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.

I searched for explicit owner-occupancy indicators such as a percentage or descriptive wording and found none. Per the rules, the current value is retained because there is no remark-based evidence to confirm or change it.

Public remarks repeatedly confirm the building has two elevators and that they have been modernized or upgraded. This aligns with the current value and is strong, repeated evidence.

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.

Strong building-level evidence supports cable inclusion. Multiple remarks explicitly state maintenance fees include "cable," "basic cable," or "cable TV," and this appears across many listings rather than a one-off agent note. The consistency matches the MLS data showing CABTV in all listings.

There is solid support that maintenance fees cover common-area costs. At least one remark explicitly lists "common elements" / common area maintenance, and the MLS data shows this is nearly universal across the building. The pattern is building-level rather than a copied isolated claim.

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.

Electricity inclusion is very strongly supported. Numerous listings explicitly mention "electricity" in the maintenance fee package, and several say "all utilities" or similar language. The MLS data closely aligns with the remarks, indicating this is a consistent building-level feature.

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.

Hot water inclusion is strongly confirmed. Multiple listings explicitly say maintenance fees include "hot water," often alongside water, sewer, and electricity, and the MLS data shows HOTWAT in nearly every listing. The evidence is consistent across many agents and not limited to copy-paste wording.

Internet service appears to be a recurring included utility in this building. Several listings specifically say "internet" or "high-speed internet" is included, and the MLS data supports this in the large majority of records. The repeated phrasing across listings suggests a real building-level feature.

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.

Sewer inclusion is exceptionally consistent. Multiple listings explicitly mention "sewer" or "water/sewer" as covered by maintenance fees, and the MLS data shows this in all listings. This is strong, building-level confirmation.

Water inclusion is one of the strongest features in the building data. Listings repeatedly mention "water" or "water/sewer" as included in the maintenance fee package, matching the MLS data across all records. The evidence is consistent and high confidence.

BBQ is supported by multiple public remarks, including explicit phrases like 'pool, BBQ area' and 'pool, BBQ area and on-site laundry.' The repetition across several listings indicates this is a real shared amenity rather than a one-off copy/paste error.

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.

Across the provided remarks, there is no explicit mention of any meeting or conference room amenity. The MLS checkbox appears to be a likely copy/paste artifact rather than a verified building feature, so this feature should be treated as absent.

Strong evidence the building offers patio/deck-style outdoor space. Across many recent listings, agents consistently mention a lanai or balcony in the unit remarks—e.g. 'spacious private lanai,' 'covered lanai,' 'spacious lanai,' and 'private balcony lanai'—which aligns with the MLS amenities history. The repeated references across multiple listings and agents suggest this is a real building feature, not a one-off copy-paste error.

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.

The building is repeatedly described as having a pool surrounded by a patio/deck, seating, tables and chairs, plus a lobby lounge. While not always labeled 'recreation area,' the amenities clearly indicate a shared resident recreation space, though the wording is somewhat indirect.

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.

Storage is clearly a building feature at Rosalei. Roughly 20+ remarks mention it in some form, including 'storage lockers,' 'separate storage area,' 'dedicated storage unit,' 'assigned storage in basement,' and 'additional storage locker on site.' The consistency across many listings and agents strongly supports that storage units/lockers are available building-wide.

This feature is strongly and repeatedly supported across the remarks. Several listings explicitly mention surfboard racks, lockers, and surfboard storage, sometimes alongside bike storage. The building clearly offers surfboard storage facilities.

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.

Trash chute is strongly supported by the MLS data pattern, with 18 of 20 recent listings showing TRACHU. Public remarks across the listings do not explicitly mention a trash chute, which suggests the amenity is likely being carried by MLS data rather than repeated in marketing copy, but the consistency is high enough to keep it included.

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.

The Rosalei clearly has a shared building pool. Pool amenities are mentioned in many current remarks across numerous listings, including phrases like "pool," "swimming pool," "heated pool," and "large pool area," suggesting this is a consistent building feature rather than a one-off claim. The evidence is strong across multiple agents and aligns with the prior high-confidence MLS data.

There is strong evidence that the building’s pool is heated. At least two remarks explicitly say “heated pool” or “large heated pool,” while the rest of the listing remarks continue to reference the same shared pool amenity, indicating this is a real building feature even though MLS checkbox usage is inconsistent.

I searched for explicit salt-pool language such as "salt water pool," "saltwater pool," or "saline pool." The remarks confirm that the building has a pool, but they never identify it as salt water. So this feature is not supported by the remarks.

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.

Community laundry is clearly a building-wide amenity at Rosalei. Across the provided remarks, well over a dozen listings explicitly mention it using phrases like 'community laundry,' 'on-site laundry,' 'laundry facilities,' and 'clean laundry facilities,' which is consistent across multiple agents and years rather than a one-off copy-paste error. Historical MLS data also shows 20/20 listings with COMLAU, so confidence is very high.

I searched for signs that the community laundry is paid, such as coin laundry, coin-op, card-operated machines, or a laundry fee. The remarks only say "community laundry" or "laundry facilities" and do not indicate payment. So this remains unconfirmed and is treated as not evidenced in the remarks.

I looked for explicit wording like "laundry on every floor," "laundry room on each floor," or similar. The remarks repeatedly mention community laundry, but never specify that it exists on every floor. Based on the public remarks, this feature is not confirmed.

Parking is strongly supported across the listings. Multiple remarks from different agents mention parking in several forms—assigned, covered, secured, deeded, garage, and nearby/rental parking—showing this building offers parking for at least some units. The evidence is consistent and appears across many listings rather than a single copy-paste mention.

