Update information can be found within the layer’s attributes and in a table on the Utah Parcel Data webpage under Basic Parcels."Database containing parcel boundary, parcel identifier, parcel address, owner type, and county recorder contact information" - HB113. The intent of the bill was to not include any attributes that the counties rely on for data sales. If you want other attributes associated with the parcels you need to contact the county recorder.Users should be aware the owner type field 'OWN_TYPE' in the parcel polygons is a very generalized ownership type (Federal, Private, State, Tribal). It is populated with the value of the 'OWNER' field where the parcel's centroid intersects the CADASTRE.LandOwnership polygon layer.This dataset is a snapshot in time and may not be the most current. For the most current data contact the county recorder.

Washington County, MN Tax Parcels. An independent manual check of the parcel data was made at the time of its initial development whereby all geo-coded parcel legal descriptions in a PLSS section were reinterpreted and examined for accuracy and completeness on the hard copy check plot. As each new plat or lot division occurs, a similar process is repeated for the new additions during the maintenance period. Multiple lines of ownership indicating ambiguity in property line location are merged into a single line if falling within 3 feet of each other. Gaps or overlaps in these situations are not shown. In some cases where two lines converge; e.g., where at one end the two lot lines are within 0.50 feet of each other and at the other end they are within 6.00 feet of each other they may be merged because the average discrepancy is 3 feet or less. Where gaps or overlaps exist in excess of approximately 3 feet in width, they are shown with text notation indicating APPARENT GAP or AREA OF DISCREPANCY.

Geospatial data about Washington County, Pennsylvania Parcels. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

Use this web map to link to other geospatial datasets available through county and city sites (Not comprehensive). May need to zoom in to see the participating cities. The county boundaries and city points were published by Washington State agencies and downloaded from geo.wa.gov. Locations are approximate, and no warranties are made regarding this data. The canvas basemap has been compiled by Esri and the ArcGIS user community from a variety of best available sources. Want to have your data site listed? Contact the Geospatial Program Office.

This data group represents Parcels for Washington County, Wisconsin in 2017. This is the final deliverable for the Version 3 Statewide Parcel Map Database Project (V3). This feature class represents a comprehensive, spatially referenced collection of parcel geometries as recognized by local-level governments within the State of Wisconsin (the feature class is aggregated from county level and municipal-level data). See the V3 Project Homepage for more detail on the parameters for how data was prepared and submitted to this project: http://www.sco.wisc.edu/parcels/submission/ Schema documentation can be found within this feature class metadata and here: http://www.sco.wisc.edu/parcels/data/assets/V3/V3_Wisconsin_Statewide_Parcels_Schema_Documentation.pdf Change log and known issues can be found here: http://www.sco.wisc.edu/parcels/data/assets/Wisconsin_Statewide_Parcels_Change_Log.pdf.

View a map of Washington County's campus.

Vector polygon map data of property parcels from Thurston County, Washington containing 121,778 features.

​

Property parcel GIS map data consists of detailed information about individual land parcels, including their boundaries, ownership details, and geographic coordinates.

​

Property parcel data can be used to analyze and visualize land-related information for purposes such as real estate assessment, urban planning, or environmental management.

​

Available for viewing and sharing as a map in a Koordinates map viewer. This data is also available for export to DWG for CAD, PDF, KML, CSV, and GIS data formats, including Shapefile, MapInfo, and Geodatabase.

