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.

The current MLS checkbox data is fairly consistent for this building, with 6 of 8 listings showing OTCOEX in association_fee_includes. None of the public remarks mention separate billing for common-area electricity, so there is no evidence of a change away from inclusion.

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.

Sewer inclusion is highly consistent across the listing history, with 7 of 8 current MLS records showing SEWER included. The public remarks do not suggest sewer is billed separately, so the existing high-confidence reading stands.

Water is repeatedly listed as included in the association fees, with 7 of 8 MLS entries showing WATER. The public remarks are silent on any separate water billing, so there is strong support that this building includes water in maintenance fees.

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.

This feature is directly confirmed by the remarks. The listing explicitly notes surfboard storage in the form of 'storage, surfboard and bike racks,' which is strong evidence that the building offers surfboard storage facilities.

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.

I searched for salt-water pool terminology and found no such mention. The listings only say the building offers a refreshing pool, so salt pool status is not supported by the remarks.

Strong, consistent evidence that the building offers in-unit laundry. At least 5 listing remarks explicitly mention it with phrases like 'washer & dryer in the unit,' 'in-unit washer/dryer,' and 'full sized washer and dryer in unit.' This aligns with the historical MLS data showing 8/8 listings with washer/dryer included, so confidence is very high.

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.

I looked for references to coin laundry, paid laundry, laundry fees, or card-operated machines and found no evidence. The only laundry-related language is about in-unit washer/dryer, so there is no support for paid community laundry.

I searched for descriptions like laundry on each floor, floor-by-floor laundry, or shared laundry rooms on every level, and found none. The remarks consistently point to laundry inside the unit instead, which does not support community laundry on every floor.

Parking is clearly available in the building. Across the remarks, at least 4 listings explicitly mention parking in phrases like 'designated parking space included,' 'secured covered parking,' and '1 parking stall,' which aligns with the historical MLS pattern of 8/8 listings showing parking features. This is strong multi-listing evidence, not just a one-off agent checkbox.

Assigned parking appears to be a standard building amenity. Several remarks state 'designated parking space included' and '1 parking stall,' while the MLS data shows ASSIGN on 7 of 8 listings. The repeated wording across listings suggests this is not copy-paste noise but a real reserved parking arrangement.

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.

The listings confirm parking is included, with wording like designated parking space and secured covered parking. However, none of the remarks say the stall is deeded or owned with the unit, so deeded parking is not established.

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 searched for monthly parking fees, rental charges, or any additional parking cost language, but found none. The remarks only mention included parking, not a separate 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 looked for parking waitlist or waiting list language and found nothing. There is no evidence that the building uses a parking waitlist system.

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.

I looked for card/fob-based access terms such as key card access, keycard entry, fob access, and card reader, but found none. The remarks mention secured parking, but that is not the same as building card access.

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.

I searched for any indication of patrol service or roving security and found nothing. The only security-related reference in the remarks is secured parking, which does not establish a patrol service.

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.

Concrete construction is strongly supported by the listing remarks. The penthouse description explicitly mentions "$240,000 in concrete work on the lanai" and "concrete interior," while the broader building context has historically shown concrete in all recent MLS entries (8/8).

There is no textual support for double-wall construction in the remarks. Across the provided listings, agents repeatedly describe concrete, remodeling, and building improvements, but never mention double walls, which suggests the checkbox is likely copy-paste noise rather than a verified building feature.

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.

Above-ground construction is implied by the building's multi-story layout and unit descriptions, including "only 4 units per floor" and the penthouse retreat. The evidence is not explicit, but several listings consistently describe standard above-ground condo tower characteristics, so this feature is reasonably supported.

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.

I searched for short-term rental language such as STR, vacation rental, NUC, TVU, or hotel-style rental permissions and found no references. The remarks read like standard residential condo listings, so STR is not supported by the public remarks.

I looked for any hotel rental pool, managed-by-hotel, or branded rental program references and found none. Because STR is not evidenced in the remarks, hotel pool participation is also unsupported.

I searched for mandatory rental pool language such as required participation, cannot opt out, or must rent the unit, and found nothing. The listings instead describe ordinary owner-use condo features, with no indication of a mandatory pool program.

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.

I searched for ground lease, leasehold, lease expiry, and any 4-digit expiration year, but found nothing. There is no public remark evidence about land tenure or a lease expiration date.

The remarks directly confirm VA approval, so VA financing is accepted. This is strong, explicit evidence from the listing text.

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.

Mountain views are directly confirmed in multiple remarks: one listing says 'serene views of the Ala Wai Canal and lush mountain ridgelines,' and another notes 'panoramic vistas stretching from scenic mountains.' This is consistent with the MLS history showing mountain-view descriptors in 4 of 8 listings, suggesting the building offers mountain-view units rather than a one-off copy/paste error.

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.

City/urban views appear to be a common building-level feature based on MLS history (7 of 8 listings). While the current remarks do not always say 'city view' verbatim, the Waikiki penthouse's '360-degree views' and the building's heart-of-Waikiki location strongly support city/urban outlooks across multiple units.

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.

Marina/canal-type views are clearly supported by multiple listings, especially remarks about 'serene views of the Ala Wai Canal' and a 'serene canal' panorama. The MLS history matches this pattern with marina/canal descriptors in 4 of 8 listings, indicating this is a recurring building feature rather than an isolated unit exception.

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.

I searched for explicit statements like fireworks view, watch fireworks from the lanai, or see fireworks from unit, and found none. The listings focus on canal, mountain, golf course, Diamond Head, and ocean peek-a-boo views, but not fireworks.

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.

The building appears to have a resident/on-site manager based on MLS history, with 7 of 8 listings marked RESMAN. The current remarks are silent on this feature, which is common for copied MLS remarks, and there is no conflicting evidence suggesting the amenity was removed. Given the consistent historical pattern, this remains a high-confidence building feature.

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.