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, "majority owner occupied," or "highly owner occupied," but found no such mentions. With no supporting evidence in the remarks, the current value of 39.0 should be kept.

The public remarks consistently mention elevator modernization and a full upgrade of the building’s two elevators. This matches the current building context of 2 elevators, so the value is strongly supported.

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. Roughly all listings that mention utilities reference "cable TV" or "basic cable," and the current MLS data shows 20/20 listings include CABTV. This looks consistent across multiple agents rather than a copy-paste anomaly.

There is solid support that maintenance fees cover common-area costs. Several listings reference "common area maintenance" or "common elements," and the MLS data is nearly unanimous at 18/20. The evidence is consistent enough to treat this as a building feature.

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. Listings repeatedly say "electricity," "electric," or "all utilities," and the MLS data shows 19/20 listings include electricity. This is repeated across many independent remarks and appears reliable.

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 by both MLS data and remarks. Several listings say "hot water included" or list it alongside utilities, and there is no strong contrary evidence such as WTRHTR suggesting unit-owned heaters.

Internet service appears to be a recurring included utility in this building. Many listings mention internet/high-speed internet in the fee package, consistent with the strong MLS pattern despite occasional omitted remarks.

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 list "sewer" or "water/sewer" among covered fees, and the MLS data is 20/20. The evidence is strong across the dataset and not limited to one agent.

Water inclusion is one of the strongest features in the building data. Listings repeatedly mention "water" or "water/sewer" as included, and the MLS data shows universal water inclusion at 20/20. This is highly consistent across remarks and likely correct.

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 remarks, agents mention 'covered lanai,' 'spacious lanai,' 'private lanai,' and one states 'pool and patio/deck area,' which aligns with the historical PATDEC/COVPAT checkbox data. This appears consistent across multiple listings and agents rather than 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, using phrases like "separate storage area," "storage lockers," "dedicated storage unit," "assigned storage in basement," and "bonus storage." The repeated mentions across different listings and agents make this look like a real amenity rather than copy-paste noise.

The remarks repeatedly and explicitly confirm surfboard storage facilities in several forms. This is strong, consistent evidence that the building offers surfboard storage.

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 pattern, with 18 of 20 recent listings showing TRACHU. None of the public remarks explicitly say "trash chute," "garbage chute," or "refuse chute," so the evidence comes primarily from the repeated MLS amenity data rather than listing comments. Given the high historical consistency, this is likely a real building feature and not just copy-paste noise.

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 swimming pool. Pool amenities are mentioned in numerous current remarks across many listings, often in consistent copy-paste language such as "pool," "swimming pool," "sparkling pool," "heated pool," and "on-site pool." This strongly reinforces the already high-confidence historical MLS signal and does not appear to be a correction case.

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-water wording such as salt water pool, saltwater pool, or saline pool. The listings mention a pool, heated pool, and large pool area, but do not identify it as saltwater.

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 amenity at Rosalei. Well over a dozen listings mention it directly with phrases like "community laundry," "on-site laundry," "laundry facilities," and "clean laundry facilities," often alongside other shared amenities like pool and storage. The evidence is consistent across multiple agents and recent remarks, so confidence is very high.

I looked for language indicating paid laundry such as coin-op, card use, quarters, or laundry fees. The public remarks mention community laundry many times, but none state that it requires payment.

I searched for explicit wording like laundry on each floor, laundry room on every floor, or floor-by-floor laundry access. The listings only mention community laundry generally and one remark specifying the ground floor, which does not support every-floor laundry.

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.

The building clearly offers assigned/reserved parking. Current remarks repeatedly mention phrases like '1 assigned covered parking space,' 'one assigned parking stall,' and 'one assigned, reserved parking space included with sale,' across many listings and agents. This is strong, consistent evidence rather than a copy-paste checkbox artifact.

Covered parking is strongly supported by numerous listings. Multiple remarks mention 'covered parking space,' 'covered secured garage parking,' and 'assigned covered parking stalls,' indicating the building offers covered stalls for at least some units. The evidence is consistent across different listings and not limited to a single agent remark.

