The Digital Geologic-GIS Map of Everglades National Park and Vicinity, Florida is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables, and is available in the following GRI-supported GIS data formats: 1.) a 10.1 file geodatabase (ever_geology.gdb), a 2.) Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) geopackage, and 3.) 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. The file geodatabase format is supported with a 1.) ArcGIS Pro map file (.mapx) file (ever_geology.mapx) and individual Pro layer (.lyrx) files (for each GIS data layer), as well as with a 2.) 10.1 ArcMap (.mxd) map document (ever_geology.mxd) and individual 10.1 layer (.lyr) files (for each GIS data layer). The OGC geopackage is supported with a QGIS project (.qgz) file. Upon request, the GIS data is also available in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format. Contact Stephanie O'Meara (see contact information below) to acquire the GIS data in these GIS data formats. In addition to the GIS data and supporting GIS files, three additional files comprise a GRI digital geologic-GIS dataset or map: 1.) A GIS readme file (ever_geology_gis_readme.pdf), 2.) the GRI ancillary map information document (.pdf) file (ever_geology.pdf) which contains geologic unit descriptions, as well as other ancillary map information and graphics from the source map(s) used by the GRI in the production of the GRI digital geologic-GIS data for the park, and 3.) a user-friendly FAQ PDF version of the metadata (ever_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Please read the ever_geology_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the GIS data and other map files. Google Earth software is available for free at: https://www.google.com/earth/versions/. QGIS software is available for free at: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: For a complete listing of GRI products visit the GRI publications webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/geologic-resources-inventory-products.htm. For more information about the Geologic Resources Inventory Program visit the GRI webpage: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/gri,htm. At the bottom of that webpage is a "Contact Us" link if you need additional information. You may also directly contact the program coordinator, Jason Kenworthy (jason_kenworthy@nps.gov). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: Florida Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (ever_geology_metadata.txt or ever_geology_metadata_faq.pdf). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:675,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 342.9 meters or 1125 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in Google Earth, ArcGIS, QGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/gri-geodatabase-model.htm).

Data Dictionary template for Tempe Open Data.

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under LIR Parcels.In Spring of 2016, the Land Information Records work group, an informal committee organized by the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget’s State Planning Coordinator, produced recommendations for expanding the sharing of GIS-based parcel information. Participants in the LIR work group included representatives from county, regional, and state government, including the Utah Association of Counties (County Assessors and County Recorders), Wasatch Front Regional Council, Mountainland and Bear River AOGs, Utah League of Cities and Towns, UDOT, DNR, AGRC, the Division of Emergency Management, Blue Stakes, economic developers, and academic researchers. The LIR work group’s recommendations set the stage for voluntary sharing of additional objective/quantitative parcel GIS data, primarily around tax assessment-related information. Specifically the recommendations document establishes objectives, principles (including the role of local and state government), data content items, expected users, and a general process for data aggregation and publishing. An important realization made by the group was that ‘parcel data’ or ‘parcel record’ products have a different meaning to different users and data stewards. The LIR group focused, specifically, on defining a data sharing recommendation around a tax year parcel GIS data product, aligned with the finalization of the property tax roll by County Assessors on May 22nd of each year. The LIR recommendations do not impact the periodic sharing of basic parcel GIS data (boundary, ID, address) from the County Recorders to AGRC per 63F-1-506 (3.b.vi). Both the tax year parcel and the basic parcel GIS layers are designed for general purpose uses, and are not substitutes for researching and obtaining the most current, legal land records information on file in County records. This document, below, proposes a schedule, guidelines, and process for assembling county parcel and assessment data into an annual, statewide tax parcel GIS layer. gis.utah.gov/data/sgid-cadastre/It is hoped that this new expanded parcel GIS layer will be put to immediate use supporting the best possible outcomes in public safety, economic development, transportation, planning, and the provision of public services. Another aim of the work group was to improve the usability of the data, through development of content guidelines and consistent metadata documentation, and the efficiency with which the data sharing is distributed.GIS Layer Boundary Geometry:GIS Format Data Files: Ideally, Tax Year Parcel data should be provided in a shapefile (please include the .shp, .shx, .dbf, .prj, and .xml component files) or file geodatabase format. An empty shapefile and file geodatabase schema are available for download at:At the request of a county, AGRC will provide technical assistance to counties to extract, transform, and load parcel and assessment information into the GIS layer format.Geographic Coverage: Tax year parcel polygons should cover the area of each county for which assessment information is created and digital parcels are available. Full coverage may not be available yet for each county. The county may provide parcels that have been adjusted to remove gaps and overlaps for administrative tax purposes or parcels that retain these expected discrepancies that take their source from the legally described boundary or the process of digital conversion. The diversity of topological approaches will be noted in the metadata.One Tax Parcel Record Per Unique Tax Notice: Some counties produce an annual tax year parcel GIS layer with one parcel polygon per tax notice. In some cases, adjacent parcel polygons that compose a single taxed property must be merged into a single polygon. This is the goal for the statewide layer but may not be possible in all counties. AGRC will provide technical support to counties, where needed, to merge GIS parcel boundaries into the best format to match with the annual assessment information.Standard Coordinate System: Parcels will be loaded into Utah’s statewide coordinate system, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (NAD83, Zone 12 North). However, boundaries stored in other industry standard coordinate systems will be accepted if they are both defined within the data file(s) and documented in the metadata (see below).Descriptive Attributes:Database Field/Column Definitions: The table below indicates the field names and definitions for attributes requested for each Tax Parcel Polygon record.FIELD NAME FIELD TYPE LENGTH DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE SHAPE (expected) Geometry n/a The boundary of an individual parcel or merged parcels that corresponds with a single county tax notice ex. polygon boundary in UTM NAD83 Zone 12 N or other industry standard coordinates including state plane systemsCOUNTY_NAME Text 20 - County name including spaces ex. BOX ELDERCOUNTY_ID (expected) Text 2 - County ID Number ex. Beaver = 1, Box Elder = 2, Cache = 3,..., Weber = 29ASSESSOR_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Assessor in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/assessorBOUNDARY_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Recorder in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/recorderDISCLAIMER (added by State) Text 50 - Disclaimer URL ex. gis.utah.gov...CURRENT_ASOF (expected) Date - Parcels current as of date ex. 01/01/2016PARCEL_ID (expected) Text 50 - County designated Unique ID number for individual parcels ex. 15034520070000PARCEL_ADD (expected, where available) Text 100 - Parcel’s street address location. Usually the address at recordation ex. 810 S 900 E #304 (example for a condo)TAXEXEMPT_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Primary category of granted tax exemption ex. None, Religious, Government, Agriculture, Conservation Easement, Other Open Space, OtherTAX_DISTRICT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - The coding the county uses to identify a unique combination of property tax levying entities ex. 17ATOTAL_MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - Total market value of parcel's land, structures, and other improvements as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 332000LAND _MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - The market value of the parcel's land as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 80600PARCEL_ACRES (expected) Decimal - Parcel size in acres ex. 20.360PROP_CLASS (expected) Text 100 - Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Mixed, Agricultural, Vacant, Open Space, Other ex. ResidentialPRIMARY_RES (expected) Text 1 - Is the property a primary residence(s): Y'(es), 'N'(o), or 'U'(nknown) ex. YHOUSING_CNT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - Number of housing units, can be single number or range like '5-10' ex. 1SUBDIV_NAME (optional) Text 100 - Subdivision name if applicable ex. Highland Manor SubdivisionBLDG_SQFT (expected, where applicable) Integer - Square footage of primary bldg(s) ex. 2816BLDG_SQFT_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how building square footage is counted by the County ex. Only finished above and below grade areas are counted.FLOORS_CNT (expected, where applicable) Decimal - Number of floors as reported in county records ex. 2FLOORS_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how floors are counted by the County ex. Only above grade floors are countedBUILT_YR (expected, where applicable) Short - Estimated year of initial construction of primary buildings ex. 1968EFFBUILT_YR (optional, where applicable) Short - The 'effective' year built' of primary buildings that factors in updates after construction ex. 1980CONST_MATERIAL (optional, where applicable) Text 100 - Construction Material Types, Values for this field are expected to vary greatly by county ex. Wood Frame, Brick, etc Contact: Sean Fernandez, Cadastral Manager (email: sfernandez@utah.gov; office phone: 801-209-9359)

