Kealani

MLS property data consistently shows the building as constructed in 1970 across all available listings. Remarks only describe renovations and upgrades, not a different build year, reinforcing 1970 as the construction year.

Across 6 listings, the highest unit floor reported is 15, and no remarks mention a higher story. In the absence of an explicit total-story count, the building is inferred to have 15 floors based on the maximum observed unit floor.

One listing explicitly notes there are 'only four units per floor' in this boutique building. Combined with 15 observed residential floors, this suggests approximately 60 units total, though no remark provides an exact unit count.

Remarks were checked for explicit percentages (e.g., '80% owner occupied') and phrases like 'majority owner occupied' or 'high owner occupancy', but none were present. With no confirming information, the prior 52% owner-occupancy value is kept at low confidence.

Remarks were searched for 'elevator', 'elevators', and similar terms but none were found. With no evidence to confirm or contradict, the prior value of 2 elevators is kept, but remains low 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.

All 6 current MLS listings leave the central-AC-in-fees box unchecked. While at least one remark notes having A/C, none state that air conditioning costs are included in the maintenance fee.

Across 6 listings for this building, 0 indicate that cable TV is included in the association fees. The public remarks focus on location, renovations, and amenities, but never state that cable service is covered, suggesting it is not a standard included utility.

Most listings (5 of 6) explicitly show common area electricity included in the association fees. Given this consistency and the building-wide nature of the expense, it is very likely a standard included item.

All available MLS data show no cooperative tax inclusion, and the building is marketed as a condominium. This combination strongly indicates that co-op taxes are not part of the maintenance fees.

None of the current listings indicate that individual-unit electricity is covered by the fees. The remarks do not reference power being included, suggesting residents pay their own electric bills.

Across all 6 listings, the HOA-includes-gas option is never checked. The absence of any mention in remarks further supports that gas is not part of the included utilities.

Multiple listings indicate individual water heaters (4/7 show WTRHTR in inclusions and one public remark notes a 'tankless water heater'), which conflicts with central hot water service. Only 1 of 7 listings checks HOTWAT in the association fee includes, suggesting that entry is likely agent error. Given consistent evidence of unit-level water heating and no remarks that HOA covers hot water, the building’s maintenance fee is very unlikely to include hot water.

Most listings (5 of 6) do not show internet service as part of the association fee, and none of the public remarks highlight internet being included. The lone INTSER mention is outweighed by the broader pattern of omission.

There is no MLS or remarks evidence that the building includes marina access or boat-related fees. References are limited to canal and golf course views, indicating marina costs are not part of the HOA.

Association_fee_includes data is highly consistent, with SEWER included on 6 of 7 listings across different units. No listing remarks contradict this or suggest sewer is billed separately, so it is very likely that the HOA fee covers sewer service for the building.

Most listings (6/7) explicitly show WATER in the association fee includes, and none of the public remarks suggest any change toward separately billed water. The strong, consistent pattern across multiple units and agents supports that building maintenance fees include water service.

Multiple listings describe Kealani’s amenities but none mention BBQ facilities, and MLS data consistently leaves the BBQ checkbox empty. This makes it very likely there is no shared BBQ area in the building.

One detailed listing highlights 'surfboard and bike racks' as part of the building’s amenities, implying a designated place to store bicycles rather than informal use of parking areas. While no MLS entries check the specific bike-storage field, the clear textual description is strong evidence that bike storage is available in this building.

Remarks describe 'panoramic vistas' of the canal and nearby golf course only as views, not as direct water access. The consistent absence of any dock or marina references makes it highly likely Kealani has no boat dock.

Parking is described as secured and covered, but no mention is made of any wash bay or car wash facility. With 0/6 MLS selections, it is very likely there is no car wash amenity.

The building is repeatedly described as a small, well‑maintained boutique condo, and neither MLS data nor remarks mention a clubhouse or community center. This strongly suggests no clubhouse is present.