The remarks repeatedly indicate parking is owned with the unit rather than merely rented. There are several explicit references to deeded, owned, assigned, and included stalls, which strongly supports deeded parking.

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 fee, monthly parking charge, rental amount, or other dollar figure tied to parking and found none. The listings discuss nearby rental parking and a stall being rented by an owner, but do not provide a monthly fee.

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 entry for parking is supported by multiple explicit mentions. Listings refer to 'covered secured parking,' 'secured gated garage,' and 'secured building entry,' showing the parking area has controlled access features. This appears consistently across several remarks and aligns with the current MLS security indicators.

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 explicit references to a parking waitlist or waiting list and found none. The remarks focus on assigned/deeded parking and nearby rented parking, not on a queue 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.

The listings provide explicit security-access wording consistent with card/fob entry. Because multiple remarks say the building is secured and one specifically says fob-required entry, this is high-confidence evidence for card/fob access security.

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 searched for patrol-service language like security patrol, roving security, or patrolled building. The remarks describe a secured building with management and intercom, but do not mention any patrol service.

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.

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 none of the public remarks contradict that. The repeated description of Rosalei as a "classic"/"historical hi rise" with major concrete-typical repairs like spalling work and exterior reconstruction further supports that the building is concrete.

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 short-term rental approval language such as STR, vacation rental allowed, NUC/TVU, or hotel-style rental permission and found none. The only rental references point to 3+ month or midterm rentals, which suggests STR is not allowed.

I looked for hotel rental pool, hotel-managed program, Hilton/Trump/Ritz pool language, and found none. Because the building does not appear to allow STR based on the remarks, hotel-pool participation is also false.

I searched for wording such as mandatory participation, required rental program, or cannot opt out and found nothing. The listings instead emphasize owner-occupant use, investment, and midterm/long-term rental potential, so a mandatory hotel pool 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 any leasehold language, ground lease end date, renewal/extension year, or lease expiry year and found nothing. The remarks consistently describe Rosalei as fee simple, so there is no public-remark evidence of a lease expiry date.

I searched the remarks for explicit VA-related language such as VA approved, VA financing, and VA loans accepted, but found none. The only financing references were to seller financing/Vendee or creative financing, which are not VA approval evidence.

The listings repeatedly and directly say the building is fully insured, including 100% hurricane insurance coverage. This is strong, repeated evidence that the building has full insurance coverage.

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 such as FLSE passed, fire safety certified, life safety compliant, or passed fire inspection, but found none. The references to sprinklers and annual alarm testing suggest safety-related upkeep, but they do not confirm a passed FLSE.

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.

Multiple listings explicitly mention mountain-facing views across different agents and time periods. Current remarks include direct phrases such as "mountain and canal," "mountain views," "Mnt. views," and "mauka vistas," confirming the building offers mountain-view units. The consistency across many listings suggests this is a real building-level feature, not a copy-paste error.

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.

Several listings explicitly reference city-oriented views, including "sweeping city views," "city skyline," and "beautiful view of the city." Current remarks also pair city views with Ala Wai, canal, and mountain outlooks, showing that city-view units are genuinely available in the building. The repeated mentions across multiple listings support including this feature.

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-type views are well supported for this building. Across many listings, agents describe "Ala Wai Canal," "marina/canal," and similar waterway views from lanais and high-floor units, indicating this is a real and recurring building feature. The evidence appears consistent across multiple listings rather than a one-off remark.

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 current listings explicitly mention sunset views; 0/20 view descriptions include SUNSET and several remarks instead describe canal, mountain, city, or sunrise views. The evidence across listings appears consistent rather than copy-paste confirmation of sunset exposure, so this feature should remain false.

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 searched for direct-view phrases like fireworks view, see fireworks from the unit, or watch fireworks from the lanai. The remarks talk about canal, mountain, city, and beach views, but nothing about fireworks views.

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.