The hydrographic features of the CanVec series include watercourses, water linear flow segments, hydrographic obstacles (falls, rapids, etc.), waterbodies (lakes, watercourses, etc.), permanent snow and ice features, water wells and springs. The Hydrographic features theme provides quality vector geospatial data (current, accurate, and consistent) of Canadian hydrographic phenomena. It aims to offer a geometric description and a set of basic attributes on hydrographic features that comply with international geomatics standards, seamlessly across Canada. The CanVec multiscale series is available as prepackaged downloadable files and by user-defined extent via a Geospatial data extraction tool. Related Products: Topographic Data of Canada - CanVec Series

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under LIR Parcels.In Spring of 2016, the Land Information Records work group, an informal committee organized by the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget’s State Planning Coordinator, produced recommendations for expanding the sharing of GIS-based parcel information. Participants in the LIR work group included representatives from county, regional, and state government, including the Utah Association of Counties (County Assessors and County Recorders), Wasatch Front Regional Council, Mountainland and Bear River AOGs, Utah League of Cities and Towns, UDOT, DNR, AGRC, the Division of Emergency Management, Blue Stakes, economic developers, and academic researchers. The LIR work group’s recommendations set the stage for voluntary sharing of additional objective/quantitative parcel GIS data, primarily around tax assessment-related information. Specifically the recommendations document establishes objectives, principles (including the role of local and state government), data content items, expected users, and a general process for data aggregation and publishing. An important realization made by the group was that ‘parcel data’ or ‘parcel record’ products have a different meaning to different users and data stewards. The LIR group focused, specifically, on defining a data sharing recommendation around a tax year parcel GIS data product, aligned with the finalization of the property tax roll by County Assessors on May 22nd of each year. The LIR recommendations do not impact the periodic sharing of basic parcel GIS data (boundary, ID, address) from the County Recorders to AGRC per 63F-1-506 (3.b.vi). Both the tax year parcel and the basic parcel GIS layers are designed for general purpose uses, and are not substitutes for researching and obtaining the most current, legal land records information on file in County records. This document, below, proposes a schedule, guidelines, and process for assembling county parcel and assessment data into an annual, statewide tax parcel GIS layer. gis.utah.gov/data/sgid-cadastre/ It is hoped that this new expanded parcel GIS layer will be put to immediate use supporting the best possible outcomes in public safety, economic development, transportation, planning, and the provision of public services. Another aim of the work group was to improve the usability of the data, through development of content guidelines and consistent metadata documentation, and the efficiency with which the data sharing is distributed.GIS Layer Boundary Geometry:GIS Format Data Files: Ideally, Tax Year Parcel data should be provided in a shapefile (please include the .shp, .shx, .dbf, .prj, and .xml component files) or file geodatabase format. An empty shapefile and file geodatabase schema are available for download at:At the request of a county, AGRC will provide technical assistance to counties to extract, transform, and load parcel and assessment information into the GIS layer format.Geographic Coverage: Tax year parcel polygons should cover the area of each county for which assessment information is created and digital parcels are available. Full coverage may not be available yet for each county. The county may provide parcels that have been adjusted to remove gaps and overlaps for administrative tax purposes or parcels that retain these expected discrepancies that take their source from the legally described boundary or the process of digital conversion. The diversity of topological approaches will be noted in the metadata.One Tax Parcel Record Per Unique Tax Notice: Some counties produce an annual tax year parcel GIS layer with one parcel polygon per tax notice. In some cases, adjacent parcel polygons that compose a single taxed property must be merged into a single polygon. This is the goal for the statewide layer but may not be possible in all counties. AGRC will provide technical support to counties, where needed, to merge GIS parcel boundaries into the best format to match with the annual assessment information.Standard Coordinate System: Parcels will be loaded into Utah’s statewide coordinate system, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (NAD83, Zone 12 North). However, boundaries stored in other industry standard coordinate systems will be accepted if they are both defined within the data file(s) and documented in the metadata (see below).Descriptive Attributes:Database Field/Column Definitions: The table below indicates the field names and definitions for attributes requested for each Tax Parcel Polygon record.FIELD NAME FIELD TYPE LENGTH DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE SHAPE (expected) Geometry n/a The boundary of an individual parcel or merged parcels that corresponds with a single county tax notice ex. polygon boundary in UTM NAD83 Zone 12 N or other industry standard coordinates including state plane systemsCOUNTY_NAME Text 20 - County name including spaces ex. BOX ELDERCOUNTY_ID (expected) Text 2 - County ID Number ex. Beaver = 1, Box Elder = 2, Cache = 3,..., Weber = 29ASSESSOR_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Assessor in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/assessorBOUNDARY_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Recorder in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/recorderDISCLAIMER (added by State) Text 50 - Disclaimer URL ex. gis.utah.gov...CURRENT_ASOF (expected) Date - Parcels current as of date ex. 01/01/2016PARCEL_ID (expected) Text 50 - County designated Unique ID number for individual parcels ex. 15034520070000PARCEL_ADD (expected, where available) Text 100 - Parcel’s street address location. Usually the address at recordation ex. 810 S 900 E #304 (example for a condo)TAXEXEMPT_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Primary category of granted tax exemption ex. None, Religious, Government, Agriculture, Conservation Easement, Other Open Space, OtherTAX_DISTRICT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - The coding the county uses to identify a unique combination of property tax levying entities ex. 17ATOTAL_MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - Total market value of parcel's land, structures, and other improvements as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 332000LAND _MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - The market value of the parcel's land as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 80600PARCEL_ACRES (expected) Decimal - Parcel size in acres ex. 20.360PROP_CLASS (expected) Text 100 - Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Mixed, Agricultural, Vacant, Open Space, Other ex. ResidentialPRIMARY_RES (expected) Text 1 - Is the property a primary residence(s): Y'(es), 'N'(o), or 'U'(nknown) ex. YHOUSING_CNT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - Number of housing units, can be single number or range like '5-10' ex. 1SUBDIV_NAME (optional) Text 100 - Subdivision name if applicable ex. Highland Manor SubdivisionBLDG_SQFT (expected, where applicable) Integer - Square footage of primary bldg(s) ex. 2816BLDG_SQFT_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how building square footage is counted by the County ex. Only finished above and below grade areas are counted.FLOORS_CNT (expected, where applicable) Decimal - Number of floors as reported in county records ex. 2FLOORS_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how floors are counted by the County ex. Only above grade floors are countedBUILT_YR (expected, where applicable) Short - Estimated year of initial construction of primary buildings ex. 1968EFFBUILT_YR (optional, where applicable) Short - The 'effective' year built' of primary buildings that factors in updates after construction ex. 1980CONST_MATERIAL (optional, where applicable) Text 100 - Construction Material Types, Values for this field are expected to vary greatly by county ex. Wood Frame, Brick, etc Contact: Sean Fernandez, Cadastral Manager (email: sfernandez@utah.gov; office phone: 801-209-9359)