Marketing language across 6 listings highlights pool, parking, storage, and location but never mentions any concierge or front desk services. The consistent MLS omission and lack of remark references strongly support that there is no concierge at this building.

Kealani is described as 'not pet-friendly,' ruling out on-site pet amenities. With 0/6 MLS listings marking any dog park or pet area, it is effectively certain the building does not have a dog park.

None of the remarks mention a doorman, lobby attendant, or staffed entry, even when describing the building’s features to attract buyers. Combined with 0/6 MLS doorman checkboxes, this strongly indicates there is no doorman service at this property.

Across all recent Kealani listings, agents do not check any gym-related amenity and no narrative remarks reference an exercise room or fitness center. Given how prominently such a feature would be marketed in Waikiki, it is very likely the building does not offer one.

Even in the high-end penthouse listing, there is no mention of building-provided car or limo service. Given the luxury marketing style in Waikiki, its omission and 0/6 MLS checkboxes make it almost certain there is no limo service.

Across all listings, agents do not advertise any meeting or conference facilities, focusing instead on the units and basic amenities. The consistent omission indicates Kealani does not have a shared meeting room.

Several listings describe sizeable lanais or balconies, including a penthouse with extensive lanai concrete work and other units with a 'large lanai' or 'large covered lanai'. This consistent mention across different units and agents supports that the building offers patio/deck (lanai) outdoor space as a common unit feature.

Listings promote proximity to Kapiolani Park and outdoor recreation, but none describe a private jogging or walking path on the property. With no MLS indication, the building likely does not offer its own jogging path.

Agents highlight pool, storage, and location near parks and the zoo, but never mention an on-site playground. Combined with 0/6 MLS checkboxes, this strongly indicates there is no children's playground in the building.

All marketing focuses on lanais, views, and the pool, with no reference to any private yard or fenced ground-level outdoor areas. Given the high-rise, boutique condo context and complete absence of yard mentions across many listings, it is very likely the building does not offer private yard space.

Remarks reference the nearby golf course, not a practice green in the building. The complete lack of MLS or narrative mention makes it highly likely Kealani has no putting green.

Narratives focus on the on-site pool and spacious lanais but do not mention any recreation deck or amenity area. With 0/6 MLS listings marking such a feature, it is very likely Kealani lacks a defined shared recreation area beyond the pool.

Agents consistently highlight the pool, storage, and surfboard/bike racks but never mention a recreation room. Combined with unchecked MLS fields, this indicates the building does not offer a shared rec room.

Agents emphasize easy access to Waikiki dining options rather than any on-site restaurant. The absence of MLS and narrative references strongly suggests Kealani does not contain a restaurant.

The penthouse remarks reference a 'new roof' as a building improvement but never mention a roof deck or shared rooftop terrace. Given the total absence of rooftop descriptors or checkboxes, the building almost certainly lacks common rooftop amenities.

Despite extensive discussion of building improvements and amenities, a sauna is never mentioned. Coupled with 0/6 MLS checkboxes, this indicates the building does not offer a sauna.

Multiple MLS entries (3/7) check storage-related fields, and one recent listing clearly advertises '1 parking stall, storage, surfboard and bike racks, and a refreshing pool on-site' as amenities. This indicates that the building offers storage (likely lockers/extra storage areas) as a shared feature available to at least some units. Evidence is consistent across historical data and current remarks, supporting that buyers can expect storage options in this building.

Multiple current remarks clearly mention dedicated surfboard storage in the form of 'storage, surfboard and bike racks.' This directly confirms that the building provides surfboard storage amenities. No remarks contradict or suggest the removal of this feature.

Six recent listings omit any tennis amenity in the MLS and in remarks. The specific mention of 'public tennis courts' nearby strongly implies Kealani itself does not have private tennis courts.

