What Can You Do If Your View is Blocked?
The online legal platform, NOLO, sums up the clear consensus of the legal community: “Generally, homeowners have no right to a view (or light of air), unless it has been granted in writing by a local ordinance or subdivision rule. The exception to this rule is that someone may not maliciously and deliberately block another’s view with a structure that has no reasonable use to the owner.”
A recent query to Floridarealtors.org demonstrates the difficulty involved. An owner, who purchased his condo eight years ago, informed the journal that he owns a 5th floor unit which had wonderful water views at the time. The condo adjacent to his has a large bay tree that was planted for the sole purpose of buffering the two properties. The problem now is that the tree has grown to over 70 feet, completely blocking the prized water views, not to mention a dramatic reduction in property value the owner will suffer when it comes time to sell.
Exceptions to the rule concerning flora is that certain species of trees may be exempt, especially if they grew naturally. Another condition where an owner may have legal recourse is if the tree is within a certain proximity from his or her home. Also, a few communities/condo developments have laws protecting views. This is known as view ordinances. (But this is rare). Finally, if a tree is an obvious health hazard (loose branches, known to cause allergies, etc.), the condo owner would also have legal recourse.
Other than these few exceptions, the rule is fairly universal. Also, if a structure is built which obscures the view of a condo owner, there is even less in terms of legal remedy.
As stated earlier, the land owner simply does not have a legal right to a view.
Harry B. Katz, ESQ., a managing partner at the Boca Raton law firm, Goede, Adamczyk, DeBoest & Cross PLLC offers a legal example of the law in the famous case of Fountainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five, Inc.
When one of the partners of the Fountainbleau Hotel in southeast Florida sold his share, he proceeded to open a hotel, the Eden Roc, adjacent to the Fountainbleau.
In response to this, the Fountainbleau owner decided to build a massive wing that became known as the “Spite Wall.” The wall left the Eden Roc’s pool in near darkness, blocking out the sun most of the day, rendering its use highly undesirable. This led to a law suit by the Eden Roc, claiming damages to his business due to the undesirability of the pool, and that the new wing was erected out of spite.
Katz informs that, “The court held that where a structure serves a useful purpose, it does not give rise to a cause of action, even if it causes injury to another by cutting off the light and air and interfering with the view that would otherwise be available over adjoining land in its natural state, regardless of the fact that the structure may have been erected partly for spite.
The disgruntled owner of the condo with the obstructed view has few legal options since the tree apparently sits on common property. He/she can certainly ask the condo association to cut back the tree. But under no circumstances should the owner attempt to trim the tree on his own. This would certainly lead to legal problems.
The wisest course is to consult an attorney to see if your situation is one of the exceptions to the rule.