Mokuleia Beach Colony
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.
Mokuleia Beach Colony
Building Overview
Mokuleia Beach Colony in North Shore — built 1966; no pets and no short-term rentals (based on MLS data).
About Mokuleia Beach Colony
Mokuleia Beach Colony is a residential building located on the North Shore, originally built in 1966. According to available MLS records, specific details regarding the number of units, building size, and construction type are not specified in the provided data.
Key policies recorded in the MLS indicate that pets are not allowed and short-term rentals are not permitted at this property. The management company is listed as unknown in the MLS data. No additional amenity or common-area information is available in the provided records.
Buyers and agents should verify all building details, including unit counts, construction type, parking arrangements, HOA fees, and management, with the seller, listing agent, or official condominium documents. This summary is based solely on the available MLS data and does not include information beyond those records.
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 percentage like '80% owner occupied,' 'majority owner occupied,' or similar wording, but the remarks do not provide a number. The closest statement only indicates a mix of full-time residents and second homeowners, which is not enough to estimate a precise owner-occupancy rate.
I searched the public remarks for explicit elevator references such as a count, 'multiple elevators,' or any mention of an elevator, and found none. The property is repeatedly described as a bungalow or single-level residence, which also suggests no elevator access.
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
11 of 14 listings indicate common area electricity is included (OTCOEX). The public remarks do not explicitly mention utility fees, but they also do not conflict with the MLS checkbox pattern. This appears to be a consistent building-level item across multiple agent listings rather than a one-off entry.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Only 1 of 14 listings includes HOTWAT, while 10 of 14 explicitly list water heaters in the unit (WTRHTR). Multiple remarks mention tankless, on-demand, or otherwise in-unit water heaters, which is inconsistent with building-supplied hot water being included. The evidence strongly points to this being a unit-level water-heater setup rather than a fee-included hot water benefit.
No analysis available
No analysis available
13 of 14 listings include sewer in association fees. There are no public-remark contradictions, and the consistency across listings makes this a very strong building-level feature. This looks like a stable MLS item rather than copy-paste noise.
13 of 14 listings indicate water is included in the association fee. No remarks suggest otherwise, and the near-universal MLS pattern points to a consistent building amenity/fee inclusion. This is strong evidence that the building includes water in maintenance fees.
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
Multiple listings explicitly describe the building/community as having a "walking path," "scenic walking path," or simply "paths" among the amenities. I found this in several separate remarks, alongside the MLS amenity flag appearing in 7/14 listings, which strongly supports that the building offers a shared walking/jogging path feature.
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
I searched the remarks for surfboard storage or related storage amenities and found nothing. The listings mention beach/ocean access and outdoor showers, but no dedicated surfboard storage.
All current listings (MLS TENCOU checked on 13/13) include remarks referencing tennis facilities with phrases like 'tennis court', 'tennis courts', and 'tennis & pickle ball courts'. The repeated, explicit mentions across multiple listings and agents provide strong, independent confirmation that the building offers tennis court amenities.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Pool is strongly supported: all 14 current MLS listings include the amenity, and numerous remarks explicitly mention it. Examples include "heated swimming pool," "salt-water pool," "private pool," and "community amenities including a pool." The evidence is consistent across multiple agents and clearly indicates a shared building/community pool.
No analysis available
This is directly confirmed in the remarks with an explicit salt-water pool description. Additional listings mention the pool but the salt-water wording is the key evidence.
No analysis available
At least 1 listing explicitly says the unit has "community laundry (if preferred)," which directly supports shared laundry facilities in the building. Current MLS data also shows COMLAU checked in 9 of 14 listings, suggesting the amenity is commonly carried across listings, though many remarks appear to be copy-paste and also emphasize in-unit washer/dryer instead.
I searched for paid-laundry wording such as coin laundry, coin-op, quarters, card operated, or laundry fees. The remarks mention community laundry and in-unit laundry, but nothing indicates that the shared laundry requires payment.
I looked for phrases like laundry on each floor, laundry room on every floor, or floor-by-floor laundry, and found none. The listings only mention community laundry in general, plus in-unit washer/dryer in some units, so there is no evidence for every-floor laundry.
Parking is clearly offered at the building level. The MLS data is unanimous (14/14) for some form of parking feature, and the remarks explicitly reference parking access and a parking area. This looks consistent across multiple listings rather than copy-paste noise.
Assigned parking is likely present, supported by 12 of 14 MLS listings marking ASSIGN. Public remarks do not always say 'assigned' outright, but the unit-specific parking location language suggests reserved or designated stalls rather than generic open parking. Confidence is high, though the strongest evidence remains the MLS pattern.
No analysis available
I looked for explicit language like deeded parking, owned stall, or parking included in the deed, but none appears in the remarks. The references are only to convenient parking and guest parking, so deeded parking is not supported.