Multiple recent MLS entries (6 of 7) mark the building with the TRACHU amenity, indicating a trash chute system, and this aligns with our prior high-confidence assessment. Although the public remarks focus on other amenities (pool, in-unit laundry, storage, etc.) and do not mention a chute by name, they also provide no evidence that a chute is absent. Because trash chutes are usually documented via MLS checkboxes rather than marketing remarks, the consistent checkbox data across listings strongly supports that Kealani has a trash chute.

Listings mention 'secured covered parking' and a designated parking stall but never mention valet service, which would normally be highlighted as a premium feature. The consistent omission and lack of MLS valet flags indicate the building does not provide valet service.

One listing notes secured covered parking, which implies controlled garage access but not necessarily a fully gated or walled property. No remarks describe the building as gated or fenced, and the relevant MLS amenities are always unchecked, indicating the property is not marketed as having perimeter wall/fence security.

The pool is specifically called out, yet no listing adds a separate whirlpool or spa. With no MLS or narrative evidence, Kealani almost certainly does not have a whirlpool.

Multiple recent listings for Kealani confirm a shared building pool, with phrases like 'The Kealani Building offers a refreshing pool for those warm Hawaiian days' and 'a refreshing pool on-site.' At least 3 of the provided remarks explicitly mention this amenity, and all current MLS entries show pool-related checkboxes, so the evidence is strong and consistent across agents.

Across all available listings, the pool is only described as a standard 'refreshing pool,' with no mention of heating or warm water. MLS data also shows 0/6 listings marking any heated-pool feature, providing strong evidence that the building’s pool is not heated.

Remarks clearly confirm the presence of a pool but never describe it as salt water, saltwater, saline, or a salt pool. I searched for terms like 'salt water pool', 'saltwater', 'saline', and 'salt pool' and found no matches. In the absence of any such mentions, the pool is assumed not to be salt water.

Current listings provide strong textual evidence of in-unit laundry, with at least four separate remarks explicitly stating 'washer & dryer in the unit', 'in-unit washer/dryer', 'in-unit laundry', or 'full sized washer and dryer in unit'. MLS checkbox data also shows 7/7 current listings including washer/dryer, reinforcing that this is a consistent amenity in the building. Combined with prior high-confidence history, this strongly supports including laundry_in_unit for the building.

Across all provided listings, there is no mention of community or shared laundry, and 0/6 MLS entries list community laundry as an amenity. Since agents consistently highlight in-unit washers/dryers instead, the evidence suggests the building does not have a separate community laundry facility.

Listings only mention in-unit washer/dryer or in-unit laundry and never describe any coin-op or paid community laundry. Searched for terms such as 'coin laundry', 'coin-op', 'card-operated', 'laundry fee', and related language but found nothing. This lack of mention suggests there is no paid community laundry system in the building.

Remarks repeatedly highlight in-unit washer/dryer or in-unit laundry, suggesting laundry is primarily inside units rather than in shared facilities. Searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor', 'laundry room on every floor', 'community laundry', and similar, but found no references. Based on this absence, it's likely there is no community laundry on every floor.

Multiple listings describe on-site parking, including phrases like 'with parking & a washer/dryer', 'secured covered parking', and '1 parking stall'. All 7 current MLS entries indicate a parking type and none indicate 'NONE', so the evidence strongly supports that the building offers parking for its units.

Remarks for several units state 'designated parking space included' and '1 parking stall', implying each unit has its own reserved spot. This aligns with MLS structure data showing ASSIGN for most listings, supporting that parking is assigned in this building.

MLS data shows most units flagged with covered or garage parking, and remarks specifically mention 'secured covered parking.' This confirms that the building provides covered parking options for residents.

I searched for terms like "deeded parking," "owned stall," "parking stall included," and similar language. Several remarks mention an included, designated parking stall with the unit, suggesting parking is appurtenant/deeded rather than separately rented.

Across 6 listings, there are no EVCHRG flags and no textual references to EV or charging stations. This uniform lack of indication suggests the building does not have EV charging facilities.