A web map used to access tax parcel, boundary, ownership, acreage, survey, zoning and tax information. Errors and Omissions Do Exist.The information provided is for reference only and subject to independent verification. User assumes all responsibility for its use.https://www.fayette-co-oh.com/Fayette County ProfileFayette County is a county located in the U.S. state of Ohio. Its county seat is Washington Court House. Fayette County was formed on March 1, 1810 from portions of Highland County and Ross County. It was named after Marie-Joseph Motier, Marquis de La Fayette, a French general and politician who took the side of the Colonials during the American Revolutionary War and who played an important role in the French Revolution.Fayette County is a part of the Virginia Military survey, which was reserved in 1783, to be allotted to Virginia soldiers. This district includes the entire counties of Adams, Brown, Clermont, Clinton, Highland, Fayette, Madison and Union; and a portion of the counties of Scioto, Pike, Ross, Pickaway, Franklin, Delaware, Marion, Hardin, Logan, Champaign, Clarke, Greene, Warren and Hamilton.Fayette County was formed January 19, 1810 (took effect March 1st) from Ross and Highland counties. Beginning at the southwest corner of Pickaway, running north “with the line of said county to the corner of Madison; thence west with the line of said Madison county to the line of Greene county; thence south with the line of Greene county to the southeast corner thereof; thence east five miles; thence south to the line of Highland county; thence east with said line to Paint Creek; thence in a straight line to the beginning.” All the lower portion was taken from Highland and the upper from Ross.The first portion of land entered within the territory of what is now Fayette county, was a part of original surveys Nos. 243 and 772, lying partly in Clinton county. The first survey lying wholly within Fayette county was No. 463, in what is now Madison township, surveyed for Thomas Overton by John O’Bannon June 30, 1776.The original townships were Jefferson, Greene, Wayne, Madison, Paint and Union. Concord township was formed in April 1818, from Greene. Marion township was formed in June, 1840 from Madison. Perry township was formed June 4, 1845, from Wayne and Greene. Jasper township was formed from Jefferson and Concord December 2, 1845.Washington C.H. was laid out originally on a part of entry 757, which contained 1200 acres and belonged to Benjamin Temple, of Logan county, Kentucky, who donated 150 acres to Fayette county, on condition that it be used as the site of the county seat. The deed of conveyance was made December 1, 1810, by Thomas S. Hind, attorney for Temple, to Robert Stewart, who was appointed by the legislature as director for the town of Washington. The town was laid off some time between December 1, 1810, and February 26, 1811, the latter being the date of the record of the town plat.Bloomingburg (originally called New Lexington) was laid out in 1815, by Solomon Bowers, and originally contained 34 and ¾ acres. On March 4, 1816, Bowers laid out and added twenty more lots. The name of the town was later changed to Bloomingburg by act of the legislature. The town was incorporated by act of the legislature, February 5, 1847.Jeffersonville was laid out March 1, 1831, by Walter B. Write and Chipman Robinson, on 100 acres of land belonging to them, they started selling the lots at $5 each. The town incorporated March 17, 1838. The first house was erected by Robert Wyley.The first railroad, now the C. & M. V., was completed in 1852; the second, now the Detroit Southern, in 1875; the third, now the C.H. & D. in 1879; and the fourth, now the B. & O. S. W., in 1884.The first permanent settler (probably) was a Mr. Wolf who settled in what is now Wayne township, in about the year 1796. - Circa 1886 - Map of Fayette County, Ohio. Issued by the Fayette County Record.

