Rosalei Ltd

MLS data is unanimous that the Rosalei was built in 1955, and one listing explicitly states it is the 'historic Rosalei built in 1955'. There is no evidence of a different construction year or a complete rebuild that would override this.

The highest observed unit floor in MLS data is 11, and one listing explicitly mentions an '11th-floor lanai'. No remarks or fields indicate any floors above 11, so the building is best characterized as an 11-story high-rise.

None of the listings mention how many total units the Rosalei has, and MLS structural fields do not provide a valid count. As a result, the total number of units in the building cannot be reliably determined from the available data.

The provided building context includes an owner_occupancy value of 39.00. I searched the remarks for explicit owner-occupancy statements (e.g., 'owner occupied', '80% owner occupied') and found none, so per rules I retained the existing numeric value with low confidence since the remarks do not confirm or contradict it.

Public remarks repeatedly and explicitly mention a two-elevator modernization/replacement. Given the direct, repeated references in multiple listings, the count is set to 2 with high 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.

The building is described as having individual split/window A/C units rather than a central chilled-water or building A/C system. With no MLS ACCEN flags and no explicit reference to central A/C being provided by the association, central air conditioning is not considered an included building utility.

Very strong evidence: 20 of 20 MLS entries flag CABTV and many remarks explicitly say 'basic cable' or 'cable TV' is included. Sample phrases: 'Maintenance fee includes cable TV', 'maintenance fees include basic cable' — consistent across multiple listings and agents.

Moderately strong evidence: 16 of 20 MLS entries include common-area coverage and remarks include phrases like 'common elements' and 'common area maintenance' (e.g., 'Maintenance fee includes ... common elements', 'common area maintenance').

The Rosalei is consistently marketed as a fee simple condo, not a cooperative, and there is no mention of co-op or building-level tax charges in the maintenance fees. Therefore, cooperative taxes are not included in the HOA dues.

Very strong evidence: 19 of 20 MLS entries indicate electricity is included and numerous remarks explicitly state 'electricity' or 'electric' are covered (e.g., 'Maintenance fees include electricity', 'Maintenance fee includes air conditioning, electric, hot water, sewer, and basic cable').

All utility-included descriptions focus on electric, water, sewer, cable, internet, and hot water, with no indication of any gas service or gas charges. Given the lack of MLS GAS flags and the building’s electric-focused descriptions, gas is not included in the maintenance fees.

Strong evidence: 16 of 20 MLS entries flag hot water and multiple agent remarks explicitly state 'hot water included' (e.g., 'Maintenance fees include ... hot water', 'Maintenance fees include electricity, cable, internet, hot water, sewer, and water').

Strong evidence: 17 of 20 MLS entries list internet service and numerous remarks explicitly say 'internet included' or 'maintenance fees include internet' (e.g., 'Maintenance fees include internet', 'all utilities... internet').

The building is near the marina, but no listing states that marina usage or boat-related fees are part of the maintenance dues. With zero MLS MARINA flags and only locational references, marina costs are not included in the fees.

Very strong evidence: 19 of 20 MLS entries indicate sewer is included and many agent remarks explicitly state 'sewer' or 'water/sewer' are covered by the maintenance fees (e.g., 'Maintenance fees include ... sewer', 'water/sewer included').

Extremely strong evidence: 20 of 20 MLS entries flag WATER and numerous remarks explicitly state 'water is included' (e.g., 'Maintenance fees include water', 'Maintenance Fees include ALL utilities!').

At least three different listings mention a 'pool, BBQ area and on-site laundry' or 'pool and BBQ area' as building amenities. The repetition across multiple agents plus supporting MLS checkboxes strongly confirms a common BBQ facility.

Several listings from different agents describe on-site bike storage with phrases like 'Surfboard racks, moped head parking, & bike storage', 'HOA dues cover ... surfboard/bike/moped storage', and 'Rosalei features ... surfboard storage, bike storage.' One studio listing also notes 'Amenities include a pool, and bike and surfboard storage.' This repeated, explicit wording across multiple listings is strong evidence that the building offers dedicated bicycle storage.

