Hale Kaloapau
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.
Hale Kaloapau
Building Overview
Hale Kaloapau in Mililani-Waipio, built 1972 — pets and short-term rentals not allowed per available MLS data.
About Hale Kaloapau
Based on MLS data, Hale Kaloapau is a residential building located in the Mililani-Waipio neighborhood. According to available records the building was built in 1972. Specific details about building size, number of units, and construction type are not provided in the MLS data.
Key policies and amenities noted in the MLS records include a no-pets policy and short-term rentals are not allowed. The management company is listed as unknown in the available MLS information. No additional amenity lists (such as pools, fitness centers, or common areas) are specified in the provided data.
Information about parking, maintenance fees, homeowners association details, and other charges is not included in the MLS extract. Buyers should verify parking, fees, management, and any other material details with the listing agent or current managing entity, as this summary is based solely on the MLS data available.
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 looked for owner-occupancy references such as '80% owner occupied,' 'majority owner occupied,' or 'highly owner occupied' and found no mention. Since the remarks do not state an occupancy percentage or even a general owner-occupancy description, this remains unknown.
I searched the remarks for elevator-related language such as 'elevator,' '4 elevators,' 'multiple elevators,' or any building-access wording and found nothing. Because there is no explicit evidence in the listings, the number of elevators cannot be determined from these remarks.
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 electricity appears to be included in the maintenance fees. MLS data shows 10 of 11 listings with OTCOEX checked, which is strong and consistent across multiple listings. No public remarks explicitly mention it, but the checkbox evidence is highly reliable.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Hot water is not indicated as included in the maintenance fee. MLS data shows 0 of 11 listings with HOTWAT and 10 of 11 with WTRHTR, a strong sign the building does not supply hot water as a common fee item. The remarks are consistent with this, including explicit mentions of a water heater.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sewer appears to be included in the association fees. MLS data shows SEWER checked in 10 of 11 listings, which is strong multi-listing support. No public remarks mention sewer directly, but the checkbox pattern is consistent and high confidence.
Water appears to be included in the maintenance fees. MLS data shows WATER checked in 10 of 11 listings, which is consistent across the building's listings. Public remarks do not explicitly mention water, but the MLS evidence is strong.
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
Strong, repeated evidence that Hale Kaloapau offers private yard/outdoor space for some units. Multiple listings from different remark blocks describe a 'private outdoor courtyard,' 'fully fenced and cemented private patio,' 'private fenced yard,' and 'private enclosed yard,' which is more than enough to confirm the feature. The wording varies, but it is consistent across listings rather than looking like a single copy-paste error.
No analysis available
Multiple listing remarks repeatedly reference access to MTA amenities and nearby Rec Center 3 ("7 recreation centers", "Rec 3 is conveniently located just across the street", "nearby recreation center offers a pool, tennis/pickleball court"). Although only 3/9 listings have the RECARE checkbox, consistent agent remarks across listings indicate building residents use shared recreation facilities, so the building should be marked as having a recreation area available to residents.
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
Pool access is strongly supported across the listings: several remarks explicitly mention Mililani rec centers with a pool, including phrases like "community pools," "Rec Center 3 with pool," and "offers pool, tennis and basketball court." This appears to be a building/association amenity rather than a copy-paste error, and the evidence is consistent across multiple agents.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Multiple listings explicitly confirm laundry inside the unit, including phrases like "brand new stacked Washer/Dryer," "new washer/dryer," and "washer and dryer are located in-unit." This is consistent across several recent agent remarks and aligns with the current MLS inclusions data, so the feature appears to be reliably present in the building.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Parking is clearly supported by the public remarks and MLS data. Multiple listings mention "two parking stalls," "two side-by-side parking stalls," "2 assigned parking stalls," and "2 reserved parking stalls," showing this is a consistent building feature rather than a one-off note. The evidence is strong across many listings and appears consistent, not copy-paste misinformation.
Assigned/reserved parking is strongly supported. Several remarks explicitly say "assigned parking stalls" or "reserved parking stalls," while others describe stalls located directly in front of the unit or right behind it, indicating designated parking. This aligns with the MLS pattern and suggests the feature is real and consistently represented across listings.