This Zoning feature class is an element of the Oregon GIS Framework statewide, Zoning spatial data. This version is authorized for public use. Attributes include zoning districts that have been generalized to state classes. As of June 30, 2023, this feature class contains zoning data from 229 local jurisdictions. DLCD plans to continue adding to and updating this statewide zoning dataset as they receive zoning information from the local jurisdictions. Jurisdictions included in the latest version of the statewide zoning geodatabase: Cities: Adams, Adrian, Albany, Amity, Antelope, Ashland, Astoria, Athena, Aurora, Banks, Barlow, Bay City, Beaverton, Bend, Boardman, Bonanza, Brookings, Brownsville, Burns, Butte Falls, Canby, Cannon Beach, Carlton, Cascade Locks, Cave Junction, Central Point, Chiloquin, Coburg, Columbia City, Coos Bay, Cornelius, Corvallis, Cottage Grove, Creswell, Culver, Dayton, Detroit, Donald, Drain, Dufur, Dundee, Dunes City, Durham, Eagle Point, Echo, Enterprise, Estacada, Eugene, Fairview, Falls City, Florence, Forest Grove, Fossil, Garibaldi, Gaston, Gates, Gearhart, Gervais, Gladstone, Gold Beach, Gold Hill, Grants Pass, Grass Valley, Gresham, Halsey, Happy Valley, Harrisburg, Helix, Hermiston, Hillsboro, Hines, Hood River, Hubbard, Idanha, Independence, Jacksonville, Jefferson, Johnson City, Jordan Valley, Junction City, Keizer, King City, Klamath Falls, La Grande, La Pine, Lafayette, Lake Oswego, Lebanon, Lincoln City, Lowell, Lyons, Madras, Malin, Manzanita, Maupin, Maywood Park, McMinnville, Medford, Merrill, Metolius, Mill City, Millersburg, Milton-Freewater, Milwaukie, Mitchell, Molalla, Monmouth, Moro, Mosier, Mount Angel, Myrtle Creek, Myrtle Point, Nehalem, Newberg, Newport, North Bend, North Plains, Nyssa, Oakridge, Ontario, Oregon City, Pendleton, Philomath, Phoenix, Pilot Rock, Port Orford, Portland, Prescott, Prineville, Rainier, Redmond, Reedsport, Rivergrove, Rockaway Beach, Rogue River, Roseburg, Rufus, Saint Helens, Salem, Sandy, Scappoose, Scio, Scotts Mills, Seaside, Shady Cove, Shaniko, Sheridan, Sherwood, Silverton, Sisters, Sodaville, Spray, Springfield, Stanfield, Stayton, Sublimity, Sutherlin, Sweet Home, Talent, Tangent, The Dalles, Tigard, Tillamook, Toledo, Troutdale, Tualatin, Turner, Ukiah, Umatilla, Vale, Veneta, Vernonia, Warrenton, Wasco, Waterloo, West Linn, Westfir, Weston, Wheeler, Willamina, Wilsonville, Winston, Wood Village, Woodburn, Yamhill. Counties: Baker County, Benton County, Clackamas County, Clatsop County, Columbia County, Coos County, Crook County, Curry County, Deschutes County, Douglas County, Harney County, Hood River County, Jackson County, Jefferson County, Josephine County, Klamath County, Lane County, Lincoln County, Linn County, Malheur County, Marion County, Multnomah County, Polk County, Sherman County, Tillamook County, Umatilla County, Union County, Wasco County, Washington County, Wheeler County, Yamhill County. R emaining jurisdictions either chose not to share data to incorporate into the public, statewide dataset or did not respond to DLCD’s request for data. These jurisdictions’ attributes are designated “not shared” in the orZDesc field and “NS” in the orZCode field.

