Ulster County GIS Portal Item: https://gis.ulstercountyny.gov/portal/home/item.html?id=c14d9cd99f8c40e2b4dd437e40fad39e

This layer is a component of Supplemental Layers for use with Parcel Viewer.

This layer is a component of Supplemental Layers for use with Parcel Viewer.

A vector line file of public/private streets compiled from orthoimagery and other sources that is attributed with street names, addresses, route numbers, routing attributes, and includes a related table of alternate/alias street names.

A web service of the Address Point file of buildings and properties in New York State. Address points are scale triggered and will turn on at 1:50,000 and labels are scale triggered and will turn on at 1:3,000. See metadata for additional information. Additional metadata, including field descriptions, can be found at the NYS GIS Clearinghouse: http://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/inventories/details.cfm?DSID=921. SAM Address Points Data Dictionary: http://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/supportfiles/Address-Points-Data-Dictionary.pdfIf the purpose of accessing the address points service is for geocoding, NYS ITS has a publicly available geocoding service which includes the address points along with other layers. For more information about the geocoding service, please visit: http://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/inventories/details.cfm?DSID=1278.For more information about the SAM Program, please visit:http://gis.ny.gov/streets. Publication Date: See Update FrequencyCurrent as of Date: 2 business days prior to Publication DateUpdate frequency: Second and forth Fridays of each monthThis map service is available to the public. The State of New York, acting through the New York State Office of Information Technology Services, makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the use of or reliance on the Data provided. The User accepts the Data provided “as is” with no guarantees that it is error free, complete, accurate, current or fit for any particular purpose and assumes all risks associated with its use. The State disclaims any responsibility or legal liability to Users for damages of any kind, relating to the providing of the Data or the use of it. Users should be aware that temporal changes may have occurred since this Data was created.

A web service of the Address Point file of buildings and properties in New York State. Address Points are scale triggered and will turn on at 1:50,000 and labels are scale triggered and will turn on at 1:3,000. See metadata for additional information.

SAM Address Points Data Dictionary: https://gis.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2022/10/address-points-data-dictionary.pdf . If the purpose of accessing the address points service is for geocoding, NYS ITS has a publicly available geocoding service which includes the address points along with other layers. For more information about the geocoding service, please visit: https://gis.ny.gov/address-geocoder . For more information about the SAM Program, please visit: https://gis.ny.gov/streets-addresses . Publication Date: See Update Frequency. Current as of Date: 2 business days prior to Publication Date. Update frequency: Second and forth Fridays of each month. This map service is available to the public. Spatial Reference of Source Data: NAD_1983_UTM_Zone_18N. Spatial Reference of Map Service: WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary.

This layer is a component of Supplemental Layers for use with Parcel Viewer.

This layer is a component of Supplemental Layers for use with Parcel Viewer.

Orthoimagery from Spring 2021. The service provides a Natural Color view at approximately 12 inch resolution. The source orthoimagery is 4-band at resolutions of 12 or 6 inches. This is for the following counties: Eastern Albany, Rockland, Ulster, Westchester, Greene. For more information see http://gis.ny.gov/gateway/mg/index.html

Combination of multiple years of orthoimagery encompassing years 2016 - 2020. The service provides a Natural Color view at approximately 12 inch resolution. The source orthoimagery is 4-band at resolutions of 12 or 6 inches. For more information see http://gis.ny.gov/gateway/mg/index.html

This layer is a component of Supplemental Layers for use with Parcel Viewer.

To provide a faithful representation of official New York State regulatory freshwater wetlands maps for GIS resource analysis at scales equal to the 1 to 24,000 scale of original mapping or smaller scales (e.g., 1 to 100,000 scale).Regulatory maps consist of mylar versions of New York State Department of Transportation 1 to 24,000 planimetric maps on which wetland boundaries and wetland identification codes are drawn. Planimetric maps are generally congruent with and have the same quad names as United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute topographic maps; a few of the Department of Transportation quads have extended borders. Regulatory wetland maps are prepared by NYSDEC and filed as required by the Freshwater Wetlands Act (Article 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law). Associated with the maps are Classification Sheets that list the Wetlands Identification Code, the municipality in which the wetland occurs and the regulatory class of each wetland. Preparation and filing dates vary by county. As amendments to the official maps occur, the coverages are updated so that the GIS information reflects the regulatory maps currently in use. Archive copies of county coverages with previous versions of the official maps are kept. An important feature of the offical maps is that the lines indicate only "the approximate location of the actual boundaries of the wetlands" (ECL Section 24-0301(3)). For a final determination of the actual location of a wetland it is necessary to contact the NYSDEC office for the region in which the wetland occurs.

This layer is sourced from gis.ulstercountyny.gov.

This dataset depicts the geographic distribution of coastal risk along the Hudson River shoreline of Rockland, Orange, Ulster, Greene, Albany, Rensselaer, Columbia, Dutchess, and Putnam Counties. The objective of the Risk Assessment (and resulting mapped Risk Areas) is to define areas at risk from coastal hazards. Data were collected from sources accurate enough to differentiate geographic areas according to the likelihood of flooding, erosion, waves and storm surge. To the extent allowed by source data, areas where flood water can extend up streams and under culverts and bridges are reflected in mapping. The mapping process and data sources used are described below. Mapped Risk Areas are classified into three categories: Extreme, high, and moderate. Extreme Risk Areas: These are areas currently at risk of frequent inundation, vulnerable to erosion in the next 40 years, or likely to be inundated in the future due to sea level rise. Criteria and source data used to define these Extreme Risk Areas include: FEMA V zone. Areas subject to High Tide Flooding per NOAA NWS’s advisory threshold. Added 3 feet to the MHHW shoreline and extended this elevation inland over the digital elevation model (DEM) to point of intersection with ