Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2005-21405-R-1 Long

              (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: $4,204
IMPR.: $14,134
TOTAL: $18,338
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/CKG
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Karla Long
DOCKET NO.: 05-21405.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 31-22-113-016-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Karla Long, 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 23-year old, multi-level
dwelling of frame and masonry construction containing 1,398
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. The appellant’s map indicates three
comparables are located in close proximity to the subject and one
comparable is located one-quarter mile from the subject. The
comparables are multi-level frame and masonry dwellings that are
25 to 40 years old with partial basements. One comparable has
central air conditioning and a fireplace. Their living areas are
1,691 to 1,715 square feet in size, and have improvement
assessments of $7.67 to $7.90 per square foot. The subject
property has an improvement assessment of $10.11 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
three suggested comparable properties located in close proximity
to the subject. The comparable properties consist of multi-level