The Real Cost of Retrofit: What Marco Polo Teaches Us About Dollars, Data, and Misconceptions

by Terin Hopkins

On July 14, 2017, the Marco Polo condominium in Honolulu became a national symbol of a well-known, but often unaddressed risk: legacy high-rise residential buildings without fire sprinkler protection. The 36-story, “S”-shaped building, located at 2333 Kapiolani Boulevard, constructed in 1971, containing approximately 572 units ranging from compact studios under five hundred square feet, to three-bedroom penthouses exceeding 1,500 square feet. With a total building area of approximately 781,165 square feet, Marco Polo stands as one of the largest residential high-rise buildings retrofit project ever undertaken.

The 2017 fire was devastating. Three residents lost their lives, a fourth later succumbed to injuries, and more than a dozen others, including a firefighter, were injured. Over two hundred units were damaged, with thirty destroyed. As with many high-rise fires in unsprinklered buildings, the absence of an automatic fire sprinkler system allowed the fire to grow unchecked, spread rapidly, and produce catastrophic consequences.

What followed was not just a recovery but transformation.

A Comprehensive Life-Safety Upgrade

In the wake of the fire, the Marco Polo Association of Apartment Owners (AOAO), building management, and residents made a decisive choice: invest in a high level of life safety protection and ensure that such a tragedy would not happen again.

The project that followed was a full-scale retrofit and modernization of the building’s fire protection systems, completed in October 2021, after approximately two years of construction. The scope was extensive and included:

• Installation of automatic fire sprinklers in all 568 residential units and four commercial spaces
• Sprinkler protection extended to all common areas, including corridors, storage rooms, electrical rooms, and the parking structures.
• A complete fire alarm system upgrade
• Installation of a new diesel fire pump
• Addition of a new wet standpipe system connected to the municipal water supply.

Importantly, all of this work was completed while the building remained fully occupied, demonstrating that high-rise retrofit can be successfully achieved, without displacing residents when supported by careful coordination, phased construction, and consistent, transparent communication.

The Real Cost of Retrofit

One of the most important contributions of the Marco Polo project is its transparency around cost, an issue that often dominates discussions about retrofit feasibility, published November 2021 in BUILDING Management – Hawaii.

The total cost of the project came to approximately $6.08 million, which broke down as follows:

• Fire sprinkler retrofit: $5,260,530.
• Fire alarm upgrade: $2,197,633.
• Insurance offset (alarm system): –$2,000,000.
• Change orders: $625,434.

These figures are often translated into a per-unit cost for the 568-unit building, approximately $9,260 per unit for the sprinkler system and $10,700 per unit for the total project, which, while useful at a glance, only tells part of the story.

A more accurate way to understand the project is through the lens of total building size. Based on 781,165 total square feet:

• Sprinkler system cost: ≈ $6.73 per square foot
• Total project cost: ≈ $7.79 per square foot

These numbers are significant, not because they are high, but because they directly challenge the inflated cost claims that often dominate opposition to retrofit policies. In many jurisdictions, estimates of $300,000 or more per unit are cited to argue against sprinkler requirements. The Marco Polo project demonstrates that actual retrofit costs can be significantly lower than commonly claimed, even when the project includes a comprehensive life-safety system upgrade.

It is also important to note that this project went beyond a basic sprinkler retrofit. The costs include a full fire alarm modernization, new pump infrastructure, and standpipe improvements.

A more targeted sprinkler-only retrofit, similar to what many policy frameworks propose, would be even more cost-effective.

Why “Per Unit” Costs Can Mislead

High-rise retrofit projects are driven by systems, not units.

A sizable portion of the cost is tied to infrastructure that serves the entire building, including:

• Fire pumps and water supply systems.
• Standpipes and vertical risers.
• Fire alarm networks and panels.
• Piping through corridors, garages, and service areas.

These components are required regardless of whether a building has two hundred or six hundred units. As a result, cost does not scale linearly with unit count. Smaller buildings may appear more expensive per unit, while larger buildings benefit from economies of scale.

Additionally, these costs are typically funded at the building level, through reserves, capital improvement funds, or association-wide financing, not strictly assigned to individual units. The per-unit figure reflects ownership structure, not construction reality.