I looked for phrases such as "parking fee," "monthly parking charge," "rental stall," or "additional cost for parking" and found none. Listings only mention that a parking stall is included, with no reference to any separate monthly parking fee.

No MLS records mark guest parking and the remarks never reference guest or visitor parking. The consistent omission strongly indicates that the building does not provide dedicated guest parking.

Remarks describing 'secured covered parking' and at least one MLS record with SECENT show that the parking area has controlled/secured entry. Even if not universally highlighted, this is a building-level feature available where parking is provided.

All current MLS data omit the TANDEM flag and no remarks refer to tandem or back-to-back stalls. This strongly suggests that tandem parking is not a feature of this building’s parking arrangement.

No MLS listing or remark mentions valet or attended parking service. The total lack of references, together with the building’s boutique profile, indicates that valet parking is not available.

I searched for references to a "parking waitlist," "waiting list for parking," or similar language and found none. Given the explicit inclusion of parking stalls with units and no indication of a queue system, a formal parking waitlist is unlikely.

Across 6 listings, including a highly detailed penthouse description, there is no mention of secure or keyed elevator access. In similar buildings this is usually highlighted as a premium security feature, so the consistent omission plus unchecked MLS amenities suggests the elevators are not access-controlled by key or fob.

Searched the remarks for terms like key card, fob access, electronic access, and card reader, but none were found. The only security-related reference is to 'secured covered parking,' which does not specifically indicate a card/fob-based building access system. Based on this absence, the building is assumed not to have a card/fob access system.

Across 6 listings, including detailed penthouse and multiple standard unit descriptions, there is no mention of a security guard or staffed security. MLS amenities also consistently omit any security guard checkbox, suggesting the building does not offer guard service. This appears to be a small boutique condo without staffed security personnel.

Reviewed all remarks for mentions of security patrol, roving security, or patrolled premises and found no such descriptions. The building is described as boutique, quiet, and well-maintained, but without any indication of an active patrol service. Given this lack of evidence, a security patrol is assumed not to be present.

The remarks focus on renovations, views, pool, and secured covered parking but never reference cameras, CCTV, or monitored video security. Given 6 listings and no MLS checkbox for a security system, there is strong indication that there is no formal building-wide video surveillance system being marketed as an amenity.

Across 6 listings, 0/6 show central AC in the MLS feature checkboxes and no remarks refer to central air, HVAC, or a building-wide cooling system. Multiple units mention or imply individual unit AC instead, indicating this building relies on unit-specific cooling rather than central AC.

MLS data shows 3/6 listings with ACSPL (split AC) checked, and none state that only other AC types are allowed. This pattern across multiple listings indicates that some units in the building have split/ductless systems, so buyers searching for split AC units should consider this building.

MLS inclusions show ACWIUN (window AC) checked on 2/6 listings, with no conflicting evidence in remarks. This indicates that at least some units use window AC units, so the building should be flagged as offering window AC in some residences.

Multiple listings and all recent MLS entries consistently indicate concrete construction for this Waikiki tower. The extensively remodeled penthouse remarks reference major concrete work on the lanai and a concrete interior, along with structural enhancements overseen by engineers. This strongly confirms that the building is a reinforced concrete condominium structure.

Narrative descriptions emphasize concrete work and concrete interiors, with no mention of double-wall construction, which is typically associated with wood-framed houses rather than a Waikiki condo tower. Only a minority of agents checked the DOUWAL box in MLS, with no supporting detail in remarks. Taken together, the evidence supports that this building is not double-wall constructed.

The structure is repeatedly described and repaired as concrete, with no mention of hollow tile. MLS construction materials never include hollow tile. This combination makes hollow-tile construction very unlikely.

None of the listings mention masonry or stucco as a construction type; instead they stress concrete elements and interior finishes. MLS data never marks masonry/stucco for this building. That pattern supports concluding it is not primarily a masonry-stucco structure.