The water and marina references are clearly about nearby or viewable areas, not a dedicated dock on the property. Given the marketing value of such an amenity, its complete absence from remarks indicates there is no boat dock.

Listings that enumerate parking, storage, pool, BBQ, and laundry never mention a car wash facility. Given this and the near-total absence of CRWSH in MLS, it is very likely there is no car wash amenity.

Agents highlight the pool, BBQ, laundry, storage, and lobby but never a clubhouse or community center. The consistent omission and MLS data together indicate there is no clubhouse amenity.

Agents highlight building management quality and a resident manager but never describe concierge-type services such as a staffed front desk or assistance with reservations/packages. Given the complete absence of such references and CONCIE being unchecked on all MLS records, the building is best characterized as not offering concierge service.

While pets are allowed, agents do not advertise any dedicated pet or dog park area. In a market where such features are prized, their absence from remarks and MLS implies no dog park exists.

The building is consistently described as well-managed with an on-site or resident manager, not with a doorman or lobby attendant. With all MLS entries leaving the doorman amenity unchecked and no textual references, the evidence points to the absence of a doorman service.

Multiple listings provide long amenity descriptions without any reference to a gym or fitness room. In a Waikiki condo, a fitness center would be prominently marketed if present, so it is very likely this building has no exercise room.

Even high-end units highlight only standard amenities, with no suggestion of a house car or chauffeur service. This makes it almost certain that the building does not offer limo or courtesy car service.

Marketing remarks that would normally advertise a reservable meeting or conference room do not mention such a feature. The near-absence of MEEROO in MLS and lack of textual support indicate the building does not offer a formal meeting room.

Strong evidence across multiple listings: many unit remarks reference a "private lanai", "covered lanai/balcony", "spacious lanai", or "balcony" and building-level amenities mention a "pool and patio/deck area." The MLS checkbox history also listed PATDEC/COVPAT on many units. Evidence is consistent across different agents and listings, supporting inclusion of patio/deck as a building amenity.

While the neighborhood offers outdoor recreation, there is no indication of a private jogging or walking path as part of the property. The absence of this in remarks and MLS suggests no building-specific jogging path.

Agents focus on adult-oriented amenities like pool, BBQ, and storage and never mention any kids’ play structures. This consistent omission indicates there is no playground amenity.

None of the numerous listings mention a private yard, fenced yard, or any yard-type space, despite extensively listing amenities. Given the high-rise structure and MLS absence of PRIYAR, it is very likely the building offers no private yard areas.

References to 'world-class golfing experiences' clearly refer to nearby courses, not an in-building facility. The lack of any mention of a putting green and zero MLS checkboxes make it very likely no putting green exists at the building.

Remarks repeatedly refer to a pool with surrounding patio/deck, seating, tables, and shower, which functions as a recreation area for residents. Combined with several MLS RECARE checkboxes, this supports the presence of a common recreation/amenity deck.

Agents consistently omit any 'rec room' or similar space while detailing other common areas like the pool deck and lobby. This pattern makes it very likely that there is no dedicated recreation room in the building.

Agents emphasize that the building is 'close to' or 'within walking distance' of restaurants rather than having its own. This clear distinction strongly indicates there is no in-building restaurant amenity.

Listings thoroughly describe views from lanais and the pool/amenity areas but never reference any rooftop terrace or deck. This strongly suggests the building has no shared rooftop amenity.

Agents market the pool, BBQ, laundry, and storage but never a sauna or steam room, which would usually be highlighted in Waikiki. This strongly supports that the building does not have a sauna.

Strong evidence that the building offers storage units/lockers: historical MLS checkboxes showed storage in 11/20 listings (amenities) and 5/20 (unit_features), and current public remarks mention storage in many listings (phrases include “storage lockers,” “assigned storage locker in the basement,” “dedicated storage unit,” and “bonus storage”). The storage references appear across multiple agent listings and unit remarks (not limited to a single listing), supporting a high-confidence true value.

I searched for 'surfboard storage', 'surfboard rack', 'surfboard locker' and found numerous explicit mentions across the public remarks confirming surfboard storage is available.

