Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2004-22727-R-1 Jutla

              (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 Cook County Board of Review is
warranted. The correct assessed valuation of the property is:
LAND: $ 2,075
IMPR.: $ 55,525
TOTAL: $ 57,600
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/rfd6592
1 of 1
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: David Jutla
DOCKET NO.: 04-22727.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 02-12-200-043-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are David Jutla, the appellant, by attorney Michael E. Crane of Crane and Norcross, Chicago, and the Cook County Board of Review.
The subject property consists of a 28-year-old, three-story multi-family dwelling of masonry construction containing 6,507 square feet of living area with six full bathrooms. The subject is built on slab and located in Palatine Township, Cook County.
The appellant, through counsel, raised two arguments: first, that there was unequal treatment in the assessment process of the improvement; and second, that the fair market value of the subject is not accurately reflected in its assessed value as the bases for this appeal. In support of the equity argument, the appellant submitted assessment data and descriptive information on three properties suggested as comparable to the subject. Based on the appellant's documents, the three suggested comparables consist of two-story or three-story, multi-family dwellings of masonry or frame and masonry construction. One of the comparables has the same neighborhood code as the subject. The improvements range in size from 6,372 to 6,840 square feet of living area and range in age from 11 to 25 years. The comparables contain six full bathrooms while one comparable has six additional half-baths. Two comparables have air-conditioning as well as a four-car garage. The improvement assessments range from $6.93 to $7.87 per square foot of living area.
As to the market value argument, the appellant's attorney prepared and submitted an "income approach", using the subject's actual income and expenses. In addition, the appellant provided a one-page letter from Prime Appraisal, LLC dated June 17, 2005 suggesting that the subject's rental rates and expenses are within the current market range for properties of the same type,