, or keycard entry. While the building is described as secured, there is no direct evidence that access is via a card or fob system, so card access is marked as not present with medium confidence.

Across all five listings, none mention a security guard or on-site security personnel; instead, they consistently state 'secured lobby'. With 4/5 MLS records leaving the security guard box unchecked and no narrative support, it is very likely the building does not offer staffed guard service. The lone amenity checkbox conflict appears to be a one-off copy/paste or data-entry mistake.

I looked for terms such as security patrol, roving security, or patrol service in the public remarks. None were found, so security patrol service is assumed not present with medium confidence.

None of the five listings reference cameras or video surveillance; security is only described generically as a 'secured lobby'. All five MLS records omit any security system amenity flag, suggesting there is no notable or marketed video security system at the building level.

None of the 5 listings check any central AC-related fields (ACCEN/CENAC) or mention central air/HVAC in remarks. All observed units rely on window AC instead, so it is very likely the building does not offer central air conditioning.

No listings (0/5) indicate split AC via ACSPL or in remarks, while all show window AC instead. This consistent pattern supports that split/ductless AC is not a feature of units in this building.

Every listing (5/5) marks window AC (ACWIUN) in the inclusions, with no contrary indications in remarks or other AC fields. This consistent MLS data across multiple units suggests window AC is the standard cooling system in the building.

All five listings for this building indicate concrete construction in the MLS checkbox data. No remarks suggest any other primary structural system, which strongly supports that the building is a reinforced-concrete high-rise.

Double wall construction appears on just one listing and is absent on the majority, with no supporting remarks. This pattern points to a probable data entry inconsistency rather than actual double-wall building construction.

Hollow tile construction is never checked in the MLS data and is not mentioned in any remarks. This strongly suggests the building is not categorized as hollow tile construction.

Masonry/stucco construction is not selected on any of the five listings, and remarks are silent on masonry or stucco structure. Given the consistent concrete classification, masonry-stucco construction is unlikely.

None of the listings indicate steel frame in the MLS data, and agents only select concrete as the structure type. This makes it unlikely that the building is classified as a steel-frame structure in MLS terms.

No listing indicates slab construction even though the building is a high-rise, suggesting MLS users do not classify it under the SLAB checkbox. In the absence of any supporting data, slab construction is treated as not applicable.

No analysis available

Zero of five listings check wood frame construction, and no remarks describe any wood-frame building elements. Given the concrete high-rise context, it is very unlikely that the building is classified as wood frame.

Above-ground construction is not checked on any listing and is not mentioned in remarks. Given how this field is usually used in the market, it is unlikely to apply to this high-rise concrete building.

No listing marks brick construction, and the building type (Waikiki high-rise condo) is inconsistent with brick structural systems. This provides strong evidence that brick construction does not apply here.

Single wall construction is never indicated in MLS and is typically associated with older Hawaiian wood homes, not high-rise resort condos. This makes single-wall construction effectively ruled out.

Public remarks clearly and repeatedly confirm that legal short-term and even daily vacation rentals are allowed in this building, including references to Airbnb/VRBO. Zoning and explicit STR language leave no ambiguity that STR is permitted.

Searched remarks for terms like hotel rental pool, rental program, or hotel management and found none. Listings instead emphasize independent STR via Airbnb/VRBO, suggesting there is no formal hotel pool program.

Checked for language indicating required or mandatory participation in any hotel or rental pool and found none; instead, listings stress owner flexibility in how the unit is used or rented. This strongly indicates there is no mandatory hotel pool requirement.

None of the listings explicitly describe the tenure as fee simple or use common FS terminology. With no supporting remarks or tenure flags, it is not possible to confirm the presence of any Fee Simple units in this building.

The listings do not reference leasehold status, lease rent, or lease expiration dates. With no leasehold indicators in either MLS tenure codes or remarks, the existence of Leasehold units cannot be confirmed.

The remarks were checked for phrases such as 'lease expires', 'leasehold expiring', 'land lease to', or 'ground lease ends', as well as any 4-digit years tied to lease terms, and none were found. Without explicit information, the lease expiry year cannot be determined.

The remarks were checked for terms like 'VA approved', 'VA financing', or 'VA loans accepted' and none were present. In the absence of any such references, the building is assumed not to be VA-approved based on available information.

While the remarks describe what the maintenance/HOA fee includes (electricity, hot water, sewer, water, cable, internet), they do not mention full building or walls-in insurance coverage. Due to this absence, the feature is set to false with medium confidence.

Across multiple agents and listings, there are no references to fire sprinklers, and the specific 'fire sprinklers' amenity is consistently left unmarked. Given that such a safety feature is typically highlighted when present, this pattern indicates the building likely lacks a fire sprinkler system.

