Village on the Green 1B
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.
Village on the Green 1B
Building Overview
Village on the Green 1B in Waipahu — built 1995; pets allowed; short-term rentals not permitted.
About Village on the Green 1B
Based on MLS data, Village on the Green 1B is a condominium community located in Waipahu. According to available records the building was built in 1995. Size and construction type are not listed in the provided MLS information.
Key policies and features reported in the MLS include that pets are allowed and short-term rentals are not permitted. The MLS does not specify onsite amenities, common area features, or other building services.
The MLS data does not identify a management company, nor does it provide details on parking, maintenance fees, or special assessments. Buyers should verify all specifics, including unit size, construction details, amenity availability, parking arrangements, association rules, and fees, with the listing agent or the condominium association.
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
The remarks explicitly state that the complex boasts a 75% owner occupancy rate, so I use that number directly. Although one listing says "Owner Occ ratio TBD," the direct 75% statement is the strongest evidence and matches the current building context.
I searched the public remarks for explicit elevator references such as "elevator," "multiple elevators," or a count like "4 elevators," and found none. Because this is a townhouse-style property and the remarks focus on ground-floor access, parking, and interior features, there is no evidence to confirm any elevator count.
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
Five of six current listings include the OTCOEX code, suggesting common area electricity is included in the maintenance fee. The public remarks do not spell this out, so this appears to be an MLS-based building feature rather than something agents are describing in prose.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
None of the current listings include HOTWAT, while all six include WTRHTR, which points away from building-supplied hot water being included. One remark also mentions a 'water heater,' reinforcing that hot water is unit-generated rather than a shared utility.
No analysis available
No analysis available
All six current listings include the SEWER code in association_fee_includes. There are no contradictory public remarks, so this appears to be a stable building feature rather than copy-paste noise.
All six current listings include WATER in association_fee_includes. The agent remarks do not explicitly mention water fees, but the MLS data is fully consistent across listings, supporting a high-confidence inclusion.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
None of the 6 listings’ remarks reference a clubhouse or community center; they mention other amenities like a community pool, golf course frontage, yards, parking, and AC instead. With no remark-level support and only weak MLS amenity evidence, this appears to be a copy/paste or checkbox inconsistency rather than a confirmed shared building feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No mention of 'meeting room', 'conference room', 'board room', or similar in the public remarks. Given agents sometimes check MLS amenity boxes without remarks to back them up (only 1/5 listings have the checkbox), there is insufficient evidence to mark a meeting room as present.
Evidence supports patio/deck amenities: 4 of 6 listings have PATDEC/COVPAT in MLS data, and one remark explicitly says the unit "has a lanai where one can enjoy and unwind." This is enough to treat the feature as present in the building, though the wording is not as strong as the yard evidence.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Private yard is well supported across several listings, with multiple explicit phrases including "fenced private back yard," "private fenced yard," "own private court yard," and "large private yard." The repeated wording across different remarks suggests this is a real building/unit feature, not just copied MLS checkbox data.
Remarks reference nearby Waikele golf course but do not state the building has a 'putting green' or 'practice putting green'. With only one MLS listing checking PUTGRE and no supporting language across the public remarks, there is weak evidence for an on-site putting green.
No analysis available
No listings' remarks mention a recreation room, rec room, game room, or similar. The provided public remarks reference an HOA community pool and nearby Waikele golf course but contain no phrases like 'recreation room' or 'game room' across the listing, suggesting the single MLS checkbox (1/5 listings) is likely a copy-paste; evidence is weak.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Storage is supported by both current public remarks and prior MLS data. One listing explicitly says the unit has "extra storage," while historical MLS entries show storage in 4/6 unit_features and 2/6 amenities, suggesting this is a recurring building feature rather than a copy-paste anomaly.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Pool is supported by both the MLS amenities and the public remarks. One listing explicitly says "HOA community pool," and the current MLS data shows the pool amenity checked in 4 of 6 listings. That combination makes this a strong building-level feature that buyers should know about.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Strong evidence supports in-unit laundry in the building. All 6 current MLS listings list WASHER/DRYER in the inclusions, and multiple remarks explicitly mention it, including "new washer/dryer installed in Oct. 2021" and "washer/dryer." The consistency across listings makes this a high-confidence building feature.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Parking is strongly confirmed across the listings. All 6/6 MLS records indicate parking features, and the remarks repeatedly reference assigned stalls, including phrases like 'two car garage enclosed parking,' 'two additional parking stalls,' and '2 parking stalls.' This appears consistent across multiple agents rather than a copy-paste anomaly.
Both MLS checkbox data (ASSIGN on 5/5 listings) and remarks explicitly state assigned stalls ('two assigned parking stalls'), indicating reserved/assigned parking is provided.
