Portal for identifying genetic and pharmacologic dependencies and biomarkers that predicts them by providing access to datasets, visualizations, and analysis tools that are being used by Cancer Dependency Map Project at Broad Institute. Project to systematically identify genes and small molecule dependencies and to determine markers that predict sensitivity. All data generated by DepMap Project are available to public under CC BY 4.0 license on quarterly basis and pre-publication.

This DepMap release contains data from CRISPR knockout screens from project Achilles, as well as genomic characterization data from the CCLE project.For more information, please see README.txt.

This dataset contains the results of Avana library CRISPR-Cas9 genome-scale knockout (prefixed with Achilles) as well as mutation, copy number and gene expression data (prefixed with CCLE) for cancer cell lines as part of the Broad Institute’s Cancer Dependency Map project. We have repackaged our fileset to include all quarterly-updating datasets produced by DepMap.The Avana CRISPR-Cas9 genome-scale knockout data has expanded to include 625 cell lines, the RNAseq data includes 1,210 cell lines, and the copy number data includes 1,657 cell lines. Please see the README files for details regarding data processing pipeline procedures updates.As our screening efforts continue, we will be releasing additional cancer dependency data on a quarterly basis for unrestricted use. For the latest datasets available, further analyses, and to subscribe to our mailing list visit https://depmap.org.Descriptions of the experimental methods and the CERES algorithm are published in http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.3984. Additional Achilles processing information is published here https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/720243v1.full. Some cell lines were process using copy number data based on the Sanger Institute whole exome sequencing data (COSMIC: http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk.cell_lines, EGA accession number: EGAD00001001039) reprocessed using CCLE pipelines. A detailed description of the pipelines and tool versions for CCLE expression can be found here: https://github.com/broadinstitute/gtex-pipeline/blob/v9/TOPMed_RNAseq_pipeline.md.version 2: uploaded a new version of CCLE_gene_cn.csv to correctly reflect released cell lines.version 3: uploaded a new version of CCLE_gene_cn.csv that has the log2 transform correctly applied to it and to removed duplicate cell lines.

Seagrass beds are critical wetlands components of shallow marine ecosystems along the Massachusetts coastline. Seagrass beds provide food and cover for a great variety of commercially and recreationally important fauna and their prey. The leaf canopy of the seagrass bed calms the water, filters suspended matter and together with extensive roots and rhizomes, stabilizes sediment. Seagrasses are often referred to as "Submerged Aquatic Vegetation" or SAV. This distinguishes them from algae, which are not classified as plants by biologists (rather they are often placed in the kingdom protista), and distinguishes them from the "emergent" saltwater plants found in salt marshes.

In Massachusetts, the dominant SAV is Zostera marina or eelgrass. The other species found in the embayments of the Massachusetts coast is Ruppia maritima, commonly called “widgeon grass,” which is present in areas of less salinity along Cape Cod and Buzzards Bay. Widgeon grass, found in the upper reaches of embayments, has a thread-like morphology that makes it difficult to identify using remotely sensed data. It can only be identified and located by on-site survey.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) began a program to map the state's SAV resources in the early 1990s and since 1995 the MassDEP Eelgrass Mapping Project has produced multiple surveys of SAV along the Massachusetts coastline, as listed here:

PhaseProject YearsProject Area11995Entire MA Coast22001Coast-wide MA Coast except Elizabeth Islands (Gosnold) and Mount Hope Bay32006/07Selected embayments, coast-wide including Elizabeth Islands42010-20132010 - South Shore of Cape Cod: Woods Hole to Chatham, selected embayments, Pleasant Bay;2012 - North Shore, Boston Harbor, South Shore to Provincetown;2013 - Buzzards Bay, Elizabeth Islands, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket52015-20172015 - South Shore of Cape Cod, Pleasant Bay, Nantucket;2016 - North Shore, Boston Harbor, South Shore to Canal;2017 - Buzzards Bay, North Shore of Cape Cod, Elizabeth Islands and Martha's Vineyard62019-20232019 - South Shore of Cape Cod, Pleasant Bay, North Shore of Nantucket2020 - Martha’s Vineyard, Buzzards Bay and Elizabeth Islands 2021 - Cape Cod Bay (Provincetown through Duxbury) 2022 - South Shore, Boston Harbor, North Shore (Marshfield through Rockport)2023 - Cape Ann to the New Hampshire border (Essex through Newburyport)

View full metadata

Also see the map service.