The remarks discuss security (secured lobby) and building amenities but do not reference any fire/life safety evaluation or certification. In the absence of any explicit mention, this is marked as not present with medium 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 four of the provided remarks highlight ocean views, e.g., 'Diamond Head and ocean view,' 'Rare Diamond Head and ocean view,' 'partial ocean views,' and 'views of the ocean's turquoise and blue water from your lanai.' Additionally, 3 of 5 MLS entries checked OCEAN in the view field, indicating that some units in this building clearly offer ocean views. This is repeatedly emphasized as a key selling point across different listings.

While none of the provided public remarks explicitly reference mountain views, 1 of 5 MLS records checked the MOUNTA (mountain) view option. MLS view checkboxes are typically only marked when agents believe a view is present, so this is moderate evidence that some units in the building have mountain or mauka-facing views.

Multiple remarks describe 'Diamond Head and ocean view from the top floor unit' and 'Rare Diamond Head and ocean view from high floor corner unit,' making Diamond Head views a repeated feature. This is reinforced by the MLS data where one listing explicitly checked DIAHEA (Diamond Head) in the view field. Together, this strongly supports that the building offers units with Diamond Head views.

The 9th-floor listing notes 'partial ocean views and the brilliant colors of city lights,' which is a clear description of a city/urban view at night. In addition, 1 out of 5 MLS entries has CITY checked in the view field. This combination shows that some units benefit from city views alongside ocean exposure.

Although the public remarks use generic 'ocean view' language rather than 'coastline,' 1/5 MLS records explicitly checked COASTL. Given the building’s location one block from Waikiki Beach and the repeated emphasis on high-floor ocean views, it is reasonably likely that at least some units enjoy coastline-style outlooks along the shore.

The marketing for these units consistently emphasizes ocean proximity and high-floor skyline-type views, with no mention of any garden or courtyard outlooks. In a compact, resort-zoned Waikiki building like this, and with 0/5 MLS records checking GARDEN, it is unlikely that garden views are a notable or available feature for buyers.

The building is described as a block from Waikiki Beach in a dense resort/urban setting, and none of the listings mention golf course vistas. With 0/5 MLS entries marking GOLCOU (golf course) and no textual references, there is strong evidence that this building does not offer golf course views from its units.

Across all provided remarks, agents emphasize ocean, Diamond Head, and city views but never mention marina, harbor, or canal outlooks. With 0/5 MLS records indicating MARCAN and the building situated in a part of Waikiki not typically associated with direct marina views, it's very likely that no units in this building are marketed with marina or harbor views.

Agents highlight ocean, Diamond Head, and city lights but do not reference sunrise views or morning/eastern exposure. Given that sunrise views are typically marketed when present and 0/5 MLS entries indicate SUNRIS, the evidence suggests sunrise views are not a distinct selling feature of this building.

Listings go into detail about view types (ocean, Diamond Head, city lights) without ever mentioning sunsets or evening-oriented views. With 0/5 MLS records checking SUNSET and no textual support, it appears that sunset views are not a notable or reliably available feature in this building.

All marketing focuses on Waikiki Beach, ocean, Diamond Head, and vibrant city surroundings, with zero references to cemeteries or similar negative view factors. Combined with 0/5 MLS records checking CEMETA, this is strong evidence that no units in this building have cemetery views.

The text was reviewed for references to watching Friday night fireworks or seeing fireworks from the unit or lanai, and none were found. Without explicit mention, fireworks views are assumed not to be a noted feature.

No analysis available

None of the remarks or MLS data indicate a 'no pets' policy, and the NOPET restriction is not checked on any of the five listings. Although agents do not actively promote pet-friendliness, the data suggests pets are not barred by the building. Buyers needing pet-allowed buildings may consider this a probable match, subject to confirming specific pet rules and limits.

A majority of listings (3 out of 5) indicate a resident manager in the amenities, suggesting the building maintains on-site management. While remarks do not explicitly say 'resident manager', the responsiveness of management and repeated amenity selection point to a resident manager being present.

The building is clearly resort-zoned and legally allows short-term rentals, but remarks and MLS data never reference hotel management, a hotel program, or condotel status. With 0/5 listings tagged as CONDOT, the evidence supports treating this as a standard condo with STR rights, not a condotel. Buyers should not assume hotel-style management or services here.

All evidence points to this being a condo building, with standard HOA fees covering utilities and common area expenses. There is no mention of shares, proprietary leases, or other co-op concepts, and COOTAX is never used. It is therefore almost certain this is not a co-op.