Landforms are large recognizable features such as mountains, hills and plains; they are an important determinant of ecological character, habitat definition and terrain analysis. Landforms are important to the distribution of life in natural systems and are the basis for opportunities in built systems, and therefore landforms play a useful role in all natural science fields of study and planning disciplines. Dataset SummaryPhenomenon Mapped: LandformsGeographic Extent: GlobalProjection: WGS 1984Mosaic Projection: Web Mercator Auxiliary SphereUnits: MetersCell Size: 231.91560581932 metersPixel Depth: 8-bit unsigned integerAnalysis: Restricted single source analysis. Maximum size of analysis is 30,000 x 30,000 pixels.Source: EsriPublication Date: May 2016ArcGIS Server URL: https://landscape7.arcgis.com/arcgis/ In February 2017, Esri updated the World Landforms - Improved Hammond Method service with two display functions: Ecological Land Units landform classes and Ecological Facets landform classes. This layer represents Ecological Facets landform classes. You can view the Ecological Land Units landform classes by choosing Image Display, and changing the Renderer. This layer was produced using the Improved Hammond Landform Classification Algorithm produced by Esri in 2016. This algorithm published and described by Karagulle et al. 2017: Modeling global Hammond landform regions from 250-m elevation data in Transactions in GIS. The algorithm, which is based on the most recent work in this area by Morgan, J. & Lesh, A. 2005: Developing Landform Maps Using Esri’s Model Builder., Esri converted Morgan’s model into a Python script and revised it to work on global 250-meter resolution GMTED2010 elevation data. Hammond’s landform classification characterizes regions rather than identifying individual features, thus, this layer contains sixteen classes of landforms:Nearly flat plains Smooth plains with some local relief Irregular plains with moderate relief Irregular plains with low hills Scattered moderate hills Scattered high hills Scattered low mountains Scattered high mountains Moderate hills High hills Tablelands with moderate relief Tablelands with considerable relief Tablelands with high relief Tablelands with very high relief Low mountains High mountains To produce these classes, Esri staff first projected the 250-meter resolution GMTED elevation data to the World Equidistant Cylindrical coordinate system. Each cell in this dataset was assigned three characteristics: slope based on 3-km neighborhood, relief based on 6 km neighborhood, and profile based on 6-km neighborhood. The last step was to overlay the combination of these three characteristics with areas that are exclusively plains. Slope is the percentage of the 3-km neighborhood occupied by gentle slope. Hammond specified 8% as the threshold for gentle slope. Slope is used to define how flat or steep the terrain is. Slope was classified into one of four classes: Percent of neighborhood over 8% of slopeSlope Classes0 - 20%40021% -50%30051% - 80%200>81% 100Local Relief is the difference between the maximum and minimum elevation within in the 6-km neighborhood. Local relief is used to define terrain how rugged or the complexity of the terrain"s texture. Relief was assigned one of six classes:Change in elevationRelief Class ID0 – 30 meters1031 meter – 90 meters2091 meter – 150 meters30151 meter – 300 meters40301 meter – 900 meters50>900 meters60The combination of slope and relief begin to define terrain as mountains, hills and plains. However, the difference between mountains or hills and tablelands cannot be distinguished using only these parameters. Profile is used to determine tableland areas. Profile identifies neighborhoods with upland and lowland areas, and calculates the percent area of gently sloping terrain within those upland and lowland areas. A 6-km circular neighborhood was used to calculate the profile parameter. Upland/lowland is determined by the difference between average local relief and elevation. In the 6-km neighborhood window, if the difference between maximum elevation and cell’s elevation is smaller than half of the local relief it’s an upland. If the difference between maximum elevation and cell’s elevation is larger than half of the local relief it’s a lowland. Profile was assigned one of five classes:Percent of neighborhood over 8% slope in upland or lowland areasProfile ClassLess than 50% gentle slope is in upland or lowland0More than 75% of gentle slope is in lowland150%-75% of gentle slope is in lowland250-75% of gentle slope is in upland3More than 75% of gentle slope is in upland4Early reviewers of the resulting classes noted one confusing outcome, which was that areas were classified as "plains with low mountains", or "plains with hills" were often mostly plains, and the hills or mountains were part of an adjacent set of exclusively identified hills or mountains. To address this areas that are exclusively plains were produced, and used to override these confusing areas. The hills and mountains within those areas were converted to their respective landform class. The combination of slope, relief and profile merged with the areas of plains, can be better understood using the following diagram, which uses the colors in this layer to show which classes are present and what parameter values produced them: What can you do with this layer?This layer is suitable for both visualization and analysis. It can be used in ArcGIS Online in web maps and applications and can be used in ArcGIS Desktop. Restricted single source analysis means this layer has size constraints for analysis and it is not recommended for use with other layers in multisource analysis. This layer is part of a larger collection of landscape layers that you can use to perform a wide variety of mapping and analysis tasks. The Living Atlas of the World provides an easy way to explore the landscape layers and many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics. Geonet is a good resource for learning more about landscape layers and the Living Atlas of the World. To get started see the Living Atlas Discussion Group. The Esri Insider Blog provides an introduction to the Ecophysiographic Mapping project.

The Digital Basic Landscape Model (ATKIS Base DLM) is a digital, object-structured vector dataset. It determines the topographical objects of the real world by location and shape, names and characteristics. Furthermore, object-related material data are linked in such a way that the database can be used in a GIS application. In order to achieve a nationwide content uniformity of the data, the basic DLM is defined by means of an object type catalog derived from the AAA application scheme (ATKIS-OK Basic DLM), which contains regulations on the content and modelling of topographic information for the AdV basic data base and the country solutions. In addition to the objects of the object category groups ‘Siedlung’, ‘Transport’, ‘Vegetation’, ‘Waters’, ‘Administrative territorial units’ and ‘Relief Forms’, the contents also include structures and facilities on settlement areas and for traffic, as well as specific information on the waters. The position accuracy for the main linear objects (road axes, road axes, railway lines and water axes) is ± 3 m. When using a database, the ATKIS data can be submitted either completely or as user-related inventory data update (NBA) according to the customer’s desired time cycles. The data is provided free of charge via automated procedures or by self-collection. When using the data, the license conditions must be observed. The Digital Basic Landscape Model (ATKIS Base DLM) is a digital, object-structured vector dataset. It determines the topographical objects of the real world by location and shape, names and characteristics. Furthermore, object-related material data are linked in such a way that the database can be used in a GIS application. In order to achieve a nationwide content uniformity of the data, the basic DLM is defined by means of an object type catalog derived from the AAA application scheme (ATKIS-OK Basic DLM), which contains regulations on the content and modelling of topographic information for the AdV basic data base and the country solutions. In addition to the objects of the object category groups ‘Siedlung’, ‘Transport’, ‘Vegetation’, ‘Waters’, ‘Administrative territorial units’ and ‘Relief Forms’, the contents also include structures and facilities on settlement areas and for traffic, as well as specific information on the waters. The position accuracy for the main linear objects (road axes, road axes, railway lines and water axes) is ± 3 m. When using a database, the ATKIS data can be submitted either completely or as user-related inventory data update (NBA) according to the customer’s desired time cycles. The data is provided free of charge via automated procedures or by self-collection. When using the data, the license conditions must be observed. The Digital Basic Landscape Model (ATKIS Base DLM) is a digital, object-structured vector dataset. It determines the topographical objects of the real world by location and shape, names and characteristics. Furthermore, object-related material data are linked in such a way that the database can be used in a GIS application. In order to achieve a nationwide content uniformity of the data, the basic DLM is defined by means of an object type catalog derived from the AAA application scheme (ATKIS-OK Basic DLM), which contains regulations on the content and modelling of topographic information for the AdV basic data base and the country solutions. In addition to the objects of the object category groups ‘Siedlung’, ‘Transport’, ‘Vegetation’, ‘Waters’, ‘Administrative territorial units’ and ‘Relief Forms’, the contents also include structures and facilities on settlement areas and for traffic, as well as specific information on the waters. The position accuracy for the main linear objects (road axes, road axes, railway lines and water axes) is ± 3 m. When using a database, the ATKIS data can be submitted either completely or as user-related inventory data update (NBA) according to the customer’s desired time cycles. The data is provided free of charge via automated procedures or by self-collection. When using the data, the license conditions must be observed. The Digital Basic Landscape Model (ATKIS Base DLM) is a digital, object-structured vector dataset. It determines the topographical objects of the real world by location and shape, names and characteristics. Furthermore, object-related material data are linked in such a way that the database can be used in a GIS application. In order to achieve a nationwide content uniformity of the data, the basic DLM is defined by means of an object type catalog derived from the AAA application scheme (ATKIS-OK Basic DLM), which contains regulations on the content and modelling of topographic information for the AdV basic data base and the country solutions. In addition to the objects of the object category groups ‘Siedlung’, ‘Transport’, ‘Vegetation’, ‘Waters’, ‘Administrative territorial units’ and ‘Relief Forms’, the contents also include structures and facilities on settlement areas and for traffic, as well as specific information on the waters. The position accuracy for the main linear objects (road axes, road axes, railway lines and water axes) is ± 3 m. When using a database, the ATKIS data can be submitted either completely or as user-related inventory data update (NBA) according to the customer’s desired time cycles. The data is provided free of charge via automated procedures or by self-collection. When using the data, the license conditions must be observed.