Listings repeatedly frame the structure as concrete and never mention a steel frame or steel structural system. Given the consistent MLS coding and the usual practice of calling out steel framing when relevant, it is unlikely this is classified as a steel-frame building. The evidence therefore points away from steel-frame construction.

While many high-rises are in fact built on substantial concrete foundations, none of the agents here have checked the 'slab' option or described a slab foundation in remarks. Given the complete absence of explicit evidence, the slab construction feature is not supported for this building in the MLS context. It is therefore treated as not present for data purposes.

No analysis available

Nothing in any remarks suggests wood framing (no 'wood frame' or similar terms), and the building is clearly a concrete high-rise. All MLS records omit wood-frame as a construction type. This strongly indicates the building is not wood-frame.

Listings consistently describe a multi-story Waikiki condominium with only four units per floor, upper-floor corner units, and a penthouse featuring panoramic 360-degree views and a cantilevered balcony. These features inherently require above-ground construction. The presence of ABOGRO in a majority of recent MLS entries further supports that the building is constructed above ground.

There are no references to brick construction or brick exterior anywhere in the remarks. All available data and the concrete-focused descriptions indicate the building is not brick-constructed. MLS data uniformly omits brick as a construction material.

The single-wall construction style is typical of older low-rise Hawaii homes, not concrete high-rise condos. Remarks and MLS codes consistently indicate a concrete building with no suggestion of single-wall construction. This makes single-wall construction effectively ruled out.

All listings describe standard residential ownership and lifestyle (VA-approved boutique condo, long-term living, location amenities) with no reference to legal short-term or vacation rental use. I searched for terms like 'short-term rental', 'vacation rental', 'NUC', 'TVU', or nightly/weekly stays and found none, so STR is treated as not allowed based solely on the remarks.

The building is repeatedly called a 'boutique condo' with no reference to any hotel operator or hotel rental program. I looked for phrases like 'hotel pool', 'hotel rental program', 'managed by hotel', or brand-name hotel affiliations and found no evidence of participation in a hotel pool.

Listings highlight owner features such as in-unit laundry, parking, and residential amenities but never mention a required rental or hotel pool. I searched for language like 'mandatory hotel pool', 'must be in rental program', or 'required to participate' and found none, so a mandatory pool is very unlikely based on the remarks.

Current MLS data does not flag any of the 6 listings as Fee Simple, and the remarks never mention fee simple ownership. Because tenure is not discussed at all, the existence of Fee Simple units in this building remains uncertain.

Across all provided remarks, there are no references to leasehold, lease rent, or lease terms, and MLS tenure fields do not show LH. The lack of any leasehold-related language means leasehold status cannot be confirmed for this building.

The listings do not discuss land tenure or provide any dates related to a ground lease or leasehold expiration. Without explicit statements about a lease and its end year, the lease expiry remains unknown.

Public remarks clearly confirm that the building is VA approved, meaning VA financing is accepted. This is direct evidence from a current listing, so the VA status is marked true with high confidence.

Searched for 'fully insured', 'full insurance', 'walls-in coverage', 'comprehensive building insurance', and similar language, but none appeared in the listings. Due to this lack of evidence, the building is assumed not fully HOA-insured with medium confidence.

No listing checks a fire-sprinkler amenity, and none of the remarks mention sprinklers despite extensive discussion of building improvements. This strongly suggests the building does not have a fire sprinkler system, though it is not stated outright.

Searched for phrases like 'fire life safety evaluation passed', 'FLSE', 'fire safety certified', 'life safety compliant', and 'passed fire inspection' and found no references. In the absence of any mention, this is assumed false 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 one listing describes 'peek-a-boo ocean views' from the bedrooms, indicating ocean exposure in the building. MLS view data (1 of 6 listings with OCEAN checked and none with NONE) supports the presence of ocean-view units. Buyers seeking ocean views can reasonably find them in this building.