Assigned parking is strongly supported across many current listings, with multiple explicit phrases such as "assigned covered parking space," "deeded parking stall," "assigned parking stall," and "reserved parking space." The evidence appears consistent across multiple agents rather than a one-off copy-paste, and there is no meaningful contradiction in the remarks.

Covered parking is very clearly supported by numerous listings. Remarks use direct phrases like "covered parking," "covered secured garage parking," and "covered & secured parking stalls," showing this is a real building feature rather than an MLS checkbox artifact.

Multiple listings directly state that parking is deeded/owned with the unit. The repeated wording about deeded, assigned, and owned stalls strongly supports this being a deeded-parking building for at least some 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.

I searched for a stated parking charge, monthly parking rent, or dollar amount tied to parking and found none. Some listings mention nearby parking available for rent or that a stall may be rented, but no fee is specified.

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.

Secured parking entry is supported by multiple explicit mentions across listings, especially phrases like "covered secured garage parking" and "covered secured parking stall." The remarks also consistently describe the building as secure/secured, which aligns with parking access control and suggests the feature is genuine.

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.

I looked for "parking waitlist," "parking waiting list," or language about joining a list for parking and found nothing. The remarks instead describe individual included stalls, nearby parking, or rented stalls.

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.

The public remarks repeatedly describe the building as secured, and one listing specifically says "fob required entry." That is strong evidence of card/fob access security. This feature is supported with high confidence.

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.

I looked for wording indicating patrol service, such as "security patrol," "roving security," or "patrolled building." The listings mention secured entry and management, but not patrols. There is no public-remark evidence for this feature.

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.

Strong evidence that this building offers split A/C in at least some units. Multiple current listings explicitly mention it, including phrases like "split A/C for year-round comfort," "Newer split A/C system installed," and "split AC," which aligns with the prior high-confidence history. This appears to be consistent across multiple agents rather than a one-off copy-paste error.

Window AC is supported by both historical MLS data and current public remarks. At least 2 listings explicitly mention a "Window A/C unit" / "window AC," while MLS history shows ACWIUN appearing in 4 of 20 listings, suggesting this is a real but not universal building feature. Some other listings mention split AC instead, so the building appears to have mixed unit-level cooling types rather than a copy-paste universal claim.

Strong building-level evidence supports concrete construction. MLS data shows 19 of 20 current listings marked CONCRE in construction_materials, and the remarks across many listings repeatedly reference the same building without any contradiction. Because this appears to be consistent agent-entered MLS material data rather than a one-off note, confidence is very high.

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.

I searched for STR/TVU/NUC/vacation-rental permission and found no evidence that short-term rentals are allowed. The only rental language points to 3+ month terms or long-term rental use, which indicates STR is not permitted.

I looked for hotel pool, hotel rental program, managed-by-hotel, or similar resort-pool language and found none. Because there is no evidence STR is allowed, hotel-pool participation must also be false.

I searched for wording such as mandatory hotel pool, required rental participation, or cannot opt out and found nothing. With no hotel pool references and no STR evidence, mandatory pool participation is not supported.

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.

I looked for terms like ground lease, leasehold, lease expires, or a renewal/extension year and found nothing. The remarks describe the property as fee simple, so there is no lease-expiry year to extract.

I searched the public remarks for explicit VA-related language such as "VA approved," "VA financing," or "VA loans accepted" and found none. The only financing references were seller financing/creative financing, which do not indicate VA eligibility.

The listings directly and repeatedly state that the building is fully insured, specifically noting 100% hurricane coverage. This is strong public-remark evidence for walls-in/full building insurance.

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 remarks for direct fire/life safety evaluation language and found none. The listings mention fire sprinklers in key areas and annual fire alarm testing, but that is not the same as a passed fire/life safety evaluation.

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.

Mountain views are well supported across many listings and multiple agents, not just a single copy-paste description. Current remarks repeatedly cite phrases like 'mountain views,' 'Mnt. views,' and 'peekaboo views of the mountains,' matching the high historical MLS support.

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.

City views are clearly supported by the remarks and the building’s historical MLS pattern. Several listings across different agents mention 'city views' or 'city skyline,' indicating this is a genuine building-level view type offered in some units.

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.

Across the provided remarks, 0 listings explicitly describe a garden, courtyard, or landscaped view. Instead, the dominant view descriptions are canal, mountain, city, marina, and golf course views, which makes the current MLS 'GARDEN' entries look like likely data-entry noise rather than a true building-level feature.

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.

Marina/canal views are consistently supported across the listings, especially through repeated Ala Wai Canal references. The evidence spans multiple remarks and aligns with the building’s historical MLS view descriptions, making this a reliable feature.

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.

Sunset views are not supported by the current remarks; listings instead emphasize canal, mountain, and city views. Historical MLS data shows only 1/20 sunset mentions, so this appears to be absent or at least not reliably offered across the building.

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.

I looked for direct references to fireworks views from the building, unit, or lanai. The remarks mention canal, mountain, city, marina, and beach proximity, but nothing about fireworks visibility. There is no public-remark evidence for this feature.

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, repeated evidence across the current remarks confirms the building has a resident/on-site manager. Multiple listings explicitly mention "on-site management," "site manager," "resident manager," "all day manager," and "excellent managed building," which is consistent with the prior MLS pattern showing RESMAN in 19/20 listings. This looks like a stable building-level feature, not a one-off agent copy-paste error.

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.