USGS is assessing the feasibility of map projections and grid systems for lunar surface operations. We propose developing a new Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM), the Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS), and the Lunar Grid Reference Systems (LGRS). We have also designed additional grids designed to NASA requirements for astronaut navigation, referred to as LGRS in Artemis Condensed Coordinates (ACC), but this is not released here. LTM, LPS, and LGRS are similar in design and use to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Universal Polar Stereographic (LPS), and Military Grid Reference System (MGRS), but adhere to NASA requirements. LGRS ACC format is similar in design and structure to historic Army Mapping Service Apollo orthotopophoto charts for navigation. The Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM) projection system is a globalized set of lunar map projections that divides the Moon into zones to provide a uniform coordinate system for accurate spatial representation. It uses a transverse Mercator projection, which maps the Moon into 45 transverse Mercator strips, each 8°, longitude, wide. These transverse Mercator strips are subdivided at the lunar equator for a total of 90 zones. Forty-five in the northern hemisphere and forty-five in the south. LTM specifies a topocentric, rectangular, coordinate system (easting and northing coordinates) for spatial referencing. This projection is commonly used in GIS and surveying for its ability to represent large areas with high positional accuracy while maintaining consistent scale. The Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS) projection system contains projection specifications for the Moon’s polar regions. It uses a polar stereographic projection, which maps the polar regions onto an azimuthal plane. The LPS system contains 2 zones, each zone is located at the northern and southern poles and is referred to as the LPS northern or LPS southern zone. LPS, like is equatorial counterpart LTM, specifies a topocentric, rectangular, coordinate system (easting and northing coordinates) for spatial referencing. This projection is commonly used in GIS and surveying for its ability to represent large polar areas with high positional accuracy, while maintaining consistent scale across the map region. LGRS is a globalized grid system for lunar navigation supported by the LTM and LPS projections. LGRS provides an alphanumeric grid coordinate structure for both the LTM and LPS systems. This labeling structure is utilized in a similar manner to MGRS. LGRS defines a global area grid based on latitude and longitude and a 25×25 km grid based on LTM and LPS coordinate values. Two implementations of LGRS are used as polar areas require a LPS projection and equatorial areas a transverse Mercator. We describe the difference in the techniques and methods report associated with this data release. Request McClernan et. al. (in-press) for more information. ACC is a method of simplifying LGRS coordinates and is similar in use to the Army Mapping Service Apollo orthotopophoto charts for navigation. These data will be released at a later date. Two versions of the shape files are provided in this data release, PCRS and Display only. See LTM_LPS_LGRS_Shapefiles.zip file. PCRS are limited to a single zone and are projected in either LTM or LPS with topocentric coordinates formatted in Eastings and Northings. Display only shapefiles are formatted in lunar planetocentric latitude and longitude, a Mercator or Equirectangular projection is best for these grids. A description of each grid is provided below: Equatorial (Display Only) Grids: Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM) Grids: LTM zone borders for each LTM zone Merged LTM zone borders Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS) Grids: North LPS zone border South LPS zone border Lunar Grid Reference System (LGRS) Grids: Global Areas for North and South LPS zones Merged Global Areas (8°×8° and 8°×10° extended area) for all LTM zones Merged 25km grid for all LTM zones PCRS Shapefiles:` Lunar Transverse Mercator (LTM) Grids: LTM zone borders for each LTM zone Lunar Polar Stereographic (LPS) Grids: North LPS zone border South LPS zone border Lunar Grid Reference System (LGRS) Grids: Global Areas for North and South LPS zones 25km Gird for North and South LPS zones Global Areas (8°×8° and 8°×10° extended area) for each LTM zone 25km grid for each LTM zone The rasters in this data release detail the linear distortions associated with the LTM and LPS system projections. For these products, we utilize the same definitions of distortion as the U.S. State Plane Coordinate