As Henry George pointed out to us all the art of land value taxation is to tax the unimproved value of said land. Another way to say the same thing is that we're trying to tax the value that society adds to the land, not what the owner has added themselves. Land in the centre of London has a higher value than much land elsewhere just because it is surrounded by London. It seems reasonable enough that some of that value created by London should be taxed to pay for London.
This is of course not how we currently do it. If we, the owner of a house say, improve the house then we can expect to pay more tax upon it. This is a disincentive to increase said value - not what we want to be doing at all.
Thus this in Portugal is interesting:
People buying a home in Portugal that has unspoilt sea views or faces the sun may be hit by a 20% increase in property tax, under fiercely contested fiscal changes which became law on Monday.
Those with a place overlooking a cemetery or water treatment plant may enjoy a tax reduction of up to 10%.
Someone always does end up next to society's disposal systems so why not?
Given that one of us does in fact pay this tax we would note that the system is not perfect. For they also increase the tax when you improve the house itself.
But the basic idea has merit. Those who currently, in our native Britain, insist that nothing should ever be built anywhere near them for fear of spoiling the views probably should be taxed on the value of those views. Even if they still won't allow the building at least they're paying for their pleasures under such a system.