Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2003-01995-R-1 Pecak

              (Continued on Next Page)
Based on the facts and exhibits presented, the Property Tax
Appeal Board hereby finds a reduction in the assessment of the
property as established by the DuPage County Board of Review is
warranted. The correct assessed valuation of the property is:
LAND: $ 30,800
IMPR.: $ 115,824
TOTAL: $ 146,624
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/cck/2-19
1 of 9
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Chris and Robin Pecak
DOCKET NO.: 03-01995.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 08-03-307-003
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Chris and Robin Pecak, the appellants, and the DuPage County
Board of Review.
The subject property has been improved with a two-story frame and
masonry exterior constructed single family dwelling consisting of
4,064 square feet of living area. Features of the property
include a fireplace, central air conditioning, a full unfinished
walkout basement of 1,980 square feet of building area plus a
one-stall basement garage of 322 square feet of building area,
and a three-car attached garage of 1,213 square feet of building
area. The improvement was originally built in 1956 and has been
remodeled with the latest work done in 2002. The dwelling is
located on a 28,500 square foot parcel in Lisle, Lisle Township,
Illinois.
Appellant Chris Pecak appeared before the Property Tax Appeal
Board to present this appeal on behalf of the appellants.
Appellants do not dispute the land assessment and instead only
contest the improvement assessment. The appeal petition noted
comparable sales, assessment equity and recent construction as
the bases for the instant appeal.
For comparable sales data for an overvaluation argument,
appellants submitted a grid analysis reflecting sales of three
suggested comparable properties. Two of the sales occurred in
1992 and 1997 with the third sale occurring in 2003. Based upon
the Official Rules of the Property Tax Appeal Board, submission
of comparable sales of properties in 1992 and 1997 are not recent
enough for market value purposes for this assessment complaint
for 2003. With only one recent sale for consideration, under the
rules of the Board, appellants have submitted insufficient
evidence for an overvaluation claim based on comparable sales.