System. Scale Factor, k - The scale factor is a ratio that communicates the difference in distances when measured on a map and the distance reported on the reference surface. Symbolically this is the ratio between the maps grid distance and distance on the lunar reference sphere. This value can be precisely calculated and is provided in their defining publication. See Snyder (1987) for derivation of the LPS scale factor. This scale factor is unitless and typically increases from the central scale factor k_0, a projection-defining parameter. For each LPS projection. Request McClernan et. al., (in-press) for more information. Scale Error, (k-1) - Scale-Error, is simply the scale factor differenced from 1. Is a unitless positive or negative value from 0 that is used to express the scale factor’s impact on position values on a map. Distance on the reference surface are expended when (k-1) is positive and contracted when (k-1) is negative. Height Factor, h_F - The Height Factor is used to correct for the difference in distance caused between the lunar surface curvature expressed at different elevations. It is expressed as a ratio between the radius of the lunar reference sphere and elevations measured from the center of the reference sphere. For this work, we utilized a radial distance of 1,737,400 m as recommended by the IAU working group of Rotational Elements (Archinal et. al., 2008). For this calculation, height factor values were derived from a LOLA DEM 118 m v1, Digital Elevation Model (LOLA Science Team, 2021). Combined Factor, C_F – The combined factor is utilized to “Scale-To-Ground” and is used to adjust the distance expressed on the map surface and convert to the position on the actual ground surface. This value is the product of the map scale factor and the height factor, ensuring the positioning measurements can be correctly placed on a map and on the ground. The combined factor is similar to linear distortion in that it is evaluated at the ground, but, as discussed in the next section, differs numerically. Often C_F is scrutinized for map projection optimization. Linear distortion, δ - In keeping with the design definitions of SPCS2022 (Dennis 2023), we refer to scale error when discussing the lunar reference sphere and linear distortion, δ, when discussing the topographic surface. Linear distortion is calculated using C_F simply by subtracting 1. Distances are expended on the topographic surface when δ is positive and compressed when δ is negative. The relevant files associated with the expressed LTM distortion are as follows. The scale factor for the 90 LTM projections: LUNAR_LTM_GLOBAL_PLOT_HEMISPHERES_distortion_K_grid_scale_factor.tif Height Factor for the LTM portion of the Moon: LUNAR_LTM_GLOBAL_PLOT_HEMISPHERES_distortion_EF_elevation_factor.tif Combined Factor in LTM portion of the Moon LUNAR_LTM_GLOBAL_PLOT_HEMISPHERES_distortion_CF_combined_factor.tif The relevant files associated with the expressed LPS distortion are as follows. Lunar North Pole The scale factor for the northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_NP_PLOT_LPS_K_grid_scale_factor.tif Height Factor for the north pole of the Moon: LUNAR_LGRS_NP_PLOT_LPS_EF_elevation_factor.tif Combined Factor for northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_NP_PLOT_LPS_CF_combined_factor.tif Lunar South Pole Scale factor for the northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_SP_PLOT_LPS_K_grid_scale_factor.tif Height Factor for the south pole of the Moon: LUNAR_LGRS_SP_PLOT_LPS_EF_elevation_factor.tif Combined Factor for northern LPS zone: LUNAR_LGRS_SP_PLOT_LPS_CF_combined_factor.tif For GIS utilization of grid shapefiles projected in Lunar Latitude and Longitude, referred to as “Display Only”, please utilize a registered lunar geographic coordinate system (GCS) such as IAU_2015:30100 or ESRI:104903. LTM, LPS, and LGRS PCRS shapefiles utilize either a custom transverse Mercator or polar Stereographic projection. For PCRS grids the LTM and LPS projections are recommended for all LTM, LPS, and LGRS grid sizes. See McClernan et. al. (in-press) for such projections. Raster data was calculated using planetocentric latitude and longitude. A LTM and LPS projection or a registered lunar GCS may be utilized to display this data. Note: All data, shapefiles and rasters, require a specific projection and datum. The projection is recommended as LTM and LPS or, when needed, IAU_2015:30100 or ESRI:104903. The datum utilized must be the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Development Ephemeris (DE) 421 in the Mean Earth (ME) Principal Axis Orientation as recommended by the International Astronomy Union (IAU) (Archinal et. al., 2008).

