Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2005-22795-R-1 Pitz

              (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: $4,864
IMPR.: $20,172
TOTAL: $25,036
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/CKG
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Harald Pitz
DOCKET NO.: 05-22795.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 15-29-213-027-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Harald Pitz, 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 42-year old, one-story
dwelling of frame and masonry construction containing 1,122
square feet of living area with a full, unfinished basement,
central air conditioning, 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
listed on the grid analysis are located in close proximity to the
subject. The comparables are one-story frame, masonry, or frame
and masonry dwellings that are 46 to 51 years old. One
comparable has a full basement, one comparable has a partial
basement, and two comparables have no basements. One comparable
has central air conditioning. Their living areas are from 1,376
to 1,495 square feet in size, and have improvement assessments of
$13.78 to $13.92 per square foot. The additional comparables are
1,238 to 1,498 square feet in size and have improvement
assessments of $14.04 to $14.15 per square foot. The subject
property has an improvement assessment of $16.51 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
support of the subject's assessment, the board of review offered
the property characteristic sheets and a spreadsheet detailing