(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: See Page 3
IMPR.: See Page 3
TOTAL: See Page 3
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
1 of 5
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Robert Nardick
DOCKET NO.: 04-24900.001-R-1, 05-23615.001-R-1, and
PARCEL NO.: 04-11-403-036
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board (hereinafter PTAB) are Robert Nardick, the appellant, by Attorney Glenn Guttman of Rieff Schramm & Kanter in Chicago; and the Cook County Board of Review.
The subject property contains a 64,469 square foot parcel improved with a 30-year old, one-story, masonry dwelling of average condition. The building contains 8,202 square feet of living area with four full and one half-baths, a partial basement, four fireplaces and a three-car garage.
As a procedural matter, the PTAB finds that these appeals are within the same assessment triennial, involve common issues of law and fact and a consolidation of the appeals would not prejudice the rights of the parties. Therefore, under the Official Rules of the Property Tax Appeal Board, Section 1910.78, the PTAB hereby consolidates the above appeals.
The appellant argued that these appeals were based on unequal treatment in the assessment process of the improvement.
The appellant's pleadings for tax years 2004 through 2006 reflect data and descriptions on a total of 13 comparable properties. They are improved with a one-story or one and one-half story, dwelling of frame, masonry, or frame and masonry exterior construction. These comparables range: in baths from three to six; in age from 4 to 46 years; in size from 3,386 to 9,674 square feet of living area; and in improvement assessments from $7.85 to $20.04 per square foot of living area. Amenities include from a partial basement, one to four fireplaces, and a two-car to four-car garage. Further, in the 2006 pleadings, the appellant submitted a copy of a neighborhood map depicting the comparables' proximity to the subject. Based on this evidence,