March 2025

This dataset contains the locations and detailed information of green infrastructure practices in NYC neighborhoods built primarily through NYC Green Infrastructure Program initiatives. Green infrastructure (GI) collects stormwater from streets, sidewalks, and other hard surfaces before it can enter the sewer system or cause local flooding. The GI practice data contained in this dataset includes the location, program area, status, and type of GI. This dataset is updated by the NYC Department of Environmental Protection on a monthly basis. The “Regulated_Projects” polygon layer contains Unified Stormwater Rule green infrastructure projects. This layer is part of a larger Green Infrastructure dataset. You can download the full dataset and the data dictionary below under “Attachments”. Source Data: DEP Green Infrastructure Program Map

Information about the dataset files:

1) pancan_rnaseq_freeze.tsv.gz: Publicly available gene expression data for the TCGA Pan-cancer dataset. File: PanCanAtlas EBPlusPlusAdjustPANCAN_IlluminaHiSeq_RNASeqV2.geneExp.tsv was processed using script process_sample_freeze.py by Gregory Way et al as described in https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/ data processing and initialization steps. [http://api.gdc.cancer.gov/data/3586c0da-64d0-4b74-a449-5ff4d9136611] [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.046]

2) pancan_mutation_freeze.tsv.gz: Publicly available Mutational information for TCGA Pan-cancer dataset. File: mc3.v0.2.8.PUBLIC.maf.gz was processed using script process_sample_freeze.py by Gregory Way et al as described in https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/ data processing and initialization steps. [http://api.gdc.cancer.gov/data/1c8cfe5f-e52d-41ba-94da-f15ea1337efc] [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.046]

3) pancan_GISTIC_threshold.tsv.gz: Publicly available Gene- level copy number information of the TCGA Pan-cancer dataset. This file is processed using script process_copynumber.py by Gregory Way et al as described in https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/ data processing and initialization steps. The files copy_number_loss_status.tsv.gz and copy_number_gain_status.tsv.gz generated from this data are used as inputs in our Galaxy pipeline. [https://xenabrowser.net/datapages/?cohort=TCGA%20Pan-Cancer%20(PANCAN)&removeHub=https%3A%2F%2Fxena.treehouse.gi.ucsc.edu%3A443] [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.046]

4) mutation_burden_freeze.tsv.gz: Publicly available Mutational information for TCGA Pan-cancer dataset mc3.v0.2.8.PUBLIC.maf.gz was processed using script process_sample_freeze.py by Gregory Way et al as described in https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/ data processing and initialization steps. [https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/][http://api.gdc.cancer.gov/data/1c8cfe5f-e52d-41ba-94da-f15ea1337efc] [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.046]

5) sample_freeze.tsv or sample_freeze_version4_modify.tsv: The file lists the frozen samples as determined by TCGA PanCancer Atlas consortium along with raw RNAseq and mutation data. These were previously determined and included for all downstream analysis All other datasets were processed and subset according to the frozen samples.[https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/]

6) vogelstein_cancergenes.tsv: compendium of OG and TSG used for the analysis. [https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/]

7) CCLE_DepMap_18Q1_maf_20180207.txt.gz Publicly available Mutational data for CCLE cell lines from Broad Institute Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) / DepMap Portal. [https://depmap.org/portal/download/api/download/external?file_name=ccle%2FCCLE_DepMap_18Q1_maf_20180207.txt]

8) ccle_rnaseq_genes_rpkm_20180929.gct.gz: Publicly available Expression data for 1019 cell lines (RPKM) from Broad Institute Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) / DepMap Portal. [https://depmap.org/portal/download/api/download/external?file_name=ccle%2Fccle_2019%2FCCLE_RNAseq_genes_rpkm_20180929.gct.gz]

9) CCLE_MUT_CNA_AMP_DEL_binary_Revealer.gct: Publicly available merged Mutational and copy number alterations that include gene amplifications and deletions for the CCLE cell lines. This data is represented in the binary format and provided by the Broad Institute Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) / DepMap Portal. [https://data.broadinstitute.org/ccle_legacy_data/binary_calls_for_copy_number_and_mutation_data/CCLE_MUT_CNA_AMP_DEL_binary_Revealer.gct]

10) GDSC_cell_lines_EXP_CCLE_names.csv.gz Publicly available RMA normalized expression data for Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer(GDSC) cell-lines. File gdsc_cell_line_RMA_proc_basalExp.csv was downloaded. This data was subsetted to 389 cell lines that are common among CCLE and GDSC. All the GDSC cell line names were replaced with CCLE cell line names for further processing. [https://www.cancerrxgene.org/gdsc1000/GDSC1000_WebResources//Data/preprocessed/Cell_line_RMA_proc_basalExp.txt.zip]

11) GDSC_CCLE_common_mut_cnv_binary.csv.gz: A subset of merged Mutational and copy number alterations that include gene amplifications and deletions for common cell lines between GDSC and CCLE. This file is generated using CCLE_MUT_CNA_AMP_DEL_binary_Revealer.gct and a list of common cell lines.