The Florida Department of Revenue’s Property Tax Oversight(PTO) program collects parcel level Geographic Information System (GIS) data files every April from all of Florida’s 67 county property appraisers’ offices. This GIS data was exported from these file submissions in August 2024. The GIS parcel polygon features have been joined with thereal property roll (Name – Address – Legal, or NAL)file. No line work was adjusted between county boundaries.The polygon data set represents the information property appraisers gathered from the legal description on deeds, lot layout of recorded plats, declaration of condominium documents, recorded and unrecorded surveys.Individual parcel data is updated continually by each county property appraiser as needed. The GIS linework and related attributions for the statewide parcel map are updated annually by the Department every August. The dataset extends countywide and is attribute by Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) code.DOR reference with FIPS county codes and attribution definitions - https://fgio.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=ff7b985e139c4c7ba844500053e8e185If you discover the inadvertent release of a confidential record exempt from disclosure pursuant to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, public records laws, immediately notify the Department of Revenue at 850-717-6570 and your local Florida Property Appraisers’ Office.Please contact the county property appraiser with any parcel specific questions: Florida Property Appraisers’ Offices:Alachua County Property Appraiser – https://www.acpafl.org/Baker County Property Appraiser – https://www.bakerpa.com/Bay County Property Appraiser – https://baypa.net/Bradford County Property Appraiser – https://www.bradfordappraiser.com/Brevard County Property Appraiser – https://www.bcpao.us/Broward County Property Appraiser – https://bcpa.net/Calhoun County Property Appraiser – https://calhounpa.net/Charlotte County Property Appraiser – https://www.ccappraiser.com/Citrus County Property Appraiser – https://www.citruspa.org/Clay County Property Appraiser – https://ccpao.com/Collier County Property Appraiser – https://www.collierappraiser.com/Columbia County Property Appraiser – https://columbia.floridapa.com/DeSoto County Property Appraiser – https://www.desotopa.com/Dixie County Property Appraiser – https://www.qpublic.net/fl/dixie/Duval County Property Appraiser – https://www.coj.net/departments/property-appraiser.aspxEscambia County Property Appraiser – https://www.escpa.org/Flagler County Property Appraiser – https://flaglerpa.com/Franklin County Property Appraiser – https://franklincountypa.net/Gadsden County Property Appraiser – https://gadsdenpa.com/Gilchrist County Property Appraiser – https://www.qpublic.net/fl/gilchrist/Glades County Property Appraiser – https://qpublic.net/fl/glades/Gulf County Property Appraiser – https://gulfpa.com/Hamilton County Property Appraiser – https://hamiltonpa.com/Hardee County Property Appraiser – https://hardeepa.com/Hendry County Property Appraiser – https://hendryprop.com/Hernando County Property Appraiser – https://www.hernandopa-fl.us/PAWEBSITE/Default.aspxHighlands County Property Appraiser – https://www.hcpao.org/Hillsborough County Property Appraiser – https://www.hcpafl.org/Holmes County Property Appraiser – https://www.qpublic.net/fl/holmes/Indian River County Property Appraiser – https://www.ircpa.org/Jackson County Property Appraiser – https://www.qpublic.net/fl/jackson/Jefferson County Property Appraiser – https://jeffersonpa.net/Lafayette County Property Appraiser – https://www.lafayettepa.com/Lake County Property Appraiser – https://www.lakecopropappr.com/Lee County Property Appraiser – https://www.leepa.org/Leon County Property Appraiser – https://www.leonpa.gov/Levy County Property Appraiser – https://www.qpublic.net/fl/levy/Liberty County Property Appraiser – https://libertypa.org/Madison County Property Appraiser – https://madisonpa.com/Manatee County Property Appraiser – https://www.manateepao.gov/Marion County Property Appraiser – https://www.pa.marion.fl.us/Martin County Property Appraiser – https://www.pa.martin.fl.us/Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser – https://www.miamidade.gov/pa/Monroe County Property Appraiser – https://mcpafl.org/Nassau County Property Appraiser – https://www.nassauflpa.com/Okaloosa County Property Appraiser – https://okaloosapa.com/Okeechobee County Property Appraiser – https://www.okeechobeepa.com/Orange County Property Appraiser – https://ocpaweb.ocpafl.org/Osceola County Property Appraiser – https://www.property-appraiser.org/Palm Beach County Property Appraiser – https://www.pbcgov.org/papa/index.htmPasco County Property Appraiser – https://pascopa.com/Pinellas County Property Appraiser – https://www.pcpao.org/Polk County Property Appraiser – https://www.polkpa.org/Putnam County Property Appraiser – https://pa.putnam-fl.com/Santa Rosa County Property Appraiser – https://srcpa.gov/Sarasota County Property Appraiser – https://www.sc-pa.com/Seminole County Property Appraiser – https://www.scpafl.org/St. Johns County Property Appraiser – https://www.sjcpa.gov/St. Lucie County Property Appraiser – https://www.paslc.gov/Sumter County Property Appraiser – https://www.sumterpa.com/Suwannee County Property Appraiser – https://suwannee.floridapa.com/Taylor County Property Appraiser – https://qpublic.net/fl/taylor/Union County Property Appraiser – https://union.floridapa.com/Volusia County Property Appraiser – https://vcpa.vcgov.org/Wakulla County Property Appraiser – https://mywakullapa.com/Walton County Property Appraiser – https://waltonpa.com/Washington County Property Appraiser – https://www.qpublic.net/fl/washington/Florida Department of Revenue Property Tax Oversight https://floridarevenue.com/property/Pages/Home.aspx

Geospatial data about Benton County, Washington Parcels. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

Geospatial data about Grant County, Washington Parcels. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

County assessor's online applications for searching and rviewing data about parcels and proprties.

The Washington State Parcels Project provides a statewide data set of tax parcels attributes that cover those counties that currently have digital tax parcels. Attribute data has been normalized so that the field names are the same across all counties. The data set contains the tax parcel identification number, situs addresses, the Department of Revenue land use codes, improvement and land values, and a link to the county's assessor's website for parcel information (if it exists).

This dataset is a compilation of tax parcel polygon and point layers from the seven Twin Cities, Minnesota metropolitan area counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington. The seven counties were assembled into a common coordinate system. No attempt has been made to edgematch or rubbersheet between counties. A standard set of attribute fields is included for each county. (See section 5 of the metadata). The attributes are the same for the polygon and points layers. Not all attributes are populated for all counties.

