DOCKET NO.:05-02150.001-R-1
3 of 5
Both parties utilized the same three comparables in their
respective analyses. The comparables had varying degrees of
similarity to the subject. Comparable number 1 was a two-story
design and contained 1,258 square feet of ground area compared to
the subject's one and one-half story design and 1,672 square feet
of ground area. Comparable number one had an improvement
assessment of $70,270 or $55.85 per square foot of ground area.
Comparables number 2 and 3 were more similar to the subject in
design and size. Comparable number two was similar to the
subject in age but was inferior to the subject with a smaller
garage and no fireplace. This property had an improvement
assessment of $72,220 or $46.11 per square foot compared to the
subject's $47.14 per square foot of ground area. Comparable
number three was inferior to the subject in age, being 25 years
old compared to the subject being approximately 4 years old.
This comparable had an improvement assessment of $34.57 per
square foot of ground area. In summary the three comparables had
improvement assessments ranging from $34.57 to $55.85 per square
foot of ground area. The subject had an improvement assessment
of $47.14 per square foot of ground area, which is within the
range established by the comparables. After considering the
differences in size, design, age and features the Property Tax
Appeal Board finds the assessment of the subject property is
equitable and no reduction is warranted based on this record.
For these reasons the Board finds the assessment of the subject
property as established by the board of review is correct and a
reduction is not warranted based on assessment inequity.