12) gdsc1_ccle_pharm_fitted_dose_data.txt.gz: Pharmacological data for GDSC1 cell lines. [ftp://ftp.sanger.ac.uk/pub/project/cancerrxgene/releases/current_release/GDSC1_fitted_dose_response_15Oct19.xlsx]

13) gdsc2_ccle_pharm_fitted_dose_data.txt.gz: Pharmacological data for GDSC2 cell lines. [ftp://ftp.sanger.ac.uk/pub/project/cancerrxgene/releases/current_release/GDSC2_fitted_dose_response_15Oct19.xlsx]

14) compounds.csv: list of pharmacological compounds tested for our analysis

15) tcga_dictonary.tsv: list of cancer types used in the analysis.

16) seg_based_scores.tsv: Measurement of total copy number burden, Percent of genome altered by copy number alterations. This file was used as part of the Pancancer analysis by Gregory Way et al as described in https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/ data processing and initialization steps. [https://github.com/greenelab/pancancer/]

This StoryMap series contains a collection of four Dashboards used to display active project data on the Connecticut road network. Dashboards are used to display Capital Projects, Maintenance Resurfacing Program (MRP) projects, and Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program (LOTCIP) projects, as well as a dashboard to display all data together.Dashboards are listed by tabs at the top of the display. Each dashboard has similar capabilities. Projects are displayed in a zoomable GIS interface and a Project List. As the map is zoomed and the extent changes, the Project List will update to only display projects on the map. Projects selected from the Map or Project List will display a Project Details popup. Additional components of each dashboard include dynamic project counts, a Map Zoom By Town function and a Project Number Search.Capital Project data is sourced from the CTDOT Project Work Areas feature layer. The data is filtered to display active projects only, and categorized as "Pre-Construction" or "Construction." Pre-Construction is defined as projects with a CurrentSchedulePhase value of Planning, Pre-Design, Final Design, or Contract Processing.Maintenance Project data is sourced from the MRP Active feature layer. Central Maintenance personnel coordinate with the four districts to develop an annual statewide resurfacing program based upon a variety of factors (age, condition, etc.) that prioritize paving locations. Active MRP projects are incomplete projects for the current year.LOTCIP Project data is sourced from the CTDOT LOTCIP Projects feature layer. The data updates from LOTCIP database nightly. The geometry of the LOTCIP projects represent the approximate outline of the projects limits and does not represent the actual limits of the projects.

See full Data Guide here. This layer includes polygon features that depict protected open space for towns of the Protected Open Space Mapping (POSM) project, which is administered by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Land Acquisition and Management. Only parcels that meet the criteria of protected open space as defined in the POSM project are in this layer. Protected open space is defined as: (1) Land or interest in land acquired for the permanent protection of natural features of the state's landscape or essential habitat for endangered or threatened species; or (2) Land or an interest in land acquired to permanently support and sustain non-facility-based outdoor recreation, forestry and fishery activities, or other wildlife or natural resource conservation or preservation activities. Includes protected open space data for the towns of Andover, Ansonia, Ashford, Avon, Beacon Falls, Canaan, Clinton, Berlin, Bethany, Bethel, Bethlehem, Bloomfield, Bridgewater, Bolton, Brookfield, Brooklyn, Canterbury, Canton, Chaplin, Cheshire, Colchester, Colebrook, Columbia, Cornwall, Coventry, Cromwell, Danbury, Derby, East Granby, East Haddam, East Hampton, East Hartford, East Windsor, Eastford, Ellington, Enfield, Essex, Farmington, Franklin, Glastonbury, Goshen, Granby, Griswold, Groton, Guilford, Haddam, Hampton, Hartford, Hebron, Kent, Killingworth, Lebanon, Ledyard, Lisbon, Litchfield, Madison, Manchester, Mansfield, Marlborough, Meriden, Middlebury, Middlefield, Middletown, Monroe, Montville, Morris, New Britain, New Canaan, New Fairfield, New Milford, New Hartford, Newington, Newtown, Norfolk, North, Norwich, Preston, Ridgefield, Shelton, Stonington, Oxford, Plainfield, Plainville, Pomfret, Portland, Prospect, Putnam, Redding, Rocky Hill, Roxbury, Salem, Salisbury, Scotland, Seymour, Sharon, Sherman, Simsbury, Somers, South Windsor, Southbury, Southington, Sprague, Sterling, Suffield, Thomaston, Thompson, Tolland, Torrington, Union, Vernon, Wallingford, Windham, Warren, Washington, Waterbury, Watertown, West Hartford, Westbrook, Weston, Wethersfield, Willington, Wilton, Windsor, Windsor Locks, Wolcott, Woodbridge, Woodbury, and Woodstock. Additional towns are added to this list as they are completed. The layer is based on information from various sources collected and compiled during the period from March 2005 through the present. These sources include but are not limited to municipal Assessor's records (the Assessor's database, hard copy maps and deeds) and existing digital parcel data. The layer represents conditions as of the date of research at each city or town hall. The Protected Open Space layer includes the parcel shape (geometry), a project-specific parcel ID based on the Town and Town Assessor's lot numbering system, and system-defined (automatically generated) fields. The Protected Open Space layer has an accompanying table containing more detailed information about each feature (parcel). This table is called Protected Open Space Dat, and can be joined to Protected Open Space in ArcMap using the parcel ID (PAR_ID) field. Detailed information in the Protected Open Space Data attribute table includes the Assessor's Map, Block and Lot numbers (the Assessor's parcel identification numbering system), the official name of the parcel (such as the park or forest name if it has one), address and owner information, the deed volume and page numbers, survey information, open space type, the unique parcel ID number (Par_ID), comments collected by researchers during city/town hall visits, and acreage. This layer does not include parcels that do not meet the definition of open space as defined above. Features are stored as polygons that represent the best available locational information, and are "best fit" to the land base available for each.

