Comments (0) Mitch Wapen has contributed this to the column called “The View;” it’s VERY accurate and clever.
When buying a condo with a view,
One really should ask what taxes are due.
‘Cause if you don’t know,
The View
By Susan K. O’Brien
The real estate agent was a handsome, erudite man with definite ideas about views. He had a “must see” property. I followed him through a large, very beautiful condo with expansive windows and a lovely “open floor plan” looking out to the front of the unit. Proudly he stood, sweeping the drapes wide, waving his arm dramatically at “the view.”
I squinted.
Below this first floor unit was one of the busiest thoroughfares in the city, with big honking trucks and the usual French Canadian hyper-habit of rocketing vehicles down the streets. There was a major intersection on the corner, so all the cars and trucks stopped at the red light directly in front of the unit.
Next, I had to look hard across two massive parking lots that served the many tourists who thronged the city and the business people who worked in the high-rise office buildings nearby. A sea of cars greeted my eyes, beyond which, hallelujah, I could actually look at a tiny slice of the river.
This was “the view,” for which the owner was demanding a considerably more money than the sold prices of other condos in the area.
There are few things I dislike more in a home than traffic noise, so in no case was I interested in purchasing this unit. I had explained this, but to the agent the view was so rare and so gorgeous it would instantly win me over. Of course, it did not. It did show me how subjective opinions about views can be; that very same day, another buyer walked into that condo, fell in love with “the view,” and bought it.
In the White Mountains, it was obvious that a view of Mount Washington breathed beauty and life into the plainest condominium. Obviously this is a view anyone would like, and a view that added sales appeal and probably dollars to a condominium unit. But how much? What specific view are we talking about? Which side of the mountain? How far away from it? And how do towns decide tax evaluations based on views?
After two weeks of trying to research these answers, I came up empty. Contacting my local state rep for updated answers on the “view tax” garnered only blank silence and not even the courtesy of a reply.
The astonishing part is that New Hampshire, a state traditionally opposed to many, if not most, taxes, has led the way in this ill-defined and therefore unfair endeavor to place a dollar value on what is, in many cases, only a subjective opinion. In some cases, longtime homeowners of modest means have been threatened with out-of-sight taxes that might affect their ability to remain in their homes, because of a view they always have had. The threat may partly come from affluent part-time residents from other areas willing to pay both higher prices and higher taxes for a “view.”
In 2005, Thomas Holmes, assessor for Conway, was quoted in an Internet article (newsmax.com, Nov. 14) on the view tax as saying, “It’s more of an ‘I know it when I see it’ kind of thing.”
He knows it when he sees it? With your tax dollars and mine? My reaction that was a giant, “Wow.” What an exercise in trust we must employ to pay higher taxes for an opinion often as subjective as whether or not you like a particular piece of modern art.
The same article stated the view tax to be an “inherently inexact calculus. New Hampshire has no written state guidelines for comparing views. Instead, Avitar Associates of New England, a private company contracted to provide property valuations for many local governments throughout the state, has relied on intuition and a ‘View Manual’ to compare different properties.” Intuition? I’d love to see a copy of that manual.
Avitar currently lists 100 New Hampshire towns on its client roster. In the White Mountain region, Conway and North Conway are not listed, but Albany is. The company uses software to determine tax values. How is this system fair or not fair to residents of towns that do not use the same system? I realized, trying to figure this out, the complexity of the situation.
Marilyn Lewis, a writer for bluegreencommunities.com of Boca Raton, Florida, had this to say in her Internet article about views:
“Among those who’ve tried to reduce a view’s value to hard cash is Western Washington University marketing and finance professor Earl Benson and his colleagues. In the late 80’s and 90’s they scoured thousands of assessors’ records in Bellingham, Washington, measured the homes’ distance from the water, and performed fancy calculations to conclude that a $200,000 house with no view would sell for $317,600 if it had a full ocean view and $453,280 if it were right smack on the shore of a lake.
“On average, Benson says, a full unobstructed water view boosted a home’s price about 60%; the closer the water, the higher the price.”
I don’t quite understand the math here, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that a house on the ocean is worth more than a house in a suburb. But is it only the view that adds value? Is it also the privacy factor of having no neighbors in front of you? What about the sound of the waves from the ocean? Is that an added value as a byproduct of the view?
Writer Anne Morrow Lindberg allegedly couldn’t wait to leave her Maui oceanfront home because she could not stand the relentless noise of pounding surf. We can only imagine what a house on the ocean in Maui costs, and how many millions of people would love the sound of the waves and the view, but to the wife of the famous aviator it was torment.
So what does all this add up to for an owner or a buyer? Here’s my take on it:
—Don’t buy a condominium with a “view” unless it’s a view you really want. Don’t be swayed by the opinion of a real estate agent; even if every other potential buyer in 60 counties loves that view, it may not be one that you want to pay more money to have. Evaluate what other problems you may have to put up with to have the view.
—Investigate any “view tax” and especially the process by which those fees are determined. Watch out for “live free or die” New Hampshire, where town assessors by at least one account may figure out view taxes by feelings, not calculations.
—Make a detailed and strict determination of how well the board maintains a view. (Isn’t it amazing how so many roads lead back to board competence and ethics?) In one case, we owned a condominium that started out with a mountain view and progressed to a view of trees. It was a hard-won battle to get the board to honor its fiduciary responsibility and maintain that mountain view. I’m happy to say that in the end, the board did maintain views for all owners. You need that assurance.
—Before making demands on a board to maintain a view, consider the other factors involved. Are the trees providing a barrier to noise, pollution, and/or summer heat? If so, you may want to consider maintaining only a “seasonal view.” That is the view you have only partially or not at all in the summer, but will probably have completely or nearly so in the winter. The tradeoff in reducing other problems may be worth sacrificing a summer view.
In my opinion, The View issue is every bit as confusing as much of the content on that talk show of squabbling hosts. But it is a fact of real estate life to be understood and dealt with. In addition to determining fairness for you as an individual, it might be a good idea to join with other owners to demand of your town officials a specific and open calculation of just how assessments are made. Otherwise, inequities are likely to occur.
Thanks to all who wrote to me about “Managing Your Condo Board” (March, 2010.) I appreciated your questions and comments and am pleased the column assisted you with problems with your boards.
Susan O’Brien has owned four condominiums, currently two in Canada. Write to her at thecondocolumn@gmail.com. All opinions expressed here are strictly those of the author, and all communication is confidential.
Panorama Theme by 
Themocracy