Covered parking is clearly supported by both MLS data and remarks. The building is described with garage/enclosed parking and a specific mix of '1 covered, 1 open,' confirming that covered parking is available. Evidence is consistent across listings and not limited to a single mention.
The listings clearly show assigned parking and multiple stalls, including covered/open and a two-car garage in one remark. However, I found no wording indicating the stalls are deeded or owned with the unit, so deeded parking is not supported.
No analysis available
I looked for explicit mentions of parking cost, additional parking charges, or whether parking is included, but the remarks only describe the number and type of stalls. Because no monthly fee is given, the parking fee cannot be determined from these listings.
Guest parking is supported by the MLS records and public remarks. One listing explicitly states that 'guest parking stalls are available,' and the MLS indicates guest parking in 5/6 listings. This is strong building-level evidence that guest parking is available.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for parking waitlist / waiting list language and found nothing. The remarks instead describe assigned stalls and guest parking, which does not indicate a waitlist system.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
At least 1 listing explicitly mentions "split AC units," and the current MLS data shows ACSPL included in 2 of 6 listings. Other remarks describe window AC or generic AC units, so the evidence suggests some units in the building do have split/mini-split cooling rather than this being a blanket copy-paste entry.
Multiple listings (at least 4) explicitly mention window or multiple AC units: quotes include "window A/C units", "Multiple window AC units", and "newer 3 AC units". The MLS inclusion ACWIUN is checked on 4 of 5 listings and public remarks from different listings consistently reference window/split AC, indicating strong evidence that some units in the building have window AC units.
Evidence for concrete construction is weak: just 1 of 6 current listings has CONCRE checked, and the remarks are silent on any concrete building materials. This looks more like a stray MLS entry than a confirmed building-wide feature.
Double wall is checked in 5 of 6 current MLS listings, which is strong building-level evidence despite the lack of matching phrases in the public remarks. This looks consistent across multiple entries and is more likely a real construction attribute than copy-paste noise.
No analysis available
No listings' public remarks mention masonry or stucco (search terms 'masonry', 'stucco', 'masonry and stucco' not found). MLS construction_materials currently has MASSTU in 1 of 5 listings, but with no corroborating agent remarks this appears inconsistent and likely copy/paste; evidence is weak across multiple agents.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Wood frame appears in 4 of 6 current MLS records, which is a meaningful majority even though the remarks do not explicitly say 'wood frame.' The pattern suggests the MLS data is likely reflecting the building’s construction type rather than a one-off agent error.
Above-ground construction is not well supported: only 2 of 6 listings include ABOGRO, and none of the remarks provide confirming language. The limited MLS coverage makes this look unverified at the building level.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for short-term rental, vacation rental, NUC, TVU, and similar allowance language, but none appeared. With no evidence of STR permission in the public remarks, this is treated as not allowed.
I looked for hotel pool / hotel program / managed-by-hotel references and found none. Because there is also no evidence that STR is allowed, this cannot be true and is set to false.
I searched for mandatory hotel pool language such as required participation or cannot-opt-out wording and found nothing. With no STR allowance indicated and no rental-pool references, mandatory participation is unsupported.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for wording such as leasehold, ground lease, lease expires, lease ends, and renewal/extension dates, but found nothing. Since no specific lease expiry year appears in the remarks, the value remains unknown.
This is strong public-remarks evidence that VA-related financing is available for at least one listing in this building. I searched for VA approved / VA financing / VA loans accepted language and found an explicit VA assumable loan mention.
I searched the remarks for insurance-related phrases like fully insured, full insurance, walls-in coverage, or comprehensive building insurance, and found none. Since none of the listings mention HOA walls-in coverage or complete building insurance, there is no public-remarks support for this feature.
No analysis available
I looked for fire/life safety language such as FLSE passed, fire safety certified, life safety compliant, or passed fire inspection, and found nothing. With no public remark evidence indicating a passing evaluation, this remains unconfirmed and is treated as not evidenced in the listings.
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
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
The current MLS records strongly support garden views, with 5/6 listings showing GARDEN. Public remarks reinforce this through phrases like "private fenced yard," "nice green space between buildings," and "lush landscaping," which suggest garden or courtyard outlooks for some units. The evidence is consistent across multiple listings, though most remarks imply the view rather than stating "garden view" verbatim.
Strong evidence that this building offers golf course views. Several listings explicitly reference "golf course frontage," being "located on hole number 2," and being near or overlooking the Waikele Golf Course, which is consistent across multiple remarks rather than a one-off copy-paste. Even though only 1/6 current MLS records has GOLCOU, the remarks provide direct support for at least some units having golf course views.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Two of five current MLS listings for this building include the RESMAN amenity checkbox, but none of the public remarks mention a resident or on-site manager (no phrases like 'resident manager' or 'on-site manager'). This is moderate, indirect evidence (likely agent-entered amenity data) so the feature is included as potentially available but with moderate confidence.
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.