Lalea at Hawaii Kai 3
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.
Lalea at Hawaii Kai 3
Building Overview
Lalea at Hawaii Kai 3 in Hawaii Kai, built 1998; pets and short-term rentals are not allowed.
About Lalea at Hawaii Kai 3
Lalea at Hawaii Kai 3 is a residential building located in the Hawaii Kai neighborhood, built in 1998. Based on MLS data, specific details on building size (unit count or square footage) and construction type are not provided in the available records.
According to available records, the property does not allow pets and does not permit short-term rentals. The MLS information does not list onsite amenities, common areas, or unit-level features, and the management company is listed as unknown in the data provided.
Buyers should verify parking, maintenance fees, HOA rules, management details, and any other important items with the listing agent or association, as this summary is based solely on MLS data and the provided fields.
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 a community-level owner-occupancy figure and did not find one. The only related wording is a single unit described as owner-occupied, which is not enough to infer the overall building percentage.
I searched the listing remarks for any reference to elevator count and found none. The remarks discuss units, parking, pool, resident manager, and general community features, but do not mention elevators.
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
Evidence for common-area electricity is weak: only 1 of 4 current listings has OTCOEX checked, and the remarks discuss amenities, repairs, and in-unit features but never mention common electricity being paid by the association. This looks more like inconsistent MLS checkbox usage than a confirmed building benefit.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Hot water is not supported here: none of the current listings show HOTWAT, and most explicitly include WTRHTR instead. The public remarks contain no language suggesting hot water is provided by the association, so this is a strong negative signal.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sewer inclusion appears consistent across all current listings, with 4 of 4 MLS records showing SEWER. The remarks do not contradict this, so the feature is highly reliable for the building.
Water inclusion is strongly supported across all current listings: 4 of 4 MLS records list WATER. The public remarks do not contradict that, making this a high-confidence building feature.
BBQ is directly confirmed in 3+ listing remarks, including phrases like "BBQ area" and "several lawn areas with BBQ and cabanas." This matches the current MLS data, which shows 4/4 listings with BBQ, so the evidence is strong and consistent across multiple agents.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
The clubhouse is directly mentioned in the remarks and reinforced by the current MLS data showing 4/4 listings with CLUHOU. This is consistent across listings and appears to be a genuine building amenity.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
There is no explicit "meeting room" phrase, but one listing says the recreation room can be reserved for parties, suggesting a multipurpose community room. Confidence is lower than the other amenities because the MLS remarks do not directly use meeting-room language.
Evidence supports patio/deck for at least some units in the building: 1 of 3 listings has PATDEC/COVPAT in MLS amenities, and one listing description says "private outdoor patio." The remaining remarks are silent on patio/deck, so this is moderate-confidence evidence rather than a consistently repeated building-wide amenity.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Recreation area is supported by the current remarks, including "well-maintained recreation space" and references to common outdoor lawn areas. This appears to be a building-level amenity, not a unit-specific feature.
The recreation room is clearly supported by the remarks, including the specific phrase "a recreation room that can be reserved for parties." With 3/4 current listings showing RECROO, the feature appears to be a real shared amenity rather than a copy-paste error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Storage is confirmed by multiple listings: one describes an "enclosed garage and storage room," and another mentions a "convenient storage closet" in the garage. Current MLS data also shows storage appearing in both amenities and unit features for some listings, so this looks like a real building/unit feature rather than a mistake.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Pool is strongly confirmed for Lalea at Hawaii Kai. Multiple current listings mention a "swimming pool" and related shared amenities like clubhouse/recreation room, BBQ area, and cabanas, indicating this is a common building amenity rather than a copy-paste error. Historical MLS data is also consistent, with 4/4 listings showing pool-related amenity codes.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Laundry in unit is strongly supported. Across the remarks, multiple listings explicitly mention 'in-unit washer and dryer' or washer/dryer included in the unit/garage, which aligns with the prior high-confidence MLS data. This appears to be consistent across several listings rather than a one-off or copy-paste anomaly.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Parking is clearly present across all available listings for this building. Multiple remarks mention specific parking types, including "2 assigned parking stalls," "2 parking townhouse," and an "enclosed garage," plus one listing also references guest parking and street parking. The evidence is strong and consistent across several listings, not just a single agent's copy-paste.