Dozens of remarks describe the building’s amenities yet never reference tennis courts or tennis facilities. Given the marketing value of such an amenity in Waikiki, this strongly indicates there is no tennis court at this property.

18 of 20 recent MLS listings for this building list the TRACHU (trash chute) amenity, indicating the checkbox is widely selected across agents. None of the public remarks explicitly mention a "trash chute", "garbage chute" or "refuse chute," so the feature is implied by consistent MLS data rather than directly described in agent remarks; evidence is moderate (likely true) but not confirmed by explicit text.

Multiple listings describe parking (assigned stalls, covered/secured stalls, rentable stalls nearby, street/metered parking) without any reference to valet service. The consistent omission of valet and MLS data both indicate the building does not offer valet parking.

At least three separate remarks describe a secured, gated garage or covered secured parking, implying a physical gate/fence controlling entry to the building’s parking area. Together with some agents checking the GATED/WALFEN box, this supports treating the building as offering gated/perimeter-style physical security relevant to prospective buyers.

The amenity descriptions consistently distinguish only a standard (sometimes heated) swimming pool. The lack of any hot tub or spa language strongly indicates there is no whirlpool facility.

All 20 current MLS listings include a pool amenity and numerous public remarks explicitly reference the building pool (phrases found include 'sparkling saltwater pool', 'large heated pool', and 'beautiful swimming pool'). The repeated, varied descriptions across multiple listings and agents indicate a real, shared amenity rather than a single listing error, providing strong evidence the building has a pool.

At least three separate listings explicitly call the amenity a 'heated pool' or 'large heated pool,' not just a generic pool, showing consistent agent awareness of this feature. Other listings refer generically to the pool while one notes recent water heating system and tank replacements, consistent with operating a heated pool. Despite limited HEAPOO checkbox use, the textual remarks provide strong evidence that the Rosalei’s shared pool is heated.

I searched for 'salt water', 'saltwater', 'salt pool' etc. The pool is described as saltwater in the listing materials (multiple mentions across listings), giving strong evidence the pool is a saltwater pool.

0 of 20 listings mention in-unit washer/dryer; instead multiple listings state 'community laundry', 'on-site laundry', or 'community laundry facilities'. No public remark contains phrases like 'in-unit laundry', 'washer and dryer in unit', or 'stacked washer dryer', so the evidence across many agents consistently supports that the building does not offer in-unit laundry.

Very strong, consistent evidence that the Rosalei building offers shared laundry: MLS checkbox shows COMLAU on 20 of 20 listings and many public remarks explicitly state 'community laundry', 'on-site laundry', 'community laundry facilities', or 'clean laundry facilities'. Mentions appear repeatedly across multiple agents/listings rather than a single copy-paste instance, supporting inclusion of the shared laundry feature.

Remarks repeatedly mention 'community laundry' and once reference a 'vending machine', but there is no explicit phrasing such as 'coin-op', 'quarters', 'card operated', or 'paid laundry'. I searched for those keywords and found none that clearly indicate paid laundry.

Public remarks repeatedly mention a community laundry facility but do not state laundry is provided on every floor. I searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor', 'laundry room on every floor', and 'floor-by-floor laundry' and found no matches.

Multiple listing remarks for units in this building mention parking (examples: 'coveted parking stall', 'covered secured assigned parking stall', 'owns one covered parking stall'). Data review notes that roughly a dozen current listings reference parking stalls or covered/garage parking. Evidence is consistent across different agent remarks rather than a single copy/paste, supporting inclusion of building parking.

Multiple listings explicitly state assigned or reserved parking stalls (phrases quoted above). The MLS parking_features also showed ASSIGN present in several current listings (7/20). These repeated, specific remarks across different listings provide strong evidence that the building offers assigned parking.

Current remarks across many listings repeatedly reference covered parking: "covered parking", "covered secured garage", and "assigned covered parking space", showing that covered parking/garage stalls are available for some units. This matches prior MLS checkbox data (5 of 20) and constitutes strong evidence the building offers covered parking.

