Alexander Towers
Preliminary Information – Full Audit Pending
This buildings features were determined from publicly available data, including MLS listings. While we cross-referenced additional data sources, it still likely contains incomplete or inaccurate information, as it has not yet been personally verified.
Once a building has been fully audited, this page will be replaced with an in-depth analysis featuring verified details and photos of every key feature.
Until then, we provide a data‑driven overview that blends statistical analysis of the checkbox selections agents make in MLS with an AI‑powered read of their public remarks—yielding a clearer picture of the building than raw listings alone.
If this building is important to your search, you can help prioritize it for a full audit by requesting one below. To see what a complete report looks like, check out the example full report.
Alexander Towers
Building Overview
Alexander Towers in McCully-Moiliili (built 1979) - concrete construction with onsite pool; assigned covered parking. Based on MLS data.
About Alexander Towers
Alexander Towers is located in the McCully-Moiliili neighborhood and was built in 1979. According to available records the building is constructed of concrete. Size and unit mix information are not provided in the MLS data.
Based on MLS data, the building offers an onsite pool. No other common-area amenities are listed in the available records.
Additional details from MLS show covered, assigned parking plus guest parking. Pets and short-term rentals are not allowed. Management company information is listed as unknown in the MLS. Buyers should verify all details, fees, and policies with listing agents or condo management, as this summary is based solely on MLS data.
Building Features & Data Confidence
All features from MLS data with AI-assisted confidence analysis. Click each category to expand and see details.
No analysis available
I searched for owner-occupancy figures or phrases such as '80% owner occupied,' 'majority owner occupied,' or 'highly owner occupied,' but found none. Because no explicit percentage or descriptive ownership language appears in the remarks, the owner-occupancy rate cannot be determined from this data.
The remarks explicitly mention elevators in the plural, so the building clearly has multiple elevators. However, no listing provides an exact count such as '4 elevators' or 'four elevators,' so the precise number cannot be determined from the remarks alone.
Calculated from the lowest association fee observed across all non-penthouse unit listings for this building.
Calculated from the highest association fee observed across all non-penthouse unit listings for this building.
Calculated from association fees observed in penthouse unit listings for this building.
No listings in the current MLS data indicate that maintenance fees include central air conditioning. The remarks consistently list other inclusions only—water, sewer, basic cable TV, internet, and submetered electricity—and one mention of a "bedroom a/c" refers to an in-unit unit, not a building fee inclusion. This looks like a clear omission rather than a copy-paste pattern, so the feature should be corrected to false.
Cable TV inclusion is strongly supported. Multiple remarks explicitly state the fee includes "basic cable tv" and "basic CATV," and this aligns with the current MLS pattern where 10 of 18 listings check cable. This looks like consistent building-level information rather than a one-off agent note.
Common-area electricity appears moderately supported by the MLS pattern, with 11 of 18 listings checking OTCOEX. The public remarks mention electrical upgrades and submetered unit electricity, but they do not clearly confirm common-area electricity, so this remains a moderate-confidence building feature.
No analysis available
Several listings (multiple agent remarks) explicitly state 'electricity is sub-metered and charged back separately to the apartment owner' or 'electricity is submetered and billed with the maintenance fee but is in addition to the maintenance fee.' This is consistent across agents and strongly indicates unit electricity is not included in the maintenance fee.
No analysis available
Hot water appears to be included based on current MLS records, with 10 of 18 listings checking HOTWAT. The public remarks do not explicitly mention hot water, and there is no WTRHTR signal that would argue against it, so this is a moderate-confidence building-level feature.
Internet inclusion is strongly supported. At least one public remark explicitly says the maintenance fee includes "internet," and the current MLS data also shows INTSER in multiple listings. This is consistent across the building and looks reliable.
There is no mention of marina, boat slips, or marina access in any public remarks, and only one MLS record lists MARINA. Given absence of corroborating remarks and minimal MLS usage, marina fees are not treated as included.
Sewer inclusion is very strongly supported. Multiple remarks explicitly say the maintenance fee includes "sewer," and the MLS shows SEWER checked across all 18 listings. This is consistent, building-level evidence with no meaningful conflict.
Water inclusion is strongly supported. Several remarks explicitly say the maintenance fee includes "water," and the current MLS data shows WATER in 17 of 18 listings. The evidence is consistent across listings and appears to reflect a building-wide inclusion.
The building is repeatedly described as having BBQ amenities across the listings, including explicit phrases like "BBQ facilities" and "BBQ area." This appears in multiple remarks from different listings and fits the existing high-confidence historical data, so it is strongly supported.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Several listings explicitly say the building has a "car wash area" or "car washing area," which is direct evidence of car wash facilities. This appears across multiple remarks and is consistent with the high-confidence historical MLS data, so the feature should remain included.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Multiple listings describe patio/deck-style outdoor space, including an "enclosed 110 sq. ft. Patio" and several "enclosed lanai" / "nice lanai" remarks. Evidence appears across different listings and agents, so this looks like a real building/unit feature rather than a copy-paste checkbox error.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Multiple listings mention a shared recreation amenity using several consistent phrases, including "recreation area," "recreational area," "recreational space," and "pool/party area." The repeated references across many remarks support this as a real building-level feature rather than a copy-paste anomaly.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Searched all remarks for terms such as 'surfboard storage', 'board storage', 'surf storage', or combined 'bike and surfboard storage' and found none. Amenities listed include pool, recreational/party area, car wash area, bike rack, guest parking, BBQ, and on-site management, but nothing specific to surfboard storage. Based on the absence of any reference, surfboard storage is assumed not to be provided.
