NSW How to value a view?

I wonder if there's a standard set of considerations in valuing a view. Like, with apartments it's easier because you might have some previous unit sales at lower / higher floors and then just do a linear interpolation which leads to oft-quoted figures like 20k per floor up.

But for houses, it's a bit harder. There are different types of views as well, eg:

1. Iconic view (eg Sydney harbour)
2. Generic water view (e.g. rivers aplenty)
3. Trees
4. Mountains

then there's the quality of the view, eg

1. Gunbarrel (unobstructed, never to be built out, grown out by trees etc)
2. a good view but you might be a street or two behind the water / might get grown out by bluegums in front etc
3. 'glimpses' - I love when agents use this term because it means the view's barely worth mentioning

then there's actual vs potential view, eg an iconic good view achievable by a 2nd storey addition etc.

My question is do valuers have a sort of set of guidelines whereby they can use to answer questions like "how much value% does this good iconic view add to this 554sqm house 2 streets away from the water" - using comparables would be hard because the neighbour's view might be much better / worse due to tiny factors like trees / hills etc.

 

I suspect the answer is "however much someone else has actually been willing to pay for it".

 

You are completely overthinking this .. a valuer is NOT a judge of the 'true value' of a property.. they are merely answering this question: What price the house can be quickly sold for if borrower was unable to repay the loan?

No way .. even the most sophisticated data model i.e. RP Data is largely based on comparables based on tangibles such as area, numbers of beds/baths etc..

Whether this view is better than that view is all subjective and true value then is the most a buyer would be willing to pay for the property!

 

Views are very subjective. Imo it's a combination of 2 factors which make up what someone is willing to pay.

1. Comparable sales with views (establishes a broad precedent).
2. How important the views are to a buyer.

 

Could not agree more

 

The unimproved land value of certain properties vary according to view, from what I noticed. For example on some streets in Sydney near the water, I see a row of identical sized blocks, gradually increasing in value as you go down the street where the view gets increasingly better. So at least the valuers doing the UCV valuations consider view.

 

Of course 2 gives a solid value but that's post hoc i.e. after a property trades. What if a property needs to be valued by a prospective buyer, or a valuer working for the family court etc. I agree a view is very hard to value, and I do think valuers give it a tangible consideration when coming up with a value, but my question is how they would go about it if there aren't any comparables, or for example a comparable (similar view) is only available in the next suburb across, otherwise all other sales with similar views nearby were 5+ years ago.

 

The same way they would deal with any other situation where there aren't any comparables - some extrapolation based on other data that gets close.

I don't understand your fixation on getting a set answer on this. Are you hoping the answer is a +10% or something? It's obviously not going to be.

 

I think this also depends on the type of property. For a high-end property it might add 20-30% premium but in a low SE area it might only add 15%.

We put an extra window in our master to capture an amazing view - it cost $6k but added (I think) about $50k to the property value. Well I’d pay a $50k premium for the view anyway.

 

I appraised a property for a sale years back - absolute dog of a waterfront block. Tapered block with a 5m waterfront, terraced over 4 levels, carspace separated by a shared (3 users) ROW through the block.

Had the frontage been 10 or 15m, it would have been worth another 25%.

In essence, there is no metric to apply other than to use valid valuation methodologies including direct comparison.