The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection's (CTDEP) Permanently Protected Open Space Phase Mapping Project Phase 1 (Protected Open Space Phase1) layer includes permanently protected open space parcels in towns in Phase 1 that meet the CTDEP's definition for this project, the Permanently Protected Open Space Mapping (CT POSM) Project. The CTDEP defines permanently protected open space as (1) Land or interest in land acquired for the permanent protection of natural features of the state's landscape or essential habitat for endangered or threatened species; or (2) Land or an interest in land acquired to permanently support and sustain non facility-based outdoor recreations, forestry and fishery activities, or other wildlife or natural resource conservation or preservation activities.

Towns in Phase 1 of the CT POSM project are situated along the CT coast and portions of the Thames River and are the following: Branford, Bridgeport, Chester, Clinton, Darien, Deep River, East Haven, East Lyme, Essex, Fairfield, Greenwich, Groton, Guilford, Hamden, Ledyard, Lyme, Madison, Milford, Montville, New Haven, New London, North Branford, North Haven, Norwalk, Norwich, Old Lyme, Old Saybrook, Orange, Preston, Shelton, Stamford, Stonington, Stratford, Waterford, West Haven, Westbrook, Westport.

For the purposes of the project a number of categories or classifications of open space have also been created. These include: Land Trust, Land Trust with buidlings, Private, Private with buildings, Utility Company, Utility Company with buildings, Federal, State, Municipal, Municipal with buildings, Conservation easement, and non-DEP State land. The layer is based on information from various sources collected and compiled during the period from August 2002 trhough October 2003. These sources include municipal Assessor's records (the Assessor's database, hard copy maps and deeds) and existing digital parcel data. The layer represents conditions on the date of research at each city or town hall.

The Protected Open Space Phase1 layer includes the parcel shape (geometry), a project-specific parcel ID based on the Town and Town's Assessor lot numbering system, and system-defined (automatically generated) fields. In addition, the Protected_Open_Space_Phase1 layer has an accompanying table containing more detailed information about each parcel's collection, standardization and storage. This table is called Protected Open Space Phase1 Data and can be joined to Protected Open Space Phase1 in ArcMap using the parcel ID (PAR_ID) field. Detailed information includes the Assessor's Map, Block and Lot numbers (the Assessor's parcel identification numbering system), the official name of the parcel (such as the park or forest name if it has one), address and owner information, the deed volume and page numbers, survey information, open space type, the project-specific parcel ID number (Par_ID), comments collected by researchers during city/town hall visits, acreage collected during site reconaissance and the data source. This layer does not include parcels that do not meet the definition of open space as defined above. Features are stored as polygon feature type that represent the best available locational information, i.e. "best fit" to the land base available for each.

Phase 1 of the Protected Open Space Mapping (POSM) Project was accomplished by a contractor using only a querying process to identify open space. The contractor obtained assessor's data from the various towns and created programs to cull open space parcels strictly by query processes. We have found many errors and omissions in the data, but at this point in the project we cannot revisit all the coastal towns. Therefore, this data is being sent with a disclaimer for accuracy. You are welcome to use it but not to publish it. Please note that we do not include any water company parcels despite them being listed as part of our criteria because we must first obtain written clarification and clearance from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

We have since changed our data collection method for Phase 2 of this project. DEP staff now visit each town hall and thoroughly research the land records. The project is expected to be complete by 2010.

This layer file has been created for data entry in Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) Statewide Annual Report (STAR) via the Restoration Projects Data Portal (RPDP). The map is only intended for this purpose. This map should not be used for assessment purposes or for any other DEP department or division such as for permit or grant applications. This layer contains DRAFT project information (which may be incorrect) submitted for approval and verification determination by the Water Quality Restoration Program. It is intended only to assist the portal users reference existing nearby projects to; reduce duplication of entries, tie projects to existing projects in treatment trains; or encourage proper duplication when a project is shared by multiple entities.