One set of remarks explicitly highlights 'scenic mountains' as part of the panorama, directly confirming mountain views. This is backed by MLS data where 1 of 6 listings marks MOUNTAIN and none mark NONE. Mountain-facing units clearly exist in the building.

Multiple sources confirm Diamond Head views are available in this building. One recent remark highlights a large lanai where you can enjoy 'stunning views of nearby Diamond Head,' and prior listings also emphasized Diamond Head outlooks. With MLS view_descriptions including DIAHEA in 1/7 listings and no units marked as having no view, this feature is clearly offered in at least some units.

The Waikiki penthouse is described as having '360-degree views,' which in this urban location necessarily includes significant city/urban scenery. Additionally, 2 of 7 recent MLS entries explicitly tag CITY in the view descriptions, with none marked as having no view. Together, this supports that city views are a notable feature for some units in the building.

Across all provided remarks, agents repeatedly emphasize ocean, Diamond Head, mountain, canal, and golf-course views without once using 'coastline' or similar shoreline language. All six current MLS records omit COASTL, even for the extensively described penthouse. Given the inland Ala Wai location, it is very probable the building does not offer the type of prominent coastline views buyers specifically search for.

Evidence for garden views comes solely from MLS checkboxes, with one listing marking GARDEN and none denying views. Although remarks focus more on ocean, golf course, and canal views, this MLS data implies some lower or side units likely face landscaped or courtyard areas. Given no conflicting evidence, garden views are likely available in some units.

Multiple remarks emphasize Ala Wai Golf Course, including 'lush golf course' in the view description and 'across from the Ala Wai Golf course' as a location marker. MLS data (1 of 6 with GOLCOU) aligns with this. Golf-course views are a clear feature of Kealani.

Remarks clearly reference a 'serene canal' view from the unit fronting the Ala Wai, which fits the marina/canal category. This is consistent with 1 of 6 MLS records checking MARCAN and none checking NONE. Buyers can expect canal/marina-type views in some units.

No listing explicitly says 'sunrise view,' but the Diamond Head–side, east-facing orientation plus at least one SUNRIS checkbox in MLS data strongly suggest morning sun/sunrise exposure from some units. Buyers seeking sunrise-facing units are likely to find them here. The evidence is implied rather than directly quoted.

A Waikiki penthouse with '360-degree views' will include west-facing vistas where the sun sets, and marketing of the lanai for 'sunset cocktails' indicates a desirable evening outlook. Although no MLS entries explicitly check SUNSET, the directional exposure and remarks make sunset views in at least some units very likely. The support here is inferred rather than from a direct 'sunset view' quote.

Neither the remarks nor MLS view data provide any indication of cemetery views, and the known surroundings (golf course, canal, parks, Waikiki urban area) do not include cemeteries. With 0 of 6 listings marking cemetery and no textual hints, it is safe to conclude cemetery views are not a feature of this building.

Remarks discuss views of mountains, canal, golf course, Diamond Head, and peek-a-boo ocean views but never reference fireworks. Because fireworks views are typically highlighted when present, the absence of any mention suggests the building does not notably feature a fireworks view.

No analysis available

One agent clearly notes that 'the building is not pet-friendly,' and no other listing suggests pets are allowed or highlights pet amenities. This explicit restriction in the remarks provides strong evidence that pets are not allowed in the building.

Across historical and current MLS data, most listings (6 out of 7) consistently mark a resident/on-site manager in the amenities, with no remarks or listings stating that there is no manager. Because this is a building-level operational feature that agents rarely describe in narrative remarks, the consistent checkbox data across multiple listings and times strongly supports that the building has a resident/on-site manager.

The building is repeatedly marketed as a residential boutique condominium with no references to hotel management or nightly-rental programs. The lack of any condotel language in detailed listings supports that it is not operated as a condotel.

Agents consistently describe the property as a condominium, with no mention of shares, co-op structure, or cooperative ownership terms. Together with the MLS data, this strongly indicates the building is a condo, not a co-op.