No analysis available
One remark explicitly states the building has "trash chutes," and the MLS amenity data is nearly universal for this feature. Given the very strong historical pattern, this is highly likely to be a real building amenity.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Pool is strongly supported across the remarks: well over 10 listings mention it, often with phrases like "swimming pool," "pool, recreation area," and "pool/BBQ." The evidence is consistent across multiple agents and does not look like a one-off copy-paste error, so this feature should remain true.
No analysis available
I searched all public remarks for indications that the pool is salt water, including terms like 'salt water pool', 'saltwater pool', 'salt pool', or 'saline', and found no matches. All references are to a standard swimming pool, so the pool is assumed not to be salt water based on available remarks.
Laundry in unit is strongly supported for this building. Across the provided remarks, at least 5 listings explicitly mention in-unit washer/dryer, including phrases like "washer/dryer in the unit," "washer and dryer in the unit," and "washer-dryer and refrigerator, although included." The evidence is consistent across multiple remarks and does not appear to be a single-agent copy-paste error.
No analysis available
Remarks were checked for any indication of paid community laundry, including terms like coin-op, card-operated, or paid laundry facilities, and none were mentioned. Listings instead reference in-unit washer/dryers with no payment system described. In the absence of evidence, paid community laundry is assumed not to be present.
Remarks were searched for phrases like 'laundry on each floor,' 'laundry room on every floor,' or any shared laundry description, and none were found. Instead, listings emphasize in-unit washer/dryer, which suggests there may not be separate community laundry on every floor. Based on this absence, the feature is marked as not present.
Parking is clearly present across the building. The remarks mention it in many listings with phrases like “1 assigned parking stall,” “1 assigned covered parking,” “covered parking stall,” “parking stall in gated garage,” and “secured parking.” This is strong, repeated evidence across multiple agents, not a one-off copy-paste issue.
Assigned parking is consistently confirmed across many listings. Multiple remarks explicitly say "1 assigned parking stall," "1 assigned covered parking stall," and similar wording, indicating this is not a one-off copy-paste error. The evidence is strong and repeated across multiple agents/listings.
Covered parking is clearly present and repeatedly described in the remarks. Several listings mention "covered parking stall," "assigned covered parking stall," "covered parking on the second floor," and "parking stall in gated garage," confirming the building offers covered parking options. The consistent wording across multiple listings supports a strong building-level feature.
I searched for deeded or owned-parking language such as "deeded parking," "owned stall," or "parking included in deed" and found none. The remarks describe assigned, covered, secured parking, which supports parking being included or assigned but not deeded.
No analysis available
I looked for any parking cost language such as a monthly parking fee, additional parking charge, or parking rental and found nothing. The listings mention assigned parking and guest stalls, but no separate parking fee is stated.
Guest parking is well supported. Several listings mention “guest stalls on site,” “guest parking,” and exact details such as “3 limited time parking stalls and 5 extended time parking stalls.” The repetition across listings makes this a strong building-level feature.
Secured entry for parking/building access is repeatedly confirmed in the remarks. Listings mention "secured building," "secure entry/parking," "secure entrance to building and parking," and "secured, covered parking," showing this is a stable building feature rather than a checkbox artifact. Evidence appears across multiple listings and agents.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I searched for "parking waitlist," "waiting list," or similar wording and found none. The public remarks suggest parking is available with the unit rather than managed through a waitlist system.
No analysis available
I searched the remarks for terms like key card, keycard entry, fob access, card reader, or electronic access and found none. While the building is described as secured, there is no explicit evidence that access is controlled by a card/fob system, so this feature is set to false based on current information.
No analysis available
I looked for any indication of a security patrol or roving security service and found no references in the listings. Given this absence in multiple detailed descriptions, it is likely the building does not have a dedicated security patrol.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
There is limited evidence that some units in the building have window air conditioning: 3 of 16 current MLS listings include ACWIUN. None of the provided public remarks explicitly say 'window AC,' 'window unit,' or 'wall AC,' so this may reflect MLS copy rather than consistently described building-wide features.
Concrete construction is strongly supported by the MLS record. 17 of 18 current listings list CONCRE in construction_materials, and the repeated public remarks across multiple agents describe the same secured 15-story/high-rise building without any indication of a different structural type. This appears to be a stable building-level attribute rather than a one-off agent checkbox.
There is no remark-based evidence for double-wall construction across the listings reviewed. Only 4 of 17 current MLS records check DOUWAL, which is too weak to support the feature, and the remarks focus on renovations, amenities, and location rather than construction type. This looks more like inconsistent MLS entry than a confirmed building characteristic.