This is an annual version of the MetroGIS Regional Parcel Dataset that can be used with other annual versions to do change analysis and time series investigations. This dataset is intended to contain all updates to each county's parcel data through the end of 2004. It was originally published as the 'January 1, 2005' version of the dataset. See the Currentness Reference below and the Entity and Attribute information in Section 5 for more information about the dates for specific aspects of the dataset.

The polygon layer contains one record for each real estate/tax parcel polygon within each county's parcel dataset. Some counties will 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. The primary example of this is the condominium. 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 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.

Polygon and point counts for each county are as follows (based on the January, 2005 dataset):

Anoka = 124,042 polygons, 124,042 points
Carver = 32,910 polygons, 32,910 points
Dakota = 130,989 polygons, 141,444 points
Hennepin = 353,759 polygons, 399,184 points
Ramsey = 148,266 polygons, 163,376 points
Scott = 49,958 polygons, 49,958 points
Washington = 93,794 polygons, 96,570 points

This is a MetroGIS Regionally Endorsed dataset.

Each of the seven Metro Area counties has entered into a multiparty agreement with the Metropolitan Council to assemble and distribute the parcel data for each county as a regional (seven county) parcel dataset.

A standard set of attribute fields is included for each county. The attributes are identical for the point and polygon datasets. Not all attributes fields are populated by each county. Detailed information about the attributes can be found in the MetroGIS Regional Parcels Attributes 2004 document.

Additional information may be available in the individual metadata for 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 listed in the individual county metadata.

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: http://www.hennepin.us/gisopendata

Ramsey = https://www.ramseycounty.us/your-government/open-government/research-data

Scott = http://www.scottcountymn.gov/1183/GIS-Data-and-Maps

Washington = http://www.co.washington.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=1606

This data release contains the GIS data supporting U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report (OFR) 2005-1252, "The Geologic Map of Seattle—A Progress Report," published in 2005 by Kathy Goetz Troost, Derek B. Booth, Aaron P. Wisher, and Scott A. Shimel (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20051252). The OFR was prepared for the 2005 Washington Hydrogeology Symposium and describes the status of geologic mapping for Seattle, Washington, at the time. The map is the result of field mapping and compilation of subsurface geologic data during the years 1999–2004 and was funded by the City of Seattle and the U.S. Geological Survey. Data from more than 36,000 exploration points, geotechnical borings, monitoring wells, excavations, and outcrops were used in making the map. The northern part of the 2005 OFR and the supporting GIS data were subsequently published as two geologic maps: Booth, D.B., Troost, K.G., and Shimel, S.A., 2005, Geologic map of northwestern Seattle (part of the Seattle North 7.5’ X 15’ Quadrangle), King County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 2903, https://doi.org/10.3133/sim2903. Booth, D.B., Troost, K.G., and Shimel, S.A., 2009, Geologic map of northeastern Seattle (part of the Seattle North 7.5' x 15' quadrangle), King County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3065, https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3065. The southern part of the 2005 OFR and the supporting GIS data were not subsequently published for various reasons. With the original authors' permission, the GIS data used to create the map shown in OFR 2005-1252 are being released here to best meet modern open-data standards and to allow for use in future studies and mapping. The data included in this data release are only those components necessary to create the map shown in OFR 2005-1252. The following map features were not available and are not included in this data release: bedding point data, faults, anticlines, and contact lines. OFR_2005-1252.gdb is an Esri geodatabase containing the following feature classes: ofr_2005_1252_geology_poly (1,068 features); ofr_2005_1252_fill_poly (424 features); ofr_2005_1252_seattle_fault_zone_poly (1 feature); ofr_2005_1252_wastage_landslide_deposits_poly (188 features); ofr_2005_1252_beds_line (6 features); and ofr_2005_1252_scarp_line (351 features). Metadata records associated with each of these elements contain more detailed descriptions of their purposes, constituent entities, and attributes. A shapefile (non-geodatabase) version of the dataset is also included, although due to character limits, some field names and text cells in the attribute tables were truncated relative to the equivalent values in the geodatabase. The authors ask that users of the geologic map data cite both the open-file report and the GIS data release: Open-File Report: Troost, K.G., Booth, D.B., Wisher, A.P., and Shimel, S.A., 2005, The geologic map of Seattle—a progress report: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005-1252, https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20051252. GIS data: Troost, K.G., Booth, D.B., Wisher, A.P., and Shimel, S.A., 2024, GIS data for U.S. Geological Survey OFR 2005-1252, The geologic map of Seattle—a progress report: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P93L6SPS.