Although 3 of 9 MLS records have a covered/garage flag, none of the public remarks (across multiple agent listings) mention covered or enclosed parking — they only refer to "parking stalls", "reserved/assigned parking stalls", or street parking. This suggests covered parking is likely not a building-wide feature; evidence is indirect and mixed (MLS flags vs. consistent remarks), so confidence is moderate and further verification is recommended.
The listings consistently describe assigned, dedicated, or reserved parking stalls, but none explicitly say the stalls are deeded or owned with the unit. Because deeded parking is not directly confirmed, this remains false based on available remarks.
No analysis available
I looked for any separate parking cost such as a monthly fee, parking charge, or rental amount, but found none. The remarks only mention the number and placement of stalls.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for language like parking waitlist, waiting list, or joining a queue for parking, but found no such references. The remarks instead describe assigned/reserved stalls and street parking.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Window AC appears to be an available feature in this building. At least 3 listings explicitly mention it with phrases like "window AC," "2 window units," and "Portable AC units," while MLS inclusions also show ACWIUN in 7 of 10 listings. The repeated mentions across multiple remarks support that some units in the building have window-type air conditioning.
Across the provided listings, 0 mentions describe the building as concrete-built. Remarks talk about renovations, patios, AC, parking, and layout, but never construction material. With no remark-level support and no historical confirmation, concrete construction is not validated here.
0 of the listings explicitly mention double wall construction. The MLS checkbox pattern (9/11) looks like it may have been copied forward, while the remarks stay silent on this feature. That makes double wall unsupported by the public remarks.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
0 of the listings explicitly mention a concrete slab foundation. While the MLS shows slab in some records, the public remarks never corroborate it and instead appear to be generic marketing copy. This does not provide enough evidence to validate slab construction.
No analysis available
Across the provided remarks, there are no explicit references to wood frame construction. The MLS checkbox data appears to be repeated across listings, but the public remarks do not support it, so this feature cannot be validated from the remarks.
0 listings reference above-ground construction. The available remarks do not provide any building-material or foundation language that would support this feature. Current MLS data alone is not enough to override the lack of remark-level evidence.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for evidence that STRs are allowed, including NUC, TVU, vacation rental language, or other explicit permissive wording, and found nothing. Since there is no support for STR permission in the public remarks, this is treated as false.
No hotel rental pool, branded rental program, or hotel-managed participation is referenced in any remark. Because short-term rentals are not indicated as allowed, hotel pool participation must also be false.
I found no evidence of a hotel rental pool, much less one that is required for all units. With STR not supported in the remarks, mandatory pool participation is also false.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for leasehold language such as lease expires, land lease, ground lease ends, renewed through, or an explicit expiry year, but found nothing. There is no public-remarks evidence to extract a lease expiration date.
The remarks explicitly state VA assumable financing for eligible VA buyers, which is strong evidence the building/unit is VA-finance friendly. This is direct public-remarks support, so confidence is very high.
I searched for insurance-related phrases such as 'fully insured,' 'full insurance,' 'walls-in coverage,' or similar HOA coverage language and found none. The remarks do not provide enough information to confirm whether the building is fully insured.
No analysis available
I looked for explicit fire/life safety language like 'FLSE passed,' 'fire life safety evaluation passed,' 'fire safety certified,' or 'passed fire inspection' and found no references. With no remark evidence either way, this should be treated as unconfirmed rather than positively verified.
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
There is moderate evidence that this building offers garden/courtyard-type views. In the current MLS data, 6 of 10 listings include GARDEN in the view description, while 3 of 10 explicitly show NONE. Public remarks repeatedly mention a "private outdoor courtyard," "private fenced patio," and "open green space behind," which is consistent with garden-view units rather than a copy-paste-only checkbox.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
There is no evidence this building offers sunset views. Across the supplied listings, 0 of 11 mention SUNSET in the view description, and 4 of 11 are marked NONE, while the remarks focus on interior upgrades, patios, parking, and rec center access rather than any view. This looks like a consistent absence rather than a copy-paste pattern indicating sunset exposure.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
None of the nine provided public remarks mention a resident or on-site manager (0/9). The MLS amenity RESMAN appears in only 1 of 9 listings, and there is no prior confidence/history for this feature, so the evidence points to an agent checkbox mistake rather than a true building feature. Given the lack of any explicit mention across multiple agents, the building is unlikely to have a resident 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.