Retrofit Without Displacement and a Model for What Comes Next

One of the most persistent myths surrounding high-rise retrofit is that it requires mass relocation of residents. The Marco Polo project proves otherwise.

All work was completed while the building remained fully occupied, requiring careful coordination, phased construction, and consistent communication with residents. While challenges were inevitable, including gaining access to units, managing construction schedules, and adapting to variations from prior renovations, these issues were successfully addressed through planning, transparency, and strong project management. Residents remained in place, housing stability was preserved, and the building emerged safer and more resilient.

The experience also offers important lessons for future projects. Early and clear communication is essential, as working in occupied buildings demands transparency, scheduling discipline, and ongoing engagement with residents. Permitting and coordination with authorities can significantly impact timelines, particularly in jurisdictions where large-scale retrofits are still uncommon. Design complexity must also be anticipated, as older buildings often contain modified layouts and unique conditions that require flexible solutions. Finally, leadership matters. The willingness of the board and management to prioritize life safety and make difficult decisions was critical to the project’s success.

What makes the Marco Polo retrofit even more compelling is its location. Honolulu presents one of the most challenging construction environments in the United States. Materials, equipment, and specialized labor often must be shipped to the island, introducing extended supply chains, higher costs, and logistical complexity. In many cases, these factors can significantly elevate construction costs compared to mainland projects.

And yet, despite these challenges, the Marco Polo retrofit was completed for under $8 per square foot.

Even when accounting for the additional $2 million covered by insurance, bringing the total project value to approximately $8.08 million, the cost only increases to roughly $10.34 per square foot, still well within a range that directly contradicts many inflated estimates.

That reality is striking. If a project of this scale can be successfully delivered in an environment where construction costs are inherently elevated, often several times higher due to logistics and

material importation, it calls into question the validity of dramatically higher cost estimates frequently cited elsewhere.

This is particularly important when separating actual costs from inflated claims. In many policy discussions, retrofit costs are cited at $300,000 or more per unit as a reason to delay or avoid action. These figures often include full-building modernization beyond life-safety requirements, architectural upgrades bundled into safety work, or the misapplication of unit-based pricing to infrastructure-driven projects.

Marco Polo provides a clear, real-world counterpoint

This was a 36-story, fully occupied high-rise undergoing a comprehensive life-safety upgrade, completed at approximately $7.79 per square foot, not a projection, not a study, but a completed project.

It is also important to recognize that this was not a minimal retrofit. The project included full sprinkler protection throughout all units and common areas, a complete fire alarm system replacement, a new diesel fire pump, and a new standpipe system. This represents a top-tier, comprehensive approach to life safety, not the baseline level of protection often proposed in retrofit policies. A more targeted sprinkler-only retrofit would be even more cost-effective, particularly when evaluated on a per-square-foot basis.

Taken together, the Marco Polo project is more than a single building’s success story, it is a national case study. It demonstrates that high-rise fire risk in legacy buildings is real and well-documented, that retrofit can be completed in occupied buildings without displacement, and that costs are both manageable and frequently overstated in policy debates. Most importantly, it highlights that the actual cost of inaction is measured not just in dollars, but in lives lost, housing instability, and community disruption.

For property owners and managers, the message is clear: retrofit is not just a compliance requirement, it is a long-term investment in safety and asset protection.

For policymakers, Marco Polo provides a data-driven foundation for realistic, achievable retrofit strategies.

And for the fire protection community, it reinforces a simple but critical truth:

Safe housing must also be resilient housing

The tragedy at Marco Polo reshaped one building. The lessons learned now have the potential to reshape policy and practice nationwide, ensuring that future high-rise residents are protected, not by chance, but by design.

Terin Hopkins has 40 years of experience in public safety, fire protection, and life safety policy. He currently serves as the Manager of Public Fire Protection for the National Fire Sprinkler Association (NFSA), where he leads technical support and advocacy efforts nationwide, working closely with fire departments, code and standard, and policymakers to improve fire protection infrastructure and compliance. He represents NFSA on NFPA and UL technical committees, including NFPA 14 Standard for the Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems.

Interested in learning more about high-rise retrofits? Join us at the National High-Rise Retrofit Summit June 8-10th in Chicago, IL!