Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2002-22950-C-1 Wynter Weisz

              (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: $16,000
IMPRV: $56,741
TOTAL: $72,741
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/mmg
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Wynter Weisz
DOCKET NO.: 02-22950.001-C-1
PARCEL NO.: 14-29-318-035-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board (PTAB)
are Wynter Weisz, the appellant, by attorney Dennis Nolan of
Bartlett, and the Cook County Board of Review (board of review or
the board).
The subject property is improved with a masonry construction,
two-unit building with a storefront on the first floor and a
residential apartment unit on the second floor. The subject
contains 3,120 square feet of building area and sits on a 3,125
square foot parcel of land. The subject is located in Lake View
Township.
The appellant argued that the fair market value of the subject
was not accurately reflected in its assessed value. In support
of that argument, an appraisal report of the subject property
with an effective date of June 22, 1998 was presented. The
appraiser opined a value for the subject of $325,000. The
subject was purchased in August 1996 for a price of $235,000.
Based upon this evidence, the taxpayer requested a total assessed
value for the subject of no more than $37,600. This figure is in
keeping with the Cook County Real Property Classification
Ordinance that assesses class 2 properties, such as the subject
at 16% of its market value. Since the subject is currently
assessed at $72,741, a reduction is requested.
The Board of review presented "Board of Review Notes on Appeal"
wherein the subject's final assessment of $72,741 was disclosed.
The current assessment equates to a market value for the subject
of $454,631. The board of review provided a memorandum in
support of its current assessment and four sales comparables to
support the assessment. The sales were not adjusted for