Numerous listings explicitly indicate an assigned/covered parking stall is included with the unit or sale, supporting that parking is deeded/owned with units.

Neither the marketing remarks nor the MLS checkbox data indicate any EV charging or electric vehicle stations. This strongly suggests the building does not currently offer EV-specific parking amenities.

Searched the remarks for specific monthly parking fees or phrases like 'monthly parking charge', 'parking fee', or numeric dollar amounts for parking and found none. Listings frequently state assigned/covered parking is included with units or that parking can be rented nearby, but there is no stated monthly fee in the public remarks.

Remarks steer guests to metered or street parking rather than any building-managed guest stalls, and the MLS does not show a guest parking feature. This indicates the building does not provide dedicated guest parking as an amenity.

Numerous remarks explicitly note secured access for the building and its parking—quotes include "secured gated garage", "secured building entry", and "fob required entry", and several listings mention "covered secured parking stall"—supporting that parking in this building has secured entry. This aligns with historical MLS data (SECENT present in several listings), so confidence is high.

All references to parking describe single stalls; no listing suggests that any stalls are tandem-style. It is highly likely that the building does not offer tandem parking.

Listings emphasize self-parking in assigned or rented stalls and nearby street/metered parking, with no reference to valet services. This indicates the building does not provide valet parking.

Searched for terms such as 'parking waitlist', 'waiting list for parking', and similar phrases; none were found. Remarks emphasize assigned stalls included with many units and parking for rent nearby, with no indication of a formal waitlist system.

At least one agent clearly notes that elevator use requires a fob, and multiple remarks discuss the building’s two elevators and their recent upgrades. This direct language goes beyond generic 'secured building' phrasing and supports the presence of keyed/fob-access elevator security available to residents building-wide.

I searched for 'fob', 'key card', 'card reader', 'secured entry' and found multiple explicit references to fob/keycard or secured entry systems in the public remarks.

Across all collected remarks, there are zero references to a security guard or staffed security personnel; instead the building is described as having an on-site/resident manager. With 19/20 MLS entries not checking SECGUA and no textual evidence of guards, this is best treated as a correction of sporadic MLS mis-entry rather than a real service.

Listings describe secured access, intercom, fob entry, and an on-site/resident manager, but there is no explicit reference to a security patrol or patrol service. I searched for 'security patrol', 'roving security', and similar terms and found none.

Multiple agents emphasize secure or fobbed access but none mention security cameras or video monitoring. Combined with SECSYS being unchecked on all 20 MLS records, this strongly suggests the building does not provide a dedicated video surveillance system as a marketed amenity.

Across 20+ listings, there are no explicit references to central air or building-wide HVAC, and no MLS central AC checkboxes are marked. Instead, agents consistently describe individual split and window AC units, indicating cooling is provided at the unit level rather than via a central system.

At least two listings clearly advertise split systems with phrases like 'Newer split A/C system installed' and 'Features include ... split A/C'. Even though agents did not use the MLS split AC checkbox, the repeated explicit remarks provide strong evidence that some units have split AC.

Multiple data points support that some units have window air conditioners: 5 of 20 MLS listings included the ACWIUN checkbox, and at least one remark explicitly states 'the unit boasts a window AC.' Other remarks reference 'air conditioning in the bedroom' and 'split A/C,' showing a mix of window and split systems across units; evidence comes from several different agent remarks and historical MLS checkbox entries, so inclusion is warranted.

19 of 20 current listings mark 'CONCRE' as a construction material. Multiple agent remarks reference 'spalling repairs' and extensive exterior work (painting, spalling) consistent with reinforced concrete construction; listings consistently describe a multi-story high‑rise (built 1955) with elevator modernizations. Evidence is strong across many agents and appears well-supported rather than a single copy/paste.

Only 3 of 20 listings have the double-wall checkbox checked, and none of the agent remarks mention 'double wall' or 'double-wall construction.' The dominant construction designation and textual evidence point to a concrete high‑rise; the scattered double-wall flags likely reflect agent miscoding rather than an actual building feature.