Indiana Reference Post point Inventory created as an ESRI point shapefile consisting of a Feature point geometry. The data set was compiled by Road Inventory of the Indiana GIS Department of Transportation (INDOT) . Dataset is classified as sde Feature Class. The Feature Class is projected Coordinate System: NAD 1983, UTM, Zone 16 N. The Projections is Transverse Mercator.Each Reference Post point Inventory is placed as to Position, Measure, and by Reference Post Name. The posts are "names" for known spots on the road. The names are sequentially numbered along the road. The Reference Post point Inventory is Dated as of 2006-2015.

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)

Geospatial Services Land management within the US Forest Service and on the 900,000+ acre Monongahela National Forest (NF) is driven by a wide mix of resource and societal demands that prove a challenge in fulfilling the Forest Service’s mission of “Caring for the Land and Serving the People.” Programmatically, the 2006 Land and Resource Management Plan guide natural resource management activities on lands administered by the Monongahela National Forest. The Forest Plan describes management direction and practices, resource protection methods and monitoring, desired resource conditions, and the availability and suitability of lands for resource management. Technology enables staff to address these land management issues and Forest Plan direction by using a science-based approach to facilitate effective decisions. Monongahela NF geospatial services, using enabling-technologies, incorporate key tools such as Environmental Systems Research Institute’s ArcGIS desktop suite and Trimble’s global positioning system (GPS) units to meet program and Forest needs. Geospatial Datasets The Forest has a broad set of geospatial datasets that capture geographic features across the eastern West Virginia landscape. Many of these datasets are available to the public through our download site. Selected geospatial data that encompass the Monongahela National Forest are available for download from this page. A link to the FGDC-compliant metadata is provided for each dataset. All data are in zipped format (or available from the specified source), in one of two spatial data formats, and in the following coordinate system: Coordinate System: Universal Transverse Mercator Zone: 17 Units: Meters Datum: NAD 1983 Spheroid: GRS 1980 Map files – All map files are in pdf format. These maps illustrate the correlated geospatial data. All maps are under 1 MB unless otherwise noted. Metadata file – This FGDC-compliant metadata file contains information pertaining to the specific geospatial dataset. Shapefile – This downloadable zipped file is in ESRI’s shapefile format. KML file – This downloadable zipped file is in Google Earth’s KML format. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Monongahela National Forest Geospatial Data. File Name: Web Page, url: https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/mnf/landmanagement/gis/?cid=stelprdb5108081 Selected geospatial data that encompass the Monongahela National Forest are available for download from this page.

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)

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)

U.S. State Plane Zones (NAD 1983) represents the State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS) Zones for the 1983 North American Datum within United States.

Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpageunder 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, OtherSalt Lake County Tax Exempt codes below:AE - Airport - ExemptCC - Commercial Common AreaCE - Conservation EasementCM - CemeteryEC - Exempt CharitableEE - Exempt EducationER - Exempt ReligiousGB - GreenbeltHE - Homeowners Assoc ExemptIL - In LieuIR - Irrigation CompanyMC - Master CardOE - Owner ExemptPE - Part ExemptPR - Pro-RatedPT - Privilege TaxPY - Privilege Tax on a YieldSA - State AssessedSC - State and Cnty AssessedSE - Special - ExemptSU - Salt Lake - Utah CntyTD - Divided Tax DistrictUI - Undivided_Interest TAX_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. ResidentialSalt Lake County Property Class codes below:R - Residential / CondoC - CommercialI - IndustrialRE - RecreationalA - AgriculturalMH - Multi HousingMore information about the PROP_CLASS and PROP_TYPE for Salt Lake County can be found at http://slco.org/assessor/new/queryproptyp.cfmPROP_TYPE (expected) Text 100 - Single Family Res.,Townhome, CondoPRIMARY_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 set is a spatial representation of the jurisdiction of the State of New Jersey developed by the NJ Office of Information Technology, Office of GIS (NJOGIS) in NJ State Plane Coordinate System (NAD83). It is not a survey document and must not be used as such. The polygon delineated in this data set does not represent the legal state boundary. This data set improves upon previous versions of the state boundary through the integration of coincident features from several high quality source data sets, as a component of the NJOGIS statewide Parcels Normalization Project concluded in March 2010.

The GIS-based Time model of Gothenburg aims to map the process of urban development in Gothenburg since 1960 and in particular to document the changes in the spatial form of the city - streets, buildings and plots - through time. Major steps have in recent decades been taken when it comes to understanding how cities work. Essential is the change from understanding cities as locations to understanding them as flows (Batty 2013)1. In principle this means that we need to understand locations (or places) as defined by flows (or different forms of traffic), rather than locations only served by flows. This implies that we need to understand the built form and spatial structure of cities as a system, that by shaping flows creates a series of places with very specific relations to all other places in the city, which also give them very specific performative potentials. It also implies the rather fascinating notion that what happens in one place is dependent on its relation to all other places (Hillier 1996)2. Hence, to understand the individual place, we need a model of the city as a whole.