DEP's Office of Resilience and Coastal Protection is committed to helping prepare Florida’s communities and habitats for changes resulting from sea level rise (SLR) by: Providing funding and technical assistance to prepare Florida’s coastal communities Promoting and ensuring a coordinated approach to sea level rise planning among state, regional and local agencies. The Florida Resilient Coastlines Program is funded by the Florida Legislature as well as DEP’s Florida Coastal Management Program in partnership with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). On this map, FRCP-funded projects are depicted at their approximate locations. Filters are available for the following parameters: Project Category, Project Type, Scale, and Year. Funded projects are listed on : https://floridadep.gov/rcp/florida-resilient-coastlines-program/content/florida-resilient-coastlines-program-funded

The Cooperative Land Cover Map is a project to develop an improved statewide land cover map from existing sources and expert review of aerial photography. The project is directly tied to a goal of Florida's State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) to represent Florida's diverse habitats in a spatially-explicit manner. The Cooperative Land Cover Map integrates 3 primary data types: 1) 6 million acres are derived from local or site-specific data sources, primarily on existing conservation lands. Most of these sources have a ground-truth or local knowledge component. We collected land cover and vegetation data from 37 existing sources. Each dataset was evaluated for consistency and quality and assigned a confidence category that determined how it was integrated into the final land cover map. 2) 1.4 million acres are derived from areas that FNAI ecologists reviewed with high resolution aerial photography. These areas were reviewed because other data indicated some potential for the presence of a focal community: scrub, scrubby flatwoods, sandhill, dry prairie, pine rockland, rockland hammock, upland pine or mesic flatwoods. 3) 3.2 million acres are represented by Florida Land Use Land Cover data from the FL Department of Environmental Protection and Water Management Districts (FLUCCS). The Cooperative Land Cover Map integrates data from the following years: NWFWMD: 2006 - 07 SRWMD: 2005 - 08 SJRWMD: 2004 SFWMD: 2004 SWFWMD: 2008 All data were crosswalked into the Florida Land Cover Classification System. This project was funded by a grant from FWC/Florida's Wildlife Legacy Initiative (Project 08009) to Florida Natural Areas Inventory. The current dataset is provided in 10m raster grid format.Changes from Version 1.1 to Version 2.3:CLC v2.3 includes updated Florida Land Use Land Cover for four water management districts as described above: NWFWMD, SJRWMD, SFWMD, SWFWMDCLC v2.3 incorporates major revisions to natural coastal land cover and natural communities potentially affected by sea level rise. These revisions were undertaken by FNAI as part of two projects: Re-evaluating Florida's Ecological Conservation Priorities in the Face of Sea Level Rise (funded by the Yale Mapping Framework for Biodiversity Conservation and Climate Adaptation) and Predicting and Mitigating the Effects of Sea-Level Rise and Land Use Changes on Imperiled Species and Natural communities in Florida (funded by an FWC State Wildlife Grant and The Kresge Foundation). FNAI also opportunistically revised natural communities as needed in the course of species habitat mapping work funded by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. CLC v2.3 also includes several new site specific data sources: New or revised FNAI natural community maps for 13 conservation lands and 9 Florida Forever proposals; new Florida Park Service maps for 10 parks; Sarasota County Preserves Habitat Maps (with FNAI review); Sarasota County HCP Florida Scrub-Jay Habitat (with FNAI Review); Southwest Florida Scrub Working Group scrub polygons. Several corrections to the crosswalk of FLUCCS to FLCS were made, including review and reclassification of interior sand beaches that were originally crosswalked to beach dune, and reclassification of upland hardwood forest south of Lake Okeechobee to mesic hammock. Representation of state waters was expanded to include the NOAA Submerged Lands Act data for Florida.Changes from Version 2.3 to 3.0: All land classes underwent revisions to correct boundaries, mislabeled classes, and hard edges between classes. Vector data was compared against high resolution Digital Ortho Quarter Quads (DOQQ) and Google Earth imagery. Individual land cover classes were converted to .KML format for use in Google Earth. Errors identified through visual review were manually corrected. Statewide medium resolution (spatial resolution of 10 m) SPOT 5 images were available for remote sensing classification with the following spectral bands: near infrared, red, green and short wave infrared. The acquisition dates of SPOT images ranged between October, 2005 and October, 2010. Remote sensing classification was performed in Idrisi Taiga and ERDAS Imagine. Supervised and unsupervised classifications of each SPOT image were performed with the corrected polygon data as a guide. Further visual inspections of classified areas were conducted for consistency, errors, and edge matching between image footprints. CLC v3.0 now includes state wide Florida NAVTEQ transportation data. CLC v3.0 incorporates extensive revisions to scrub, scrubby flatwoods, mesic flatwoods, and upland pine classes. An additional class, scrub mangrove – 5252, was added to the crosswalk. Mangrove swamp was reviewed and reclassified to include areas of scrub mangrove. CLC v3.0 also includes additional revisions to sand beach, riverine sand bar, and beach dune previously misclassified as high intensity urban or extractive. CLC v3.0 excludes the Dry Tortugas and does not include some of the small keys between Key West and Marquesas.Changes from Version 3.0 to Version 3.1: CLC v3.1 includes several new site specific data sources: Revised FNAI natural community maps for 31 WMAs, and 6 Florida Forever areas or proposals. This data was either extracted from v2.3, or from more recent mapping efforts. Domains have been removed from the attribute table, and a class name field has been added for SITE and STATE level classes. The Dry Tortugas have been reincorporated. The geographic extent has been revised for the Coastal Upland and Dry Prairie classes. Rural Open and the Extractive classes underwent a more thorough reviewChanges from Version 3.1 to Version 3.2:CLC v3.2 includes several new site specific data sources: Revised FNAI natural community maps for 43 Florida Park Service lands, and 9 Florida Forever areas or proposals. This data is from 2014 - 2016 mapping efforts. SITE level class review: Wet Coniferous plantation (2450) from v2.3 has been included in v3.2. Non-Vegetated Wetland (2300), Urban Open Land (18211), Cropland/Pasture (18331), and High Pine and Scrub (1200) have undergone thorough review and reclassification where appropriate. Other classification errors were opportunistically corrected as found or as reported by users to landcovermap@myfwc.com.Changes from Version 3.2.5 to Version 3.3: The CLC v3.3 includes several new site specific data sources: Revised FNAI natural community maps for 14 FWC managed or co-managed lands, including 7 WMA and 7 WEA, 1 State Forest, 3 Hillsboro County managed areas, and 1 Florida Forever proposal. This data is from the 2017 – 2018 mapping efforts. Select sites and classes were included from the 2016 – 2017 NWFWMD (FLUCCS) dataset. M.C. Davis Conservation areas, 18331x agricultural classes underwent a thorough review and reclassification where appropriate. Prairie Mesic Hammock (1122) was reclassified to Prairie Hydric Hammock (22322) in the Everglades. All SITE level Tree Plantations (18333) were reclassified to Coniferous Plantations (183332). The addition of FWC Oyster Bar (5230) features. Other classification errors were opportunistically corrected as found or as reported by users to landcovermap@myfwc.com, including classification corrections to sites in T.M. Goodwin and Ocala National Forest. CLC v3.3 utilizes the updated The Florida Land Cover Classification System (2018), altering the following class names and numbers: Irrigated Row Crops (1833111), Wet Coniferous Plantations (1833321) (formerly 2450), Major Springs (4131) (formerly 3118). Mixed Hardwood-Coniferous Swamps (2240) (formerly Other Wetland Forested Mixed).Changes from Version 3.4 to Version 3.5: The CLC v3.5 includes several new site specific data sources: Revised FNAI natural community maps for 16 managed areas, and 10 Florida Forever Board of Trustees Projects (FFBOT) sites. This data is from the 2019 – 2020 mapping efforts. Other classification errors were opportunistically corrected as found or as reported by users to landcovermap@myfwc.com. This version of the CLC is also the first to include land identified as Salt Flats (5241).Changes from Version 3.5 to 3.6: The CLC v3.6 includes several new site specific data sources: Revised FNAI natural community maps for 11 managed areas, and 24 Florida Forever Board of Trustees Projects (FFBOT) sites. This data is from the 2018 – 2022 mapping efforts. Other classification errors were opportunistically corrected as found or as reported by users to landcovermap@myfwc.com.Changes from Version 3.6 to 3.7: The CLC 3.7 includes several new site specific data sources: Revised FNAI natural community maps for 5 managed areas (2022-2023). Revised Palm Beach County Natural Areas data for Pine Glades Natural Area (2023). Other classification errors were opportunistically corrected as found or as reported by users to landcovermap@myfwc.com. In this version a few SITE level classifications are reclassified for the STATE level classification system. Mesic Flatwoods and Scrubby Flatwoods are classified as Dry Flatwoods at the STATE level. Upland Glade is classified as Barren, Sinkhole, and Outcrop Communities at the STATE level. Lastly Upland Pine is classified as High Pine and Scrub at the STATE level.