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under LIR Parcels.In Spring of 2016, the Land Information Records work group, an informal committee organized by the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget’s State Planning Coordinator, produced recommendations for expanding the sharing of GIS-based parcel information. Participants in the LIR work group included representatives from county, regional, and state government, including the Utah Association of Counties (County Assessors and County Recorders), Wasatch Front Regional Council, Mountainland and Bear River AOGs, Utah League of Cities and Towns, UDOT, DNR, AGRC, the Division of Emergency Management, Blue Stakes, economic developers, and academic researchers. The LIR work group’s recommendations set the stage for voluntary sharing of additional objective/quantitative parcel GIS data, primarily around tax assessment-related information. Specifically the recommendations document establishes objectives, principles (including the role of local and state government), data content items, expected users, and a general process for data aggregation and publishing. An important realization made by the group was that ‘parcel data’ or ‘parcel record’ products have a different meaning to different users and data stewards. The LIR group focused, specifically, on defining a data sharing recommendation around a tax year parcel GIS data product, aligned with the finalization of the property tax roll by County Assessors on May 22nd of each year. The LIR recommendations do not impact the periodic sharing of basic parcel GIS data (boundary, ID, address) from the County Recorders to AGRC per 63F-1-506 (3.b.vi). Both the tax year parcel and the basic parcel GIS layers are designed for general purpose uses, and are not substitutes for researching and obtaining the most current, legal land records information on file in County records. This document, below, proposes a schedule, guidelines, and process for assembling county parcel and assessment data into an annual, statewide tax parcel GIS layer. gis.utah.gov/data/sgid-cadastre/It is hoped that this new expanded parcel GIS layer will be put to immediate use supporting the best possible outcomes in public safety, economic development, transportation, planning, and the provision of public services. Another aim of the work group was to improve the usability of the data, through development of content guidelines and consistent metadata documentation, and the efficiency with which the data sharing is distributed.GIS Layer Boundary Geometry:GIS Format Data Files: Ideally, Tax Year Parcel data should be provided in a shapefile (please include the .shp, .shx, .dbf, .prj, and .xml component files) or file geodatabase format. An empty shapefile and file geodatabase schema are available for download at:At the request of a county, AGRC will provide technical assistance to counties to extract, transform, and load parcel and assessment information into the GIS layer format.Geographic Coverage: Tax year parcel polygons should cover the area of each county for which assessment information is created and digital parcels are available. Full coverage may not be available yet for each county. The county may provide parcels that have been adjusted to remove gaps and overlaps for administrative tax purposes or parcels that retain these expected discrepancies that take their source from the legally described boundary or the process of digital conversion. The diversity of topological approaches will be noted in the metadata.One Tax Parcel Record Per Unique Tax Notice: Some counties produce an annual tax year parcel GIS layer with one parcel polygon per tax notice. In some cases, adjacent parcel polygons that compose a single taxed property must be merged into a single polygon. This is the goal for the statewide layer but may not be possible in all counties. AGRC will provide technical support to counties, where needed, to merge GIS parcel boundaries into the best format to match with the annual assessment information.Standard Coordinate System: Parcels will be loaded into Utah’s statewide coordinate system, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (NAD83, Zone 12 North). However, boundaries stored in other industry standard coordinate systems will be accepted if they are both defined within the data file(s) and documented in the metadata (see below).Descriptive Attributes:Database Field/Column Definitions: The table below indicates the field names and definitions for attributes requested for each Tax Parcel Polygon record.FIELD NAME FIELD TYPE LENGTH DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE SHAPE (expected) Geometry n/a The boundary of an individual parcel or merged parcels that corresponds with a single county tax notice ex. polygon boundary in UTM NAD83 Zone 12 N or other industry standard coordinates including state plane systemsCOUNTY_NAME Text 20 - County name including spaces ex. BOX ELDERCOUNTY_ID (expected) Text 2 - County ID Number ex. Beaver = 1, Box Elder = 2, Cache = 3,..., Weber = 29ASSESSOR_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Assessor in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/assessorBOUNDARY_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Recorder in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/recorderDISCLAIMER (added by State) Text 50 - Disclaimer URL ex. gis.utah.gov...CURRENT_ASOF (expected) Date - Parcels current as of date ex. 01/01/2016PARCEL_ID (expected) Text 50 - County designated Unique ID number for individual parcels ex. 15034520070000PARCEL_ADD (expected, where available) Text 100 - Parcel’s street address location. Usually the address at recordation ex. 810 S 900 E #304 (example for a condo)TAXEXEMPT_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Primary category of granted tax exemption ex. None, Religious, Government, Agriculture, Conservation Easement, Other Open Space, OtherTAX_DISTRICT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - The coding the county uses to identify a unique combination of property tax levying entities ex. 17ATOTAL_MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - Total market value of parcel's land, structures, and other improvements as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 332000LAND _MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - The market value of the parcel's land as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 80600PARCEL_ACRES (expected) Decimal - Parcel size in acres ex. 20.360PROP_CLASS (expected) Text 100 - Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Mixed, Agricultural, Vacant, Open Space, Other ex. ResidentialPRIMARY_RES (expected) Text 1 - Is the property a primary residence(s): Y'(es), 'N'(o), or 'U'(nknown) ex. YHOUSING_CNT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - Number of housing units, can be single number or range like '5-10' ex. 1SUBDIV_NAME (optional) Text 100 - Subdivision name if applicable ex. Highland Manor SubdivisionBLDG_SQFT (expected, where applicable) Integer - Square footage of primary bldg(s) ex. 2816BLDG_SQFT_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how building square footage is counted by the County ex. Only finished above and below grade areas are counted.FLOORS_CNT (expected, where applicable) Decimal - Number of floors as reported in county records ex. 2FLOORS_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how floors are counted by the County ex. Only above grade floors are countedBUILT_YR (expected, where applicable) Short - Estimated year of initial construction of primary buildings ex. 1968EFFBUILT_YR (optional, where applicable) Short - The 'effective' year built' of primary buildings that factors in updates after construction ex. 1980CONST_MATERIAL (optional, where applicable) Text 100 - Construction Material Types, Values for this field are expected to vary greatly by county ex. Wood Frame, Brick, etc Contact: Sean Fernandez, Cadastral Manager (email: sfernandez@utah.gov; office phone: 801-209-9359)

