(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:
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Sally Jones
DOCKET NO.: 04-25861.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 05-17-315-008-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Sally Jones, 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 an 82-year old, two-story
dwelling of frame and masonry construction containing 2,457
square feet of living area with a full, finished basement,
central air conditioning, and a one 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 one
comparable is located in close proximity to the subject and three
comparables are located one-half mile from the subject. The map
also shows the location of comparables not listed on the grid
analysis. The comparables are two-story frame dwellings that are
86 to 104 years old. Two comparables have unfinished basements,
one comparable has a full basement, and one comparable has a
partial basement. One comparable has central air conditioning
and three comparables have fireplaces. Their living areas are
2,484 to 3,016 square feet in size, and have improvement
assessments of $20.84 to $21.31 per square foot. The subject
property has an improvement assessment of $40.58 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