Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2005-22823-R-1 Condon

              (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: $3,480
IMPR.: $17,040
TOTAL: $20,520
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/CKG
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Edward Condon
DOCKET NO.: 05-22823.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 15-07-400-048-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Edward Condon, 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 a 44-year old, one-story
dwelling of masonry construction containing 1,245 square feet of
living area with a full, unfinished basement, central air
conditioning, a fireplace, and a two 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 and Exhibit 1 listing three additional
comparables. The appellant's map indicates the comparables
listed on the grid analysis are located in close proximity to
one-half mile from the subject. The comparables are one-story or
one and one-half story masonry or frame dwellings that are 49 to
77 years old. Three comparables have partial basements and one
comparable has an unfinished basement. Their living areas are
from 1,372 to 1,550 square feet in size, and have improvement
assessments of $10.10 to $10.58 per square foot. The additional
comparables are 1,157 to 1,511 square feet in size and have
improvement assessments of $10.62 or $10.81 per square foot. The
subject property has an improvement assessment of $13.69 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
the property characteristic sheets and a spreadsheet detailing
four suggested comparable properties located on the same block or