No analysis available
I searched for any mention of parking fees, monthly parking charges, or parking rental costs and found none. The remarks only describe parking location and guest parking, without pricing details.
Guest parking is explicitly confirmed in the remarks and supported by MLS data (10/14 listings). Several descriptions say 'Guest parking' or 'ample guest parking,' indicating this is a real building feature, not a one-off agent mistake. Evidence is strong and repeated across multiple listings.
Secured entry is supported by both MLS data and the public remarks. While only 3 of 14 listings have SECENT checked, multiple listings describe the property as 'gated,' 'private gated community,' and even 'secured by electric gates,' which strongly indicates secured access. The wording is consistent across several agents and not isolated.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for terms like parking waitlist, waiting list, or join the waitlist for parking, but there were no such mentions. Nothing in the listings suggests a parking waitlist system.
No analysis available
I searched for card/fob/keycard access language and found none. The community is described as gated and secure, but that is not the same as card-based security access.
No analysis available
I looked for patrol-service wording such as security patrol, roving security, or a patrolled property. The remarks only describe a gated/secure community, with no mention of patrols.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Split AC is clearly supported by the public remarks across multiple listings. At least 4 listings explicitly mention it with phrases like "features split AC," "brand new split AC system," and "a split AC unit," so this is not just a checkbox artifact. The MLS inclusions data (6/14) aligns with those remarks, indicating the building offers split AC in some units.
No analysis available
No public remarks mention concrete or reinforced concrete construction. MLS checkbox counts show only 5 of 13 listings with CONCRE while 9 of 13 list masonry/stucco, suggesting agents more often selected MASSTU. The uniform lack of concrete descriptions across multiple agent remarks implies the CONCRE flags are likely copy-paste mistakes; therefore concrete construction is unlikely.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Nine of 13 MLS listings list masonry/stucco (MASSTU). While the public remarks do not explicitly say 'masonry' or 'stucco', they also do not mention concrete or wood-frame construction and repeatedly describe the units as Hawaiian-style bungalows on landscaped grounds. The majority MLS selection for MASSTU across multiple listings provides moderate support that masonry/stucco is the building material.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Only 3 of 13 MLS listings show wood-frame checked, and none of the public remarks describe wood frame construction. The strong preponderance of MASSTU checks (9/13) and no agent remarks supporting wood-frame suggests the WOOFRA flags are likely incorrect; wood-frame construction is unlikely for the building.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
The remarks directly permit 30-day rentals, which is clear evidence that short-term rentals are allowed in this building. This is explicit and current listing language.
I searched for hotel rental pool references such as Hilton, Ritz, Trump, hotel program, or managed-by-hotel language and found none. Since STR is allowed but no hotel pool is mentioned, this remains false.
I looked for mandatory rental-pool wording like required participation or cannot opt out, but found nothing. The remarks do not indicate any compulsory hotel or rental pool arrangement.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for leasehold wording such as lease expires, ground lease ends, leasehold, or a 4-digit expiration year and found nothing. There is no public remark evidence to identify a lease expiry year.
The listings directly confirm VA financing support. I found explicit VA approval language plus a VA assumption reference, which is strong evidence this building is VA loan approved.
I searched the remarks for HOA insurance language such as fully insured, walls-in coverage, or full building insurance, and found nothing explicit. The remarks discuss amenities and community rules, but not insurance coverage.
No analysis available
I looked for language indicating the building passed a fire/life safety evaluation or similar safety certification, but there were no such references in the public remarks. The VA-approved note does not confirm fire/life safety 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
There is moderate MLS support for mountain views, but the public remarks provided do not clearly confirm them with phrases like 'mountain view' or 'Koolau view.' Since 5 of 14 current listings include MOUNTA in the view field and none show NONE, this likely reflects a real building-level view offering rather than a copy-paste anomaly, though the evidence is weaker than for garden views.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Garden views are strongly supported by both MLS data and remarks. Multiple listings describe 'beautiful garden views,' 'courtyard,' 'lush and green beautifully landscaped grounds,' and outlooks over the 'great lawn,' which is consistent across several agents and not just a single copied description.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Sunrise views have moderate support from the MLS and remarks. At least two listings mention 'morning sun,' which aligns with sunrise/eastern exposure, though the wording is not as explicit as 'sunrise view.'
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for explicit statements about seeing Friday night fireworks from units, lanais, or common areas. The remarks reference ocean views, sunset views, polo matches, and beach access, but nothing about fireworks visibility.
No analysis available
No analysis available
The resident manager feature appears in 13 of 14 recent MLS listings via the RESMAN amenity checkbox, which is strong building-level evidence. However, across the provided public remarks there are no explicit references to a "resident manager," "on-site manager," or similar wording, so the support looks like repeated MLS data rather than descriptive confirmation. Overall this is likely a real shared building feature, but the remarks themselves do not independently verify it.
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.