Assigned parking is directly supported by the remarks and MLS data. One listing explicitly states "two assigned parking stalls," and another listing pattern suggests this is a common building feature.
Covered parking is well supported. Multiple listings reference an enclosed garage, and the current MLS checkbox data also shows garage/covered parking in most listings.
I searched for explicit deeded/owned parking language such as "deeded parking," "owned stall," or "parking included in deed." The listings only confirm assigned parking and a garage, so deeded parking is not established.
No analysis available
I looked for any reference to parking fees, parking rent, or monthly charges and found none. The remarks describe parking as assigned, but do not mention any separate cost.
Guest parking appears to be present in the MLS data for all 3 listings, but the remarks do not confirm it directly. This looks like repeated listing metadata rather than explicit copy in the public description, so confidence is moderate.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for terms like "parking waitlist," "parking waiting list," or "join waitlist for parking" and found nothing. There is no evidence in the remarks that parking is managed by a waitlist.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Window AC is strongly supported across the current remarks. At least 2 of the listings explicitly mention window A/C units, including 'window a/c units' and 'Window AC units in each room,' which is consistent with the prior high-confidence MLS history. This looks like repeated agent copy/paste of a real building feature rather than a one-off mention.
Only 1 of 3 listings has the concrete material checkbox, and the remarks are silent on construction type. With no corroborating agent description or site-visit style language, this looks more like unverified MLS input than building-level proof.
Double wall construction is strongly supported at the building level: all 4 of 4 current listings include DOUWAL in construction_materials. The public remarks are silent on construction, but the MLS signal is consistent across listings and aligns with the prior high-confidence history.
There is no public-remarks support for hollow tile construction across the provided listings. The only signal is a single current MLS entry with HOLTIL in construction_materials, which is not strong enough on its own to validate the feature for the building.
Just 1 of 3 listings carries the masonry/stucco checkbox, and none of the remarks reference masonry, stucco, or a construction update. The pattern is weak and may reflect copy/paste or inconsistent MLS entry rather than a verified building attribute.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No listing remarks mention above ground construction, and the only signal is one current MLS checkbox out of four. This is too weak to treat as a reliable building-level feature, especially given how often MLS construction fields are copied without verification.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for indications that short-term rentals are permitted, including legal vacation rental language, NUC, or TVU references. None were found, so STR allowance is not supported by the remarks.
I searched for hotel pool references like hotel rental program, managed by hotel, or branded pool participation, and found none. Since there is no evidence that STR is allowed, this must also be false.
I looked for language such as mandatory pool, required rental program, or cannot opt out, and found nothing. There is no evidence of a mandatory rental pool arrangement in the public remarks.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for leasehold wording like "lease expires," "ground lease ends," or a renewal year, but found no such reference. Because no specific expiration year appears in the remarks, the value remains null.
I searched the public remarks for VA loan approval language such as "VA approved" or "VA financing" and found nothing. With no explicit evidence, this is marked false based on absence of mention.
I searched the remarks for language indicating the HOA provides full or walls-in insurance coverage, but there was no such statement. The listings emphasize community upkeep and amenities, not insurance coverage details.
No analysis available
I looked for explicit statements that the building passed fire/life safety evaluation or similar safety compliance language and found nothing. The remarks focus on amenities and unit updates rather than building inspection or certification status.
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 listing remarks explicitly describe mountain views; the strongest related text is a reference to "views of Koko Crater" and "stunning sunrises," which is not enough to confirm a mountain-view feature. With 2 of 3 MLS listings showing NONE in the view field and no corroborating remarks across agents, the evidence leans against including mountain views.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sunrise views are directly confirmed in the remarks: "stunning sunrises." One of three MLS listings also includes SUNRIS in the view field, so the feature appears real even though it is not listed on every entry. The evidence is explicit and consistent enough to include.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
1 of 3 listings explicitly mentions a resident manager, using the phrase 'Resident manager on site.' The MLS amenities checkbox also shows RESMAN in one listing, supporting that this is a real building feature rather than a copied mistake. Evidence is explicit but not repeated across all remarks.
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.