The Unpublished Digital Geologic Map of the National Park American Samoa is composed of GIS data layers and GIS tables in a 10.1 file geodatabase (npsa_geology.gdb), a 10.1 ArcMap (.MXD) map document (npsa_geology.mxd), individual 10.1 layer (.LYR) files for each GIS data layer, an ancillary map information (.PDF) document (npsa_geology.pdf) which contains source map unit descriptions, as well as other source map text, figures and tables, metadata in FGDC text (.TXT) and FAQ (.HTML) formats, and a GIS readme file (npsa_gis_readme.pdf). Please read the npsa_gis_readme.pdf for information pertaining to the proper extraction of the file geodatabase and other map files. To request GIS data in ESRI 10.1 shapefile format contact Stephanie O’Meara (stephanie.omeara@colostate.edu; see contact information below). The data is also available as a 2.2 KMZ/KML file for use in Google Earth, however, this format version of the map is limited in data layers presented and in access to GRI ancillary table information. Google Earth software is available for free at: http://www.google.com/earth/index.html. Users are encouraged to only use the Google Earth data for basic visualization, and to use the GIS data for any type of data analysis or investigation. The data were completed as a component of the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) program, a National Park Service (NPS) Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Division funded program that is administered by the NPS Geologic Resources Division (GRD). Source geologic maps and data used to complete this GRI digital dataset were provided by the following: University of Hawaii, Cartographic Laboratory. Detailed information concerning the sources used and their contribution the GRI product are listed in the Source Citation section(s) of this metadata record (npsa_metadata_faq.html; available at http://nrdata.nps.gov/geology/gri_data/gis/npsa/npsa_metadata_faq.html). Users of this data are cautioned about the locational accuracy of features within this dataset. Based on the source map scale of 1:24,000 and United States National Map Accuracy Standards features are within (horizontally) 12.2 meters or 40 feet of their actual location as presented by this dataset. Users of this data should thus not assume the location of features is exactly where they are portrayed in Google Earth, ArcGIS or other software used to display this dataset. All GIS and ancillary tables were produced as per the NPS GRI Geology-GIS Geodatabase Data Model v. 2.3. (available at: http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/geology/GeologyGISDataModel.cfm). The GIS data projection is defined as NAD83, UTM Zone 2N, however, its actually 2S (south). ArcGIS software doesn't allow for a 2S (south) definition for a NAD83 datum. No "north" parameters are a part of the spatial reference parameters, and all latitude values are negative. For the KML/KMZ format the data is projected upon export to WGS84 Geographic, the native coordinate system used by Google Earth. The data is within the area of interest of the National Park of American Samoa.

The downloadable ZIP file contains model documentation and contact information for the model creator. For more information, or a copy of the project report which provides greater model detail, please contact Ryan Urie - traigo12@gmail.com.This model was created from February through April 2010 as a central component of the developer's master's project in Bioregional Planning and Community Design at the University of Idaho to provide a tool for identifying appropriate locations for various land uses based on a variety of user-defined social, economic, ecological, and other criteria. It was developed using the Land-Use Conflict Identification Strategy developed by Carr and Zwick (2007). The purpose of this model is to allow users to identify suitable locations within a user-defined extent for any land use based on any number of social, economic, ecological, or other criteria the user chooses. The model as it is currently composed was designed to identify highly suitable locations for new residential, commercial, and industrial development in Kootenai County, Idaho using criteria, evaluations, and weightings chosen by the model's developer. After criteria were chosen, one or more data layers were gathered for each criterion from public sources. These layers were processed to result in a 60m-resolution raster showing the suitability of each criterion across the county. These criteria were ultimately combined with a weighting sum to result in an overall development suitability raster. The model is intended to serve only as an example of how a GIS-based land-use suitability analysis can be conceptualized and implemented using ArcGIS ModelBuilder, and under no circumstances should the model's outputs be applied to real-world decisions or activities. The model was designed to be extremely flexible so that later users may determine their own land-use suitability, suitability criteria, evaluation rationale, and criteria weights. As this was the first project of its kind completed by the model developer, no guarantees are made as to the quality of the model or the absence of errorsThis model has a hierarchical structure in which some forty individual land-use suitability criteria are combined by weighted summation into several land-use goals which are again combined by weighted summation to yield a final land-use suitability layer. As such, any inconsistencies or errors anywhere in the model tend to reveal themselves in the final output and the model is in a sense self-testing. For example, each individual criterion is presented as a raster with values from 1-9 in a defined spatial extent. Inconsistencies at any point in the model will reveal themselves in the final output in the form of an extent different from that desired, missing values, or values outside the 1-9 range.This model was created using the ArcGIS ModelBuilder function of ArcGIS 9.3. It was based heavily on the recommendations found in the text "Smart land-use analysis: the LUCIS model." The goal of the model is to determine the suitability of a chosen land-use at each point across a chosen area using the raster data format. In this case, the suitability for Development was evaluated across the area of Kootenai County, Idaho, though this is primarily for illustrative purposes. The basic process captured by the model is as follows: 1. Choose a land use suitability goal. 2. Select the goals and criteria that define this goal and get spatial data for each. 3. Use the gathered data to evaluate the quality of each criterion across the landscape, resulting in a raster with values from 1-9. 4. Apply weights to each criterion to indicate its relative contribution to the suitability goal. 5. Combine the weighted criteria to calculate and display the suitability of this land use at each point across the landscape. An individual model was first built for each of some forty individual criteria. Once these functioned successfully, individual criteria were combined with a weighted summation to yield one of three land-use goals (in this case, Residential, Commercial, or Industrial). A final model was then constructed to combined these three goals into a final suitability output. In addition, two conditional elements were placed on this final output (one to give already-developed areas a very high suitability score for development [a "9"] and a second to give permanently conserved areas and other undevelopable lands a very low suitability score for development [a "1"]). Because this model was meant to serve primarily as an illustration of how to do land-use suitability analysis, the criteria, evaluation rationales, and weightings were chosen by the modeler for expediency; however, a land-use analysis meant to guide real-world actions and decisions would need to rely far more heavily on a variety of scientific and stakeholder input.

A Hazus-compatible User-defined Facilities (UDF) dataset representing buildings in the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) Extended L1 M9.0 tsunami inundation zone (Washington Geological Survey, 2024). Tsunami evacuation zone defined by the Hazard Boundary dataset accompanying this report, and for reasons of life safety, is occasionally more inclusive of the tsunami impact areas beyond a simple interpretation of depth/velocity/momentum flux grids. File contains all needed attributes for building damage assessment and casualty modeling. File can be joined with Hazus earthquake and tsunami loss estimates (in table form) in order to derive summary statistics on building repair costs and debris. Demographic information (people per residence, age, permanent and temporary population estimates per residence/lodging, and number of employees per building) are developed within a GIS in order to take advantage of numerous overlays. The demographic numbers and building occupancy type is exported into an independent spreadsheet for tsunami casualty modeling purposes. This dataset was constructed for purposes of a statewide earthquake-tsunami risk assessment. As such, it has known limitations in terms of attribute accuracy. Its results are considered useful in the aggregate. Individual building characteristics and resultant damage from an earthquake/tsunami may vary significantly from what is presented herein. However, as a group estimate it is believed to be reasonably descriptive and useful for aggregate impact assessments. Because of the numerous challenges in constructing such a complex dataset, INDIVIDUAL BUILDING DATA CHARACTERISTICS AND IMPACT ESTIMATES SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR INSURANCE PURPOSES, FINANCIAL DECISIONS, OR ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS.

The Hydrology Feature Dataset contains photogrammetrically compiled water drainage features and structures including rivers, streams, drainage canals, locks, dams, lakes, ponds, reservoirs and mooring cells. Lakes are large standing bodies of water greater than 5 acres in size. Ponds are large standing bodies of water greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres in size. Polygons are created from Stream edges and River Edges. The Ohio River, Monongahela River and Allegheny River are coded as Major River polygons. All other River and Stream polygons are coded as River. A Drainage Canal is a manmade or channelized hydrographic feature. Drainage Canals are differentiated from streams in that drainage canals have had the sides and/or bottom stabilized to prevent erosion for the predominant length of the feature. Streams may have had some stabilization done, but are primarily in a natural state. Lakes are large standing bodies of water greater than five acres in size. Ponds are large standing bodies of water greater than one acre in size and less than five acres in size. Reservoirs are manmade embankments of water. Included in this definition are both covered and uncovered water tanks. Reservoirs that are greater than one acre in size are digitized. Hidden Streams, Hidden Rivers and Hidden Drainage Canal or Culverts are those areas of drainage where the water flows through a manmade facility such as a culvert. Hydrology Annotation is not being updated but will be preserved. If a drainage feature has been removed, as apparent on the aerial photography, the associated drainage name annotation will be removed. A Mooring Cell is a structure to which tows can tie off while awaiting lockage. They are normally constructed of concrete and steel and are anchored to the river bottom by means of gravity or sheet piling. Mooring Cells do not currently exist in the Allegheny County dataset but will be added. Locks are devices that are used to control flow or access to a hydrologic feature. The edges of the Lock are captured. Dams are devices that are used to hold or delay the natural flow of water. The edges of the Dam are shown.