Extensive research in this direction has taken place in recent years, that has also spilled over to urban design practice, not least in Sweden, where the idea that to understand the part you need to understand the whole is starting to be established. With the GIS-based Time model for Gothenburg that we present here, we address the next challenge. Place is not only something defined by its spatial relation to all other places in its system, but also by its history, or its evolution over time. Since the built form of the city changes over time, often by cities growing but at times also by cities shrinking, the spatial relation between places changes over time. If cities tend to grow, and most often by extending their periphery, it means that most places get a more central location over time. If this is a general tendency, it does not mean that all places increase their centrality to an equal degree. Depending on the structure of the individual city’s spatial form, different places become more centrally located to different degrees as well as their relative distance to other places changes to different degrees. The even more fascinating notion then becomes apparent; places move over time! To capture, study and understand this, we need a "time model".

The GIS-based time model of Gothenburg consists of: • 12 GIS-layers of the street network, from 1960 to 2015, in 5-year intervals • 12 GIS-layers of the buildings from 1960 to 2015, in 5-year intervals - Please note that this dataset has been moved to a separate catalog post (https://doi.org/10.5878/t8s9-6y15) and unpublished due to licensing restrictions on its source dataset. • 12 GIS- layers of the plots from1960 to 2015, in 5-year intervals

In the GIS-based Time model, for every time-frame, the combination of the three fundamental components of spatial form, that is streets, plots and buildings, provides a consistent description of the built environment at that particular time. The evolution of three components can be studied individually, where one could for example analyze the changing patterns of street centrality over time by focusing on the street network; or, the densification processes by focusing on the buildings; or, the expansion of the city by way of occupying more buildable land, by focusing on plots. The combined snapshots of street centrality, density and land division can provide insightful observations about the spatial form of the city at each time-frame; for example, the patterns of spatial segregation, the distribution of urban density or the patterns of sprawl. The observation of how the interrelated layers of spatial form together evolved and transformed through time can provide a more complete image of the patterns of urban growth in the city.

The Time model was created following the principles of the model of spatial form of the city, as developed by the Spatial Morphology Group (SMoG) at Chalmers University of Technology, within the three-year research project ‘International Spatial Morphology Lab (SMoL)’.

The project is funded by Älvstranden Utveckling AB in the framework of a larger cooperation project called Fusion Point Gothenburg. The data is shared via SND to create a research infrastructure that is open to new study initiatives.

1. Batty, M. (2013), The New Science of Cities, Cambridge: MIT Press.
2. Hillier, B., (1996), Space Is the Machine. Cambridge: University of Cambridge

• 12 GIS-layers of the street network in Gothenburg, from 1960 to 2015, in 5-year intervals. File format: shapefile (.shp), MapinfoTAB (.TAB). The coordinate system used is SWEREF 99TM, EPSG:3006.

• 12 GIS-layers of plots in Gothenburg, from 1960 to 2015, in 5-year intervals. Only built upon plots (plots with buildings) are included. File format: shapefile (.shp), MapinfoTAB (.TAB). The coordinate system used is SWEREF 99TM, EPSG:3006.

See the attached Technical Documentation for the description and further details on the production of the datasets. See the attached Report for the description of the related research project.

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 Lake Dataset Extracted from Qing Dynasty Historical Maps (Geometrically Corrected and Georeferenced) contains vectorized lake features derived from two representative 18th-century official maps of China—the Huang Yu Quan Lan Tu (Kangxi Edition) and the Nei Fu Yu Tu (Qianlong Edition). Both historical maps were geometrically corrected and georeferenced by aligning them with high-resolution contemporary basemaps to ensure spatial consistency with modern geographic coordinate systems.The dataset focuses on lake distributions in the southern Mongolian Plateau. After the rectification process, lake boundaries were manually vectorized, and related attribute information was extracted, including lake centroid coordinates, perimeters, and surface areas. This dataset enables comparative spatial analysis between historical and modern hydrographic features and supports the quantitative evaluation of cartographic accuracy in Qing-era maps.This dataset is intended for use in historical geographic information systems (Historical GIS), cartographic distortion analysis, environmental and geomorphological change monitoring, and digital humanities research. All data are provided in standard Shapefile format and projected using the Albers Equal-Area Projection, which is suitable for analyzing regional-scale spatial patterns and lake areas. The dataset is fully compatible with mainstream GIS software platforms.

This dataset includes all 7 metro counties that have made their parcel data freely available without a license or fees.