Terms of UseData Limitations and DisclaimerThe user’s use of and/or reliance on the information contained in the Document shall be at the user’s own risk and expense. MassDEP disclaims any responsibility for any loss or harm that may result to the user of this data or to any other person due to the user’s use of the Document.This is an ongoing data development project. Attempts have been made to contact all PWS systems, but not all have responded with information on their service area. MassDEP will continue to collect and verify this information. Some PWS service areas included in this datalayer have not been verified by the PWS or the municipality involved, but since many of those areas are based on information published online by the municipality, the PWS, or in a publicly available report, they are included in the estimated PWS service area datalayer.Please note: All PWS service area delineations are estimates for broad planning purposes and should only be used as a guide. The data is not appropriate for site-specific or parcel-specific analysis. Not all properties within a PWS service area are necessarily served by the system, and some properties outside the mapped service areas could be served by the PWS – please contact the relevant PWS. Not all service areas have been confirmed by the systems.Please use the following citation to reference these data:MassDEP, Water Utility Resilience Program. 2025. Community and Non-Transient Non-Community Public Water System Service Area (PubV2025_3).IMPORTANT NOTICE: This MassDEP Estimated Water Service datalayer may not be complete, may contain errors, omissions, and other inaccuracies and the data are subject to change. This version is published through MassGIS. We want to learn about the data uses. If you use this dataset, please notify staff in the Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP@mass.gov).