[Metadata] Tropical storms, hurricanes, and tsunamis create waves that flood low-lying coastal areas. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) produces flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) that depict flood risk zones referred to as Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) based modeling 1%-annual-chance flood event also referred to as a 100-year flood. The purpose of the FIRM is twofold: (1) to provide the basis for application of regulatory standards and (2) to provide the basis for insurance rating.SFHAs identify areas at risk from infrequent but severe storm-induced wave events and riverine flood events that are based upon historical record. By law (44 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 60.3), FEMA can only map flood risk that will be utilized for land use regulation or insurance rating based on historical data, therefore, future conditions with sea level rise and other impacts of climate change are not considered in FIRMs. It is important to note that FEMA can produce Flood Insurance Rate Maps that include future condition floodplains, but these would be considered “awareness” zones and not to be used for regulatory of insurance rating purposes.The State of Hawai‘i 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan incorporated the results of modeling and an assessment of vulnerability to coastal flooding from storm-induced wave events with sea level rise (Tetra Tech Inc., 2018). The 1% annual-chance-coastal flood zone with sea level rise (1%CFZ) was modeled to estimate coastal flood extents and wave heights for wave-generating events with sea level rise. Modeling was conducted by Sobis Inc. under State of Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources Contract No: 64064. The 1%CFZ with 3.2 feet of sea level rise was utilized to assess vulnerability to coastal event-based flooding in mid to - late century.The 1%CFZ with sea level rise would greatly expand the impacts from a 100-year flood event meaning that more coastal land area will be exposed to damaging waves. For example, over 120 critical infrastructure facilities in the City and County of Honolulu, including water, waste, and wastewater systems and communication and energy facilities would be impacted in the 1%CFZ with 3.2 feet of sea level rise (Tetra Tech Inc., 2018). This is double the number of facilities in the SFHA which includes the impacts of riverine flooding.A simplified version of the Wave Height Analysis for Flood Insurance Studies (WHAFIS) extension (FEMA, 2019b) included in Hazus-MH, was used to create the 1% annual chance coastal floodplain. Hazus is a nationally applicable standardized methodology that contains models for estimating potential losses from earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, and hurricanes (FEMA, 2019a). The current 1%-annual-chance stillwater elevations were collected using the most current flood insurance studies (FIS) for each island conducted by FEMA (FEMA, 2004, 2010, 2014, 2015). The FIS calculates the 1%-annual-chance stillwater elevation, wave setup, and wave run-up (called maximum wave crest) at regularly-spaced transects around the islands based on historical data. Modeling for the 1%CFZ used the NOAA 3-meter digital elevation model (DEM) which incorporates LiDAR data sets collected between 2003 and 2007 from NOAA, FEMA, the State of Hawaiʻi Emergency Management Agency, and the USACE (NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, 2017).Before Hazus was run for future conditions, it was run for the current conditions and compared to the FEMA regulatory floodplain to determine model accuracy. This also helped determine the stillwater elevation for the large gaps between some transects in the FIS. Hazus was run at 0.5-foot stillwater level intervals and the results were compared to the existing Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The interval of 0.5-feet was chosen as a small enough step to result in a near approximation of the FIRM while not being too impractically narrow to require the testing of dozens of input elevations. The elevation which matched up best was used as the current base flood elevation.Key steps in modeling the projected 1%CFZ with sea level rise include: (1) generating a contiguous (no gaps along the shoreline) and present-day 1%-annual-chance stillwater elevation based on the most recent FIS, (2) elevating the present-day 1%-annual-chance stillwater elevation by adding projected sea level rise heights, and (3) modeling the projected 1%-annual-chance coastal flood with sea level rise in HAZUS using the 1%-annual-chance wave setup and run-up from the FIS. The 1%CFZ extent and depth was generated using the HAZUS 3.2 coastal flood risk assessment model, 3-meter DEM, the FIS for each island, and the IPCC AR5 upper sea level projection for RCP 8.5 scenario for 0.6 feet, 1.0 feet, 2.0 feet, and 3.2 feet of sea level rise above MHHW (IPCC, 2014). The HAZUS output includes the estimated spatial extent of coastal flooding as well as an estimated flood depth map grid for the four sea level rise projections.Using the current floodplain generated with Hazus, the projected 1%-annual-chance stillwater elevation was generated using the four sea level rise projections. This stillwater elevation with sea level rise was used as a basis for modeling. The projected 1%-annual coastal flood with sea level rise was modeled in Hazus using the current 1%-annual-chance wave setup and run-up from the FIS and the projected 1%-annual-chance stillwater elevation with sea level rise. Statewide GIS Program staff extracted individual island layers for ease of downloading. A statewide layer is also available as a REST service, and is available for download from the Statewide GIS geoportal at https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/, or at the Program's legacy download site at https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/#009. For additional information, please refer to summary metadata at https://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/op/gis/data/coastal_flood_zones_summary.pdf or contact Hawaii Statewide GIS Program, Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, State of Hawaii; PO Box 2359, Honolulu, Hi. 96804; (808) 587-2846; email: gis@hawaii.gov.