This dataset is a compilation of tax parcel polygon and point layers assembled into a common coordinate system from Twin Cities, Minnesota metropolitan area counties. No attempt has been made to edgematch or rubbersheet between counties. A standard set of attribute fields is included for each county. The attributes are the same for the polygon and points layers. Not all attributes are populated for all counties.

NOTICE: The standard set of attributes changed to the MN Parcel Data Transfer Standard on 1/1/2019.
https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/committee/standards/parcel_attrib/parcel_attrib.html

See section 5 of the metadata for an attribute summary.

Detailed information about the attributes can be found in the Metro Regional Parcel Attributes document.

The polygon layer contains one record for each real estate/tax parcel polygon within each county's parcel dataset. Some counties have polygons for each individual condominium, and others do not. (See Completeness in Section 2 of the metadata for more information.) The points layer includes the same attribute fields as the polygon dataset. The points are intended to provide information in situations where multiple tax parcels are represented by a single polygon. One primary example of this is the condominium, though some counties stacked polygons for condos. Condominiums, by definition, are legally owned as individual, taxed real estate units. Records for condominiums may not show up in the polygon dataset. The points for the point dataset often will be randomly placed or stacked within the parcel polygon with which they are associated.

The polygon layer is broken into individual county shape files. The points layer is provided as both individual county files and as one file for the entire metro area.

In many places a one-to-one relationship does not exist between these parcel polygons or points and the actual buildings or occupancy units that lie within them. There may be many buildings on one parcel and there may be many occupancy units (e.g. apartments, stores or offices) within each building. Additionally, no information exists within this dataset about residents of parcels. Parcel owner and taxpayer information exists for many, but not all counties.

This is a MetroGIS Regionally Endorsed dataset.

Additional information may be available from each county at the links listed below. Also, any questions or comments about suspected errors or omissions in this dataset can be addressed to the contact person at each individual county.

Anoka = http://www.anokacounty.us/315/GIS
Caver = http://www.co.carver.mn.us/GIS
Dakota = http://www.co.dakota.mn.us/homeproperty/propertymaps/pages/default.aspx
Hennepin = https://gis-hennepin.hub.arcgis.com/pages/open-data
Ramsey = https://www.ramseycounty.us/your-government/open-government/research-data
Scott = http://opendata.gis.co.scott.mn.us/
Washington: http://www.co.washington.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=1606

The geographic data are built from the Technical Information Management System (TIMS). TIMS consists of two separate databases: an attribute database and a spatial database. The attribute information for offshore activities is stored in the TIMS database. The spatial database is a combination of the ARC/INFO and FINDER databases and contains all the coordinates and topology information for geographic features. The attribute and spatial databases are interconnected through the use of common data elements in both databases, thereby creating the spatial datasets. The data in the mapping files are made up of straight-line segments. If an arc existed in the original data, it has been replaced with a series of straight lines that approximate the arc. The Gulf of America OCS Region stores all its mapping data in longitude and latitude format. All coordinates are in NAD 27. Data can be obtained in three types of digital formats: INTERACTIVE MAP: The ArcGIS web maps are an interactive display of geographic information, containing a basemap, a set of data layers (many of which include interactive pop-up windows with information about the data), an extent, navigation tools to pan and zoom, and additional tools for geospatial analysis. SHP: A Shapefile is a digital vector (non-topological) storage format for storing geometric location and associated attribute information. Shapefiles can support point, line, and area features with attributes held in a dBASE format file. GEODATABASE: An ArcGIS geodatabase is a collection of geographic datasets of various types held in a common file system folder, a Microsoft Access database, or a multiuser relational DBMS (such as Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, PostgreSQL, Informix, or IBM DB2). The geodatabase is the native data structure for ArcGIS and is the primary data format used for editing and data management.