The MLS never identifies hollow‑tile construction for this building and instead uniformly flags it as concrete. With no textual references to hollow tile and a concrete high‑rise profile, hollow‑tile construction is very unlikely here.

Historical data strongly indicates the Rosalei is concrete (previous high-confidence classification). In the current set, only 2 of 20 listings list MASSTU in construction_materials and no public remarks mention masonry or stucco (remarks discuss exterior painting, spalling repairs, repiping, and elevator upgrades). The sparse checkbox appearances appear inconsistent and likely copy/paste, so there is strong evidence the building does not have masonry/stucco construction.

All MLS records classify construction as concrete, and none mention or check steel-frame construction. Combined with typical 1950s Waikiki construction methods and the concrete spalling projects noted in remarks, it is very unlikely that this is a steel‑frame building.

While MLS checkboxes do not mark 'SLAB', the building’s age, height, and location strongly indicate a concrete slab foundation typical of Waikiki high‑rises. Extensive mention of concrete spalling and exterior concrete work further supports a slab‑based reinforced‑concrete structure.

No analysis available

There is no MLS indication of wood-frame construction (0 of 20 listings), and the Rosalei is a concrete high‑rise rather than a low‑rise wood structure. In Honolulu, wood‑frame is used for smaller walk‑ups and houses, not 10+ story 1950s towers, so wood‑frame can be ruled out with high confidence.

5 of 20 listings have the 'above ground' checkbox checked, but none of the public remarks mention 'above ground' construction or a raised/pier foundation. The building is repeatedly described as a multi-story concrete high-rise with elevator upgrades and large exterior spalling work, so the sporadic 'ABOGRO' checks appear to be data errors and not reflective of the building's construction.

There is zero MLS or remarks evidence of any brick or brick‑and‑mortar construction. Given local building norms and the consistent concrete classification, brick construction can be confidently excluded.

There is no MLS or remarks support for single‑wall construction, and the building type and era make single‑wall structurally implausible. This feature can be confidently ruled out for the Rosalei.

Multiple public remarks and rental descriptions reference a 3-month minimum or midterm/long-term rentals, which indicates short-term (transient/vacation) rentals are not allowed.

Because STRs are not allowed per remarks and there is no evidence of hotel rental pool programs, hotel pool participation is false.

There is no evidence of a mandatory rental-pool requirement; additionally STRs are not allowed, so mandatory hotel-pool participation is false.

At least 4 listings explicitly describe their tenure as fee simple (e.g., 'Bid on this FEE SIMPLE Studio', 'WAIKIKI GEM!! FEE SIMPLE'). No listings describe leasehold or lease rent terms, so the building clearly offers fee simple ownership units.

No listing for the Rosalei references leasehold tenure, leased land, or lease rent, while multiple explicitly highlight fee simple status. With 0/20 MLS entries marked LH and consistent absence of leasehold language in remarks, we infer the building is all fee simple and does not contain leasehold units.

Building is repeatedly described as fee simple across listings, so leasehold/ground-lease does not apply. Therefore there is no lease expiry year.

Searched the public remarks for phrases like 'VA approved', 'VA financing', or 'VA loans accepted' and found none. Remarks reference seller financing (vendee) and creative financing options, but there is no explicit indication the building is VA loan approved.

Public remarks explicitly and repeatedly state the building carries full/100% hurricane insurance. Because this language appears clearly in many listings, the insured_fully flag is set to true with high confidence.

A listing describing recent AOAO upgrades states there are 'fire sprinklers in key areas' with ongoing fire alarm testing and planned upgrades. This, along with one MLS record checking the sprinkler amenity, supports that the building has a fire sprinkler system, at least in common areas.

I searched the public remarks for explicit phrases such as 'FLSE passed', 'fire life safety evaluation passed', or 'passed fire inspection' and found none. The remarks do mention fire sprinklers in key areas and annual fire alarm testing, but do not state that the building has passed an FLSE. Therefore no positive FLSE assertion can be made from the remarks.

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

Agents repeatedly highlight Ala Wai Canal, mountain, city, and golf course views, but never mention ocean or Pacific Ocean views in any unit. MLS view data also shows 0/20 listings with OCEAN selected, indicating this is not a typical view feature of the building.