This GIS datalayer represents approximate service areas for Public Water Systems (PWS) in Massachusetts. In 2017, as part of its “Enhancing Resilience and Emergency Preparedness of Water Utilities through Improved Mapping” (Critical Infrastructure Mapping Project ), the MassDEP Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP) began to uniformly map drinking water service areas throughout Massachusetts using information collected from various sources. Along with confirming existing public water system (PWS) service area information, the project collected and verified estimated service area delineations for PWSs not previously delineated and will continue to update the information contained in the datalayers. As of the date of publication, WURP has delineated Community (COM) and Non-Transient Non-Community (NTNC) service areas. Transient non-community (TNCs) are not part of this mapping project.

Layers and Tables:

The MassDEP Estimated Public Water System Service Area data comprises two polygon feature classes and a supporting table. Some data fields are populated from the MassDEP Drinking Water Program’s Water Quality Testing System (WQTS) and Annual Statistical Reports (ASR).

The Community Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_COMM_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Community systems.The NTNC Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_NTNC_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Non-Transient Non-Community systems.The Unlocated Sites List table (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL) contains a list of known, unmapped active Community and NTNC PWS services areas at the time of publication.

Production

Data Universe

Public Water Systems in Massachusetts are permitted and regulated through the MassDEP Drinking Water Program. The WURP has mapped service areas for all active and inactive municipal and non-municipal Community PWSs in MassDEP’s Water Quality Testing Database (WQTS). Community PWS refers to a public water system that serves at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.

All active and inactive NTNC PWS were also mapped using information contained in WQTS. An NTNC or Non-transient Non-community Water System refers to a public water system that is not a community water system and that has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons or more approximately four or more hours per day, four or more days per week, more than six months or 180 days per year, such as a workplace providing water to its employees.

These data may include declassified PWSs. Staff will work to rectify the status/water services to properties previously served by declassified PWSs and remove or incorporate these service areas as needed.

Maps of service areas for these systems were collected from various online and MassDEP sources to create service areas digitally in GIS. Every PWS is assigned a unique PWSID by MassDEP that incorporates the municipal ID of the municipality it serves (or the largest municipality it serves if it serves multiple municipalities). Some municipalities contain more than one PWS, but each PWS has a unique PWSID. The Estimated PWS Service Area datalayer, therefore, contains polygons with a unique PWSID for each PWS service area.

A service area for a community PWS may serve all of one municipality (e.g. Watertown Water Department), multiple municipalities (e.g. Abington-Rockland Joint Water Works), all or portions of two or more municipalities (e.g. Provincetown Water Dept which serves all of Provincetown and a portion of Truro), or a portion of a municipality (e.g. Hyannis Water System, which is one of four PWSs in the town of Barnstable).

Some service areas have not been mapped but their general location is represented by a small circle which serves as a placeholder. The location of these circles are estimates based on the general location of the source wells or the general estimated location of the service area - these do not represent the actual service area.

Service areas were mapped initially from 2017 to 2022 and reflect varying years for which service is implemented for that service area boundary. WURP maintains the dataset quarterly with annual data updates; however, the dataset may not include all current active PWSs. A list of unmapped PWS systems is included in the USL table PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL available for download with the dataset. Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. PWS IDs that represent regional or joint boards with (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) will not be mapped because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.

Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. Those highlighted (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) represent regional or joint boards that will not be mapped, because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.

PWSs that do not have corresponding sources, may be part of consecutive systems, may have been incorporated into another PWSs, reclassified as a different type of PWS, or otherwise taken offline. PWSs that have been incorporated, reclassified, or taken offline will be reconciled during the next data update.

Methodologies and Data Sources

Several methodologies were used to create service area boundaries using various sources, including data received from the systems in response to requests for information from the MassDEP WURP project, information on file at MassDEP, and service area maps found online at municipal and PWS websites. When provided with water line data rather than generalized areas, 300-foot buffers were created around the water lines to denote service areas and then edited to incorporate generalizations. Some municipalities submitted parcel data or address information to be used in delineating service areas.

Verification Process

Small-scale PDF file maps with roads and other infrastructure were sent to every PWS for corrections or verifications. For small systems, such as a condominium complex or residential school, the relevant parcels were often used as the basis for the delineated service area. In towns where 97% or more of their population is served by the PWS and no other service area delineation was available, the town boundary was used as the service area boundary. Some towns responded to the request for information or verification of service areas by stating that the town boundary should be used since all or nearly all of the municipality is served by the PWS.