Limited evidence for hollow tile: 2 of 9 current listings list HOLTIL in construction_materials, but the majority mark concrete and none of the public remarks mention hollow tile construction. This suggests hollow tile is either present in a small portion or results from inconsistent checkbox use by agents; included for buyers but flagged with moderate confidence.
Limited and weak evidence for masonry/stucco: only 2 of 10 current listings list MASSTU in construction_materials, and none of the public remarks contain phrases like 'masonry' or 'stucco'. Given the lack of supporting remarks and no historical support, the masonry/stucco attribute is likely incorrect and omitted.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
There is moderate evidence for above-ground construction. 5 of 18 current listings include ABOGRO in construction_materials, and the remarks repeatedly describe the property as a 15-story/high-rise tower, which supports the classification indirectly. The evidence is not explicit enough to be high confidence, but it is consistent across multiple listings rather than appearing as a single copy-paste anomaly.
Public remarks across the provided listings do not describe the building as brick, and there are no site-visit style comments confirming brick exterior or brick construction. The only support is a single MLS checkbox among 15 listings, which is too weak on its own and looks like a likely inconsistency in the MLS data.
No analysis available
I looked for short-term rental indicators like STR permitted, legal vacation rental, NUC/TVU, or explicit minimum-stay rules and found none. There is no public-remarks evidence that short-term rentals are allowed in this building.
I searched for hotel pool or hotel rental program wording and found nothing. Since there is also no evidence that STR is allowed, hotel-pool participation cannot be supported and should be false.
I looked for language indicating a required hotel or rental pool program and found none. There is also no evidence of an STR or hotel program at all, so mandatory participation is not supported.
No analysis available
No analysis available
I looked for leasehold language such as a lease expiry year, ground lease end date, renewed through, or extended to wording and found nothing. There is no public-remarks evidence to extract a specific lease expiration year.
I searched the public remarks for explicit VA-related language such as "VA approved" or "VA financing accepted" and found none. Because VA approval is only determined from public remarks, there is no evidence to support a true value.
I looked for insurance-related wording indicating the building is fully insured by the HOA, but nothing in the remarks supports that. The listings discuss maintenance fees and assessments, but they do not describe insurance coverage.
Strong, repeated evidence confirms fire sprinklers at Alexander Towers. Multiple listings explicitly mention the feature across different agents and time periods, with about 8+ remarks using phrases such as "fire sprinkler systems," "fire sprinklers," and "sprinkler system." The consistency across listings suggests this is a real building feature, not just MLS copy-paste noise.
I searched for direct language like 'FLSE passed,' 'fire safety certified,' 'life safety compliant,' or 'passed fire inspection,' but found none. The remarks do mention fire sprinkler systems, smoke detectors, and audible alarms, which suggest safety features but do not confirm a formal pass.
Flood zone determined from official FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) data using building coordinates, not from agent-reported listing data.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Mountain views are supported by both the current MLS data and multiple public remarks. One listing explicitly states "views of the city and mountains," which directly confirms mountain views for the building, and this is consistent with the broader MLS pattern rather than a one-off agent copy.
1 listing explicitly references a "partial Diamond Head view," which is strong direct evidence that some units in the building offer Diamond Head views. The remark appears as a specific unit description rather than generic copy-paste, making this a reliable building-level feature for search purposes.
City views are strongly supported across the building’s listings. Multiple remarks explicitly mention city-facing views, including phrases like "pleasant city views," "views of the city and mountains," and "nice lanai with city views," indicating this is a real building-level offering rather than a one-off agent mistake. The consistency across many listings and agents aligns with the already strong MLS pattern.
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
No analysis available
Public remarks explicitly reference eastern exposure—"east tower" and "dining area faces east"—which implies sunrise views/morning sun for units with that orientation. Although MLS SUNRIS was not checked, multiple remarks provide direct evidence of eastern-facing units, so the feature is included.
None of the 11 current listings include SUNSET in their view descriptions (0/11). Remarks repeatedly note east-facing orientation (e.g., "dining area faces east", "on the east tower") and mention city/mountain views but contain no mentions of "sunset", "western exposure", or evening/west views. Given the absence of any sunset-related language across multiple listings and the MLS checkbox being unchecked, there is strong evidence the building does not offer sunset views.
No analysis available
I looked for phrases such as 'fireworks view', 'watch fireworks from your lanai', or similar. The listings only mention city and mountain views, so there is no indication of a fireworks view from the building.
No analysis available
Multiple listings explicitly indicate a resident/on-site manager is present. Remarks cite "onsite manager," "business hours site manager," and "daytime property manager," which is strong corroboration across separate listings. This appears to be a stable building-level amenity rather than a mistaken MLS checkbox.
No analysis available
No analysis available
Confidence levels are based on MLS checkbox data and AI analysis of listing remarks. High = strong evidence, Medium = some evidence, Low = limited or conflicting evidence. Buyers should always verify critical details independently.