Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2005-24384-R-1 Farooq

              (Continued on Next Page)
Based on the facts and exhibits presented, the Property Tax
Appeal Board hereby finds no change in the assessment of the
property as established by the Cook County Board of Review is
warranted. The correct assessed valuation of the property is:
LAND: $9,712
IMPR.: $22,185
TOTAL: $31,897
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/CKG
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Ahmed Farooq
DOCKET NO.: 05-24384.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 18-32-307-006-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Ahmed Farooq, the appellant, by attorney Rusty A. Payton of the
Law Offices of Rusty A. Payton, P.C., Chicago, Illinois; and the
Cook County Board of Review.
The subject property consists of a 28-year old, multi-level
dwelling of frame and masonry construction containing 1,329
square feet of living area with a partial, finished basement,
central air conditioning, a fireplace, and a two car garage.
The appellant submitted evidence before the Property Tax Appeal
Board claiming unequal treatment in the assessment process as the
basis of the appeal. In support of the equity argument, the
appellant submitted a grid analysis detailing four suggested
comparable properties and Exhibit 1 listing three additional
comparables. The appellant’s map indicates the comparables on
the grid analysis are located in close proximity to the subject.
The comparables are multi-level frame, masonry, or frame and
masonry dwellings that are 32 to 44 years old with partial
basements. Two comparables have central air conditioning and
fireplaces. Their living areas are 1,057 to 1,587 square feet in
size, and have improvement assessments of $10.47 to $14.30 per
square foot. The additional comparables are 1,057 to 1,517 square
feet in size and have improvement assessments of $14.41 to $14.48
per square foot. The subject property has an improvement
assessment of $16.69 per square foot. Based on this evidence,
the appellant requested a reduction in the subject's improvement
assessment.
The board of review submitted its "Board of Review Notes on
Appeal" wherein the subject's final assessment was disclosed. In