Sources of information for estimated drinking water service areas

The following information was used to develop estimated drinking water service areas:

EOEEA Water Assets Project (2005) water lines (these were buffered to create service areas)Horsely Witten Report 2008Municipal Master Plans, Open Space Plans, Facilities Plans, Water Supply System Webpages, reports and online interactive mapsGIS data received from PWSDetailed infrastructure mapping completed through the MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure InitiativeIn the absence of other service area information, for municipalities served by a town-wide water system serving at least 97% of the population, the municipality’s boundary was used. Determinations of which municipalities are 97% or more served by the PWS were made based on the Percent Water Service Map created in 2018 by MassDEP based on various sources of information including but not limited to:The Winter population served submitted by the PWS in the ASR submittalThe number of services from WQTS as a percent of

Boundaries within the layer have been marked where sand placement projects have taken place. The boundaries in the layer delineate parameters of the locations where sand projects have taken place in each area. Considering this effort is still on going, the information related to it is updated as needed. Information contained within the layer should not be used for any surveying, engineering, legal determinations or calculations. The information used to determine the line locations have been translated and taken from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Resource Management's Strategic Beach Management Plan. Please reference the metadata for contact information.

This spatial polygon dataset displays the footprint location for each map product created by this department. This index provides access to download map products as a PDF. The index is regularly updated. Each record in the index dataset contains details for the map including; - link to download the map as a PDF - map name, map description, coverage location area and date created - link to the project metadata record All map products can be viewed and downloaded as a PDF via NR Maps. https://nrmaps.nt.gov.au/nrmaps.html See Layers: Map Products \ All Map Products. - Tick the layer to display the map footprint area in the map screen. - Right mouse click to make the layer active. - Select a feature on the map screen in your area of interest or; - Use the search panel to enter details and filter the records. - Review map details in the data panel (below the map screen) to download a map product (PDF).

A. SUMMARY This dataset contains Public Works coordinated projects with other city agencies and utilities companies. Each row contains project names, phases, status, contacts, and locations. It is replacing the Envista project datasets.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED This dataset is extracted from the DotMaps system via API.

C. UPDATE PROCESS This datasets is refreshed daily, though the underlying data generally updates on a monthly basis.

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET You can use this dataset to map out coordinated projects between Public Works, other city agencies, and utilities companies around the city of San Francisco.

Map showing the Maine DEP Biomonitoring Programs wetland and stream sample stations. This map is met to be the replacement for Maine DEP Biomonitoring Programs Google Earth mapping project.

The U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst (UMass Amherst), in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), began a series of studies in 2019 to develop a web-based statewide hydraulic modeling tool to provide preliminary culvert designs to support stream crossing replacement projects in Massachusetts. This Web Map Service (WMS) has been developed to query data from the hydraulic models at select stream crossing locations using the StreamStats web application for Massachusetts. The WMS contains stream crossing point locations with hydrology and hydraulic data tables and associated watershed polygons. These stream crossing locations were derived from the North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collaborative data center (NAACC Data Center). Preliminary culvert designs for three-sided box, conspan arch, and a pipe culvert have been modeled using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) software with cross-sectional and channel geometry data derived from high-resolution light detection and ranging (lidar) Digital Elevation Models (DEM). The WMS layer provides the ability to generate reports in the StreamStats web application for Massachusetts at the stream crossing locations for site location information, preliminary culvert designs, flood flows, bankfull channel geometry, aquatic habitat and stream connectivity restoration potential, basin characteristics, and other select information.

A variance is required when an application has submitted a proposed project to the Department of Permitting Services and it is determined that the construction, alteration or extension does not conform to the development standards (in the zoning ordinance) for the zone in which the subject property is located. A variance may be required in any zone and includes accessory structures as well as primary buildings or dwellings. Update Frequency : Daily

This layer represents the surficial and near-surface geology for over 20 years of STATEMAP geologic mapping. Each polygon represents the lithostratigraphic unit that is at or near the surface. Polygons were mapped at the 1:24,000 scale using samples from the FGS cores and cuttings repository, new core samples taken during the course of the project, extensive field work and surface sample collection, and computer modelling. Please note that much of Florida is covered with undifferentiated sediments, and by convention the FGS maps the first recognizable lithostratigraphic unit occurring within 20 feet of the land surface. Areas with >20 ft of undifferentiated sediments are mapped as Qu or Qbd. The original, published maps and reports for the STATEMAP projects can be found in the Open File Map Series and Open File Reports published by the Florida Geological Survey (Tallahassee, Fl). For the original published maps and reports, please see the Library page at https://floridadep.gov/fgs/data-maps/content/fgs-publications or the STATEMAP ESRI Storymap at http://fdep.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=b4f5974ba6c44badabe574426f865908