Strong building-level mountain/mauka view evidence: roughly 12+ listing remarks reference mountain or mauka views (examples: "views of the mountain and canal", "mountains and city", "peekaboo views of the mountains"). Mentions appear across multiple listings/agents rather than a single copy-paste entry, supporting inclusion of view_mountain=true.

While agents consistently market canal, mountain, city, and golf course views, there are zero mentions of Diamond Head in remarks or MLS view checkboxes. This strongly suggests Diamond Head is not a notable view feature for units in this building.

Multiple listings (approximately 6–8) explicitly reference city/city skyline or downtown views (quotes include "sweeping city views", "city skyline", "city and marina/canal views"). Evidence is present across several listings and agents, supporting inclusion of view_city=true.

The building is described as being a few blocks from Waikiki Beach and “sandy coastlines,” but not as having views of the coastline itself. With no coastline mentions in view remarks or MLS fields, coastline views do not appear to be a building feature.

No listings (0/20) mention a garden or courtyard view; remarks repeatedly describe 'Ala Wai Canal', 'marina/canal views', 'mountain', and 'city' views (e.g., 'scenic views of the Ala Wai Canal', 'views of the Ala Wai, city skyline, and mauka vistas'). Evidence is consistent across multiple agents and appears to reflect the building’s canal/urban orientation rather than any internal landscaped garden, so view_garden is omitted.

Several units directly advertise views of the adjacent golf course along with Ala Wai Canal and mountain vistas. Even without MLS checkbox usage, the repeated explicit phrases about “golf course” views confirm that some units enjoy golf course outlooks.

Listings frequently reference “Ala Wai Canal views,” “marina/canal views,” and similar language, indicating waterway/harbor-type vistas from multiple units. With MLS MARCAN flags and repeated canal view mentions, the building clearly offers marina/canal views in some units.

Agents do not market sunrise or morning-sun exposure in any unit despite otherwise detailed view descriptions. Combined with the absence of MLS SUNRIS flags, this suggests sunrise views are not a notable selling feature of this building’s units.

No listings mention sunset views (0 listings referenced 'sunset' or 'western exposure'); remarks repeatedly cite 'Ala Wai Canal', 'mountain', 'city', 'marina/canal' and phrases like 'sweeping city views' and 'watch the evening paddlers'. Evidence is consistent across multiple agent remarks and appears to market canal/mauka/city vistas rather than sunset/west-facing views.

All view descriptions focus on urban Waikiki, Ala Wai Canal, mountains, city, and golf course, with no hint of cemetery outlooks. Given the neighborhood context and complete absence of such mentions, it is effectively certain that cemetery views are not a feature of this building.

Listings describe views of the Ala Wai Canal, marina, mountains, city and ocean proximity, but none explicitly state you can watch fireworks from the lanai/units/building. I searched for phrases like 'fireworks view', 'see fireworks from', and related wording and found no matches.

No analysis available

No analysis available

At least 5 listings clearly describe the building as pet-friendly (e.g. 'secure pet-friendly building', 'Pets allowed', 'pets are welcome!'). With no 'no pets' restrictions indicated in MLS, the evidence strongly supports that pets are allowed in this building.

Strong, consistent evidence that the Rosalei has an on-site/resident manager: historical MLS checkbox data indicated RESMAN in 17 of 20 listings and current agent remarks across the corpus repeatedly state phrases like 'on-site management', 'site manager's office', 'resident manager', and 'on site Manager'. Multiple different listings (15+ agent remarks) mention management or a manager rather than a lone copy/paste instance, supporting inclusion of this building-level feature.

Dozens of listings market the property as a residential condo, including long-term rental language (e.g. '3 mo min', 'midterm renting') without any reference to hotel programs or front desk services. Combined with MLS absence of a condotel code, this indicates the building is not operated as a condotel.

Several listings describe the units as 'fee simple' condos and refer to AOAO projects and standard maintenance fees, with no mention of shares or cooperative ownership. The MLS also lacks any co-op tax indicator, so the building is almost certainly not a cooperative.