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under LIR Parcels.In Spring of 2016, the Land Information Records work group, an informal committee organized by the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget’s State Planning Coordinator, produced recommendations for expanding the sharing of GIS-based parcel information. Participants in the LIR work group included representatives from county, regional, and state government, including the Utah Association of Counties (County Assessors and County Recorders), Wasatch Front Regional Council, Mountainland and Bear River AOGs, Utah League of Cities and Towns, UDOT, DNR, AGRC, the Division of Emergency Management, Blue Stakes, economic developers, and academic researchers. The LIR work group’s recommendations set the stage for voluntary sharing of additional objective/quantitative parcel GIS data, primarily around tax assessment-related information. Specifically the recommendations document establishes objectives, principles (including the role of local and state government), data content items, expected users, and a general process for data aggregation and publishing. An important realization made by the group was that ‘parcel data’ or ‘parcel record’ products have a different meaning to different users and data stewards. The LIR group focused, specifically, on defining a data sharing recommendation around a tax year parcel GIS data product, aligned with the finalization of the property tax roll by County Assessors on May 22nd of each year. The LIR recommendations do not impact the periodic sharing of basic parcel GIS data (boundary, ID, address) from the County Recorders to AGRC per 63F-1-506 (3.b.vi). Both the tax year parcel and the basic parcel GIS layers are designed for general purpose uses, and are not substitutes for researching and obtaining the most current, legal land records information on file in County records. This document, below, proposes a schedule, guidelines, and process for assembling county parcel and assessment data into an annual, statewide tax parcel GIS layer. gis.utah.gov/data/sgid-cadastre/It is hoped that this new expanded parcel GIS layer will be put to immediate use supporting the best possible outcomes in public safety, economic development, transportation, planning, and the provision of public services. Another aim of the work group was to improve the usability of the data, through development of content guidelines and consistent metadata documentation, and the efficiency with which the data sharing is distributed.GIS Layer Boundary Geometry:GIS Format Data Files: Ideally, Tax Year Parcel data should be provided in a shapefile (please include the .shp, .shx, .dbf, .prj, and .xml component files) or file geodatabase format. An empty shapefile and file geodatabase schema are available for download at:At the request of a county, AGRC will provide technical assistance to counties to extract, transform, and load parcel and assessment information into the GIS layer format.Geographic Coverage: Tax year parcel polygons should cover the area of each county for which assessment information is created and digital parcels are available. Full coverage may not be available yet for each county. The county may provide parcels that have been adjusted to remove gaps and overlaps for administrative tax purposes or parcels that retain these expected discrepancies that take their source from the legally described boundary or the process of digital conversion. The diversity of topological approaches will be noted in the metadata.One Tax Parcel Record Per Unique Tax Notice: Some counties produce an annual tax year parcel GIS layer with one parcel polygon per tax notice. In some cases, adjacent parcel polygons that compose a single taxed property must be merged into a single polygon. This is the goal for the statewide layer but may not be possible in all counties. AGRC will provide technical support to counties, where needed, to merge GIS parcel boundaries into the best format to match with the annual assessment information.Standard Coordinate System: Parcels will be loaded into Utah’s statewide coordinate system, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (NAD83, Zone 12 North). However, boundaries stored in other industry standard coordinate systems will be accepted if they are both defined within the data file(s) and documented in the metadata (see below).Descriptive Attributes:Database Field/Column Definitions: The table below indicates the field names and definitions for attributes requested for each Tax Parcel Polygon record.FIELD NAME FIELD TYPE LENGTH DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE SHAPE (expected) Geometry n/a The boundary of an individual parcel or merged parcels that corresponds with a single county tax notice ex. polygon boundary in UTM NAD83 Zone 12 N or other industry standard coordinates including state plane systemsCOUNTY_NAME Text 20 - County name including spaces ex. BOX ELDERCOUNTY_ID (expected) Text 2 - County ID Number ex. Beaver = 1, Box Elder = 2, Cache = 3,..., Weber = 29ASSESSOR_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Assessor in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/assessorBOUNDARY_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Recorder in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/recorderDISCLAIMER (added by State) Text 50 - Disclaimer URL ex. gis.utah.gov...CURRENT_ASOF (expected) Date - Parcels current as of date ex. 01/01/2016PARCEL_ID (expected) Text 50 - County designated Unique ID number for individual parcels ex. 15034520070000PARCEL_ADD (expected, where available) Text 100 - Parcel’s street address location. Usually the address at recordation ex. 810 S 900 E #304 (example for a condo)TAXEXEMPT_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Primary category of granted tax exemption ex. None, Religious, Government, Agriculture, Conservation Easement, Other Open Space, OtherTAX_DISTRICT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - The coding the county uses to identify a unique combination of property tax levying entities ex. 17ATOTAL_MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - Total market value of parcel's land, structures, and other improvements as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 332000LAND _MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - The market value of the parcel's land as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 80600PARCEL_ACRES (expected) Decimal - Parcel size in acres ex. 20.360PROP_CLASS (expected) Text 100 - Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Mixed, Agricultural, Vacant, Open Space, Other ex. ResidentialPRIMARY_RES (expected) Text 1 - Is the property a primary residence(s): Y'(es), 'N'(o), or 'U'(nknown) ex. YHOUSING_CNT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - Number of housing units, can be single number or range like '5-10' ex. 1SUBDIV_NAME (optional) Text 100 - Subdivision name if applicable ex. Highland Manor SubdivisionBLDG_SQFT (expected, where applicable) Integer - Square footage of primary bldg(s) ex. 2816BLDG_SQFT_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how building square footage is counted by the County ex. Only finished above and below grade areas are counted.FLOORS_CNT (expected, where applicable) Decimal - Number of floors as reported in county records ex. 2FLOORS_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how floors are counted by the County ex. Only above grade floors are countedBUILT_YR (expected, where applicable) Short - Estimated year of initial construction of primary buildings ex. 1968EFFBUILT_YR (optional, where applicable) Short - The 'effective' year built' of primary buildings that factors in updates after construction ex. 1980CONST_MATERIAL (optional, where applicable) Text 100 - Construction Material Types, Values for this field are expected to vary greatly by county ex. Wood Frame, Brick, etc Contact: Sean Fernandez, Cadastral Manager (email: sfernandez@utah.gov; office phone: 801-209-9359)

This data includes approximate boundaries for local historic districts in the City of Saint Paul, along with basic information about each district. The boundaries are drawn to be generally accurate, but any questions that involve parcel-by-parcel judgement about where specifically the boundary falls should be resolved by referring to other documentation.Attributes (Fields) Defined:Name: Name of the Historic DistrictHistoric Listing: The level of historic listing (local, state, or national) that applies to this record. All records in this dataset will be (by definition) "local".Year added to National Register of Historic Places: A placeholder field; not applicable to this layer.Year added to State Register of Historic Places: A placeholder field; not applicable to this layer.Year added to Local Heritage Preservation Districts: The year that the area was added to the list of Local Heritage Preservation Districts.Expansion Years: Year the district was expanded (at either the National, State, or Local level).Maintenance and Update Frequency: This data is updated when a new historic district becomes effective, or details about an existing district change.

Travis County park boundaries that are open to the public and managed by Travis County Parks. The database schema was originally based on the GIS Data Model developed by the National Recreation & Parks Association (NRPA), and was altered by Travis County Transportation & Natural Resources Department to suite its needs. Data AttributesYear Open: Year park was opened to the public. Null values indicate the year is unknown. Park Status: This field indicates the current physical state of the property. Open_Fee indicates there is a day use fee to enter the park. Statuses listed as Open may include parks that have other type of fees.Park Type: 7 predefined types created & defined by TNR. Based on Service Area (as defined by the NRPA GIS data model), Size, & in 3 cases Purpose. Service Area takes precedence over size. Not all park types may exist in this dataset, if they are not yet Neighborhood Park: 0-5 miles*/ 10 min*/ <20 acresCommunity Park: 0-25 miles/ < 30 min/ > 20 - <200 acresMetropolitan Park: 0-100 miles/ 30 - 120 min/ > 200 - <1000 acresRegional Park: 0 - >100 miles/ 2-6 hrs/ > 1000 acresPreserve: Purpose = preserveConnector: Purpose = connector. These tracts make up the individual Greenway/ Corridor Parks.Service Area: Planned Service Area, or the radius from within which a majority of the visitors travel to the site. (See NRPA GIS Data Model Outline for more information)Management Priority: Priority for managing the park resources. See NRPA GIS Data Model Outline for full list of definitions. Below are TNR's adaptation of NRPA's Active & Passive Park Management Priority types.Active Park: Developed & primarily intended for programmed outdoor recreational uses; usually requires capital-intensive investments in site development and/or construction of special recreational facilities.Passive Park: Developed & primarily intended for unprogrammed outdoor recreational uses; usually centered on land & water resources & only requires basic park facilities.Planning/ Project Management Areas: Created & defined by TNR. Almost all are tied to river corridors or creek greenways, while all others are grouped into the final category, "Travis County Other". In cases where a tract/park falls along both a creek & a river, the creek takes precedence.Colorado River Corridor: Parks lying along or w/in the vicinity of the Colorado River (East of Longhorn Dam)Gilleland Creek Greenway: Parks lying along or w/in the vicinity of Gilleland CreekLake Austin: Parks lying along or w/in the vicinity of Lake Austin (East of Mansfield Dam & West of Longhorn Dam)Lake Travis: Parks lying along or w/in the vicinity of Lake Travis (West of Mansfield Dam)Onion Creek Greenway : Parks lying along or w/in the vicinity of Onion CreekPedernales River Corridor: Parks lying along or w/in the vicinity of the Pedernales RiverTravis County Other: Parks that do NOT lay along any river or creekDevelopment Status: Parks are designated as "Developed" if 50% or more of its acreage has been developed. See NRPA GIS Data Model Outline for more information about field definitions and domain values.ArcGIS Portal