Point data representing locations of CTA bus stops. See attachment below for information on STATUS and POS fields To view or use these files, compression software and special GIS software, such as ESRI ArcGIS is required.
Projected Coordinate System: NAD_1983_StatePlane_Illinois_East_FIPS_1201_Feet

This polygon files contains 2015-2016 school-year data delineating school attendance boundaries. These data were collected and processed as part of the School Attendance Boundary Survey (SABS) project which was funded by NCES to create geography delineating school attendance boundaries. Original source information that was used to create these boundary files were collected were collected over a web-based self-reporting system, through e-mail, and mailed paper maps. The web application provided instructions and assistance to users via a user guide, a frequently asked questions document, and instructional videos. Boundaries supplied outside of the online reporting system typically fell into one of six categories: a digital geographic file, such as a shapefile or KML file; digital image files, such as jpegs and pdfs; narrative descriptions; an interactive web map; Excel or pdf address lists; and paper maps. 2015 TIGER/line features (that consist of streets, hydrography, railways, etc.) were used to digitize school attendance boundaries and was the primary source of information used to digitize analog information. This practice works well as most school attendance boundaries align with streets, railways, water bodies and similar line features included in the 2015 TIGER/line "edges" files. In those few cases in which a portion of a school attendance boundary serves both sides of a street contractor staff used Esri’s Imagery base map to estimate the property lines of parcels. The data digitized from analog maps and verbal descriptions do not conform to cadastral data (and many of the original GIS files created by school districts do not conform with cadastral or parcel data).The SABS 2015-2016 file uses the WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere coordinate system.Additional information about SABS can be found on the EDGE website.The SABS dataset is intended for research purposes only and reflects a single snapshot in time. School boundaries frequently change from year to year. To verify legal descriptions of boundaries, users must contact the school district directly.All information contained in this file is in the public domain. Data users are advised to review NCES program documentation and feature class metadata to understand the limitations and appropriate use of these 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)

Point data representing location of CTA Rail Station. To view or use these files, compression software and special GIS software, such as ESRI ArcGIS is required. Projected Coordinate System: NAD_1983_StatePlane_Illinois_East_FIPS_1201_Feet

This data set is an ArcGIS shapefile depicting land segments in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and adjacent states of New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee. Land segmentation was based on county boundaries represented by a 1:100,000-scale digital dataset. Fifty of the 254 counties and incorporated cities in the model region were divided on the basis of physiography and topography, producing a total of 310 land segments. The data are projected to the UTM grid coordinate system - Zone 18 NAD27.

The SSURGO database contains information about soil as collected by the National Cooperative Soil Survey over the course of a century. The information can be displayed in tables or as maps and is available for most areas in the United States and the Territories, Commonwealths, and Island Nations served by the USDA-NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). The information was gathered by walking over the land and observing the soil. Many soil samples were analyzed in laboratories. The maps outline areas called map units. The map units describe soils and other components that have unique properties, interpretations, and productivity. The information was collected at scales ranging from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. More details were gathered at a scale of 1:12,000 than at a scale of 1:63,360. The mapping is intended for natural resource planning and management by landowners, townships, and counties. Some knowledge of soils data and map scale is necessary to avoid misunderstandings. The maps are linked in the database to information about the component soils and their properties for each map unit. Each map unit may contain one to three major components and some minor components. The map units are typically named for the major components. Examples of information available from the database include available water capacity, soil reaction, electrical conductivity, and frequency of flooding; yields for cropland, woodland, rangeland, and pastureland; and limitations affecting recreational development, building site development, and other engineering uses. SSURGO datasets consist of map data, tabular data, and information about how the maps and tables were created. The extent of a SSURGO dataset is a soil survey area, which may consist of a single county, multiple counties, or parts of multiple counties. SSURGO map data can be viewed in the Web Soil Survey or downloaded in ESRI® Shapefile format. The coordinate systems are Geographic. Attribute data can be downloaded in text format that can be imported into a Microsoft® Access® database. A complete SSURGO dataset consists of:

GIS data (as ESRI® Shapefiles) attribute data (dbf files - a multitude of separate tables) database template (MS Access format - this helps with understanding the structure and linkages of the various tables) metadata

Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: SSURGO Metadata - Tables and Columns Report. File Name: SSURGO_Metadata_-_Tables_and_Columns.pdfResource Description: This report contains a complete listing of all columns in each database table. Please see SSURGO Metadata - Table Column Descriptions Report for more detailed descriptions of each column.

Find the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) web site at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/vt/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_010596#Datamart Title: SSURGO Metadata - Table Column Descriptions Report. File Name: SSURGO_Metadata_-_Table_Column_Descriptions.pdfResource Description: This report contains the descriptions of all columns in each database table. Please see SSURGO Metadata - Tables and Columns Report for a complete listing of all columns in each database table.

Find the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) web site at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/vt/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_010596#Datamart Title: SSURGO Data Dictionary. File Name: SSURGO 2.3.2 Data Dictionary.csvResource Description: CSV version of the data dictionary