Geospatial data about Clallam County, Washington Parcels. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

Unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGA) as defined by the Growth Management Act (GMA). The annual update is conducted by collecting UGA polygons directly from each of Washington's 39 counties. As of 2025, there are 27 counties with UGAs.All UGA polygons are normalized against the Department of Revenue's (DOR) "City Boundaries" layer (shared to the Washington Geoportal a.k.a. the GIS Open Data site: geo.wa.gov). The City Boundaries layer was processed into this UGA layer such that any overlapping area of UGA polygons (from authoritative individual counties) was erased. Since DOR polygons and county-sourced UGA polygons do not have perfect topology, many slivers resulted after the erase operation. These are attempted to be irradicated by these processing steps. "Multipart To Singlepart" Esri tool; exploded all polygons to be individualSlivers were mathematically identified using a 4 acre area threshold and a 0.3 "thinness ratio" threshold as described by Esri's "Polygon Sliver" tool. These slivers are merged into the neighboring features using Esri's "Eliminate" tool.Polygons that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and not part of a DOR city (CITY_NM = Null) were also merged via the "Eliminate" tool. (many very small slivers were manually found yet mathematically did not meet the thinness ratio threshold)The final 8 polygons less than 25 sq. ft. were manually deleted (also slivers but were not lined up against another feature and missed by the "Eliminate" tool runs)Dissolved all features back to multipart using all fieldsAll UGAs polygons remaining are unincorporated areas beyond the city limits. Any polygon with CITY_NM populated originated from the DOR "City Boundaries" layer. The DOR's City Boundaries are updated quarterly by DOR. For the purposes of this UGA layer, the city boundaries was downloaded one time (4/24/2025) and will not be updated quarterly. Therefore, if precise city limits are required by any user of UGA boundaries, please refer to the city boundaries layer and conduct any geoprocessing needed. The DOR's "City Boundaries" layer is available here:https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=69fcb668dc8d49ea8010b6e33e42a13aData is updated in conjunction with the annual statewide parcel layer update. Latest update completed April 2025.

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 systems 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. (See section 5 of the metadata). The attributes are the same for the polygon and points layers. Not all attributes are populated for all counties. Summary attribute information is in the Attributes Overview. Detailed information about the attributes can be found in the MetroGIS Regional Parcels 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.

Polygon and point counts for each county are as follows (Updated annually, current as of 12/31/2016):

polygons / points
Anoka - 131708 / 131708
Carver - 41204 / 41203
Dakota - 142121 / 154945
Hennepin - 430449 / 430449
Ramsey - 158207 / 166343
Scott - 56533 / 56533
Washington - 106849 / 106849

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 = http://www.hennepin.us/gisopendata
Ramsey = https://www.ramseycounty.us/your-government/open-government/research-data
Scott = http://www.scottcountymn.gov/1183/GIS-Data-and-Maps
Washington: http://www.co.washington.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=1606

County tax assessors tax lots, including rights of way, with associated property data, excluding ownership information. Selected items from each county assessor's file are included and standardized for all three counties. The tax lot spatial features and data associated with the tax lot are compiled by Metro from existing records created and maintained by the local county assessment and taxation offices. This is a downloadable zip file that includes the taxlots shapefile and layer files for visualizing taxlots with or without right of ways. Use the original feature layers if viewing the layers in ArcGIS Online: "Taxlots (Public)" or "Taxlots with Right of Way (Public)." Date of last data update: 2025-04-18 This is official RLIS data. Contact Person: Christine Rutan christine.rutan@oregonmetro.gov 503-797-1669 RLIS Metadata Viewer: https://gis.oregonmetro.gov/rlis-metadata/#/details/3733 RLIS Terms of Use: https://rlisdiscovery.oregonmetro.gov/pages/terms-of-use