This dataset includes various facilities used for fisheries management in the Columbia Basin, as well as key hydroelectric dams throughout the Basin. For the purposes of this dataset, a facility is a fixed or semi-fixed location where fish are managed, counted or passed, and generally where there is at least one data record in a Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission(PSMFC) database. Not all dams fall neatly within this definition, but are included since they are a significant factor in fish distribution. A primary objective of this dataset is to link PSMFC's Columbia Basin fish data programs through a common location framework, while eliminating the redundancy of location data being mapped and managed by the individual program. While the facility location data will be managed by the PSMFC GIS Center as a single dataset, facilities can be separated and published into multiple map layers based on facility type or other attributes. Sources for these point data came primarily from Programs within the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC), including StreamNet, PIT Tag Information System(PTAGIS), and the Regional Mark Processing Center(RMPC), and their various state and federal partners. Locations have been checked and in some cases modified, to more closely match available imagery and/or regional hydrography, as appropriate. Inclusion in the dataset or depiction in the mapper does not mean that the facility is currently active. Basic types of fish facilities currently include:• Hatcheries, acclimation / release sites• Dams (categorized further for display purposes)• Fish traps & collection facilities (including screw traps, weir traps, etc.)• Fish passage facilities (including fish ladders and juvenile fish bypasses)• PTAGIS instream remote detection facilities** Note that not all PTAGIS sites are depicted in this dataset.We strive for accuracy and completeness, but expect that improvements to the dataset can be made. If you have any corrections, additions, suggestions, or concerns, please contact gis@psmfc.org

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under LIR Parcels.In Spring of 2016, the Land Information Records work group, an informal committee organized by the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget’s State Planning Coordinator, produced recommendations for expanding the sharing of GIS-based parcel information. Participants in the LIR work group included representatives from county, regional, and state government, including the Utah Association of Counties (County Assessors and County Recorders), Wasatch Front Regional Council, Mountainland and Bear River AOGs, Utah League of Cities and Towns, UDOT, DNR, AGRC, the Division of Emergency Management, Blue Stakes, economic developers, and academic researchers. The LIR work group’s recommendations set the stage for voluntary sharing of additional objective/quantitative parcel GIS data, primarily around tax assessment-related information. Specifically the recommendations document establishes objectives, principles (including the role of local and state government), data content items, expected users, and a general process for data aggregation and publishing. An important realization made by the group was that ‘parcel data’ or ‘parcel record’ products have a different meaning to different users and data stewards. The LIR group focused, specifically, on defining a data sharing recommendation around a tax year parcel GIS data product, aligned with the finalization of the property tax roll by County Assessors on May 22nd of each year. The LIR recommendations do not impact the periodic sharing of basic parcel GIS data (boundary, ID, address) from the County Recorders to AGRC per 63F-1-506 (3.b.vi). Both the tax year parcel and the basic parcel GIS layers are designed for general purpose uses, and are not substitutes for researching and obtaining the most current, legal land records information on file in County records. This document, below, proposes a schedule, guidelines, and process for assembling county parcel and assessment data into an annual, statewide tax parcel GIS layer. gis.utah.gov/data/sgid-cadastre/It is hoped that this new expanded parcel GIS layer will be put to immediate use supporting the best possible outcomes in public safety, economic development, transportation, planning, and the provision of public services. Another aim of the work group was to improve the usability of the data, through development of content guidelines and consistent metadata documentation, and the efficiency with which the data sharing is distributed.GIS Layer Boundary Geometry:GIS Format Data Files: Ideally, Tax Year Parcel data should be provided in a shapefile (please include the .shp, .shx, .dbf, .prj, and .xml component files) or file geodatabase format. An empty shapefile and file geodatabase schema are available for download at:At the request of a county, AGRC will provide technical assistance to counties to extract, transform, and load parcel and assessment information into the GIS layer format.Geographic Coverage: Tax year parcel polygons should cover the area of each county for which assessment information is created and digital parcels are available. Full coverage may not be available yet for each county. The county may provide parcels that have been adjusted to remove gaps and overlaps for administrative tax purposes or parcels that retain these expected discrepancies that take their source from the legally described boundary or the process of digital conversion. The diversity of topological approaches will be noted in the metadata.One Tax Parcel Record Per Unique Tax Notice: Some counties produce an annual tax year parcel GIS layer with one parcel polygon per tax notice. In some cases, adjacent parcel polygons that compose a single taxed property must be merged into a single polygon. This is the goal for the statewide layer but may not be possible in all counties. AGRC will provide technical support to counties, where needed, to merge GIS parcel boundaries into the best format to match with the annual assessment information.Standard Coordinate System: Parcels will be loaded into Utah’s statewide coordinate system, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates (NAD83, Zone 12 North). However, boundaries stored in other industry standard coordinate systems will be accepted if they are both defined within the data file(s) and documented in the metadata (see below).Descriptive Attributes:Database Field/Column Definitions: The table below indicates the field names and definitions for attributes requested for each Tax Parcel Polygon record.FIELD NAME FIELD TYPE LENGTH DESCRIPTION EXAMPLE SHAPE (expected) Geometry n/a The boundary of an individual parcel or merged parcels that corresponds with a single county tax notice ex. polygon boundary in UTM NAD83 Zone 12 N or other industry standard coordinates including state plane systemsCOUNTY_NAME Text 20 - County name including spaces ex. BOX ELDERCOUNTY_ID (expected) Text 2 - County ID Number ex. Beaver = 1, Box Elder = 2, Cache = 3,..., Weber = 29ASSESSOR_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Assessor in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/assessorBOUNDARY_SRC (expected) Text 100 - Website URL, will be to County Recorder in most all cases ex. webercounty.org/recorderDISCLAIMER (added by State) Text 50 - Disclaimer URL ex. gis.utah.gov...CURRENT_ASOF (expected) Date - Parcels current as of date ex. 01/01/2016PARCEL_ID (expected) Text 50 - County designated Unique ID number for individual parcels ex. 15034520070000PARCEL_ADD (expected, where available) Text 100 - Parcel’s street address location. Usually the address at recordation ex. 810 S 900 E #304 (example for a condo)TAXEXEMPT_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Primary category of granted tax exemption ex. None, Religious, Government, Agriculture, Conservation Easement, Other Open Space, OtherTAX_DISTRICT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - The coding the county uses to identify a unique combination of property tax levying entities ex. 17ATOTAL_MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - Total market value of parcel's land, structures, and other improvements as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 332000LAND _MKT_VALUE (expected) Decimal - The market value of the parcel's land as determined by the Assessor for the most current tax year ex. 80600PARCEL_ACRES (expected) Decimal - Parcel size in acres ex. 20.360PROP_CLASS (expected) Text 100 - Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Mixed, Agricultural, Vacant, Open Space, Other ex. ResidentialPRIMARY_RES (expected) Text 1 - Is the property a primary residence(s): Y'(es), 'N'(o), or 'U'(nknown) ex. YHOUSING_CNT (expected, where applicable) Text 10 - Number of housing units, can be single number or range like '5-10' ex. 1SUBDIV_NAME (optional) Text 100 - Subdivision name if applicable ex. Highland Manor SubdivisionBLDG_SQFT (expected, where applicable) Integer - Square footage of primary bldg(s) ex. 2816BLDG_SQFT_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how building square footage is counted by the County ex. Only finished above and below grade areas are counted.FLOORS_CNT (expected, where applicable) Decimal - Number of floors as reported in county records ex. 2FLOORS_INFO (expected, where applicable) Text 100 - Note for how floors are counted by the County ex. Only above grade floors are countedBUILT_YR (expected, where applicable) Short - Estimated year of initial construction of primary buildings ex. 1968EFFBUILT_YR (optional, where applicable) Short - The 'effective' year built' of primary buildings that factors in updates after construction ex. 1980CONST_MATERIAL (optional, where applicable) Text 100 - Construction Material Types, Values for this field are expected to vary greatly by county ex. Wood Frame, Brick, etc Contact: Sean Fernandez, Cadastral Manager (email: sfernandez@utah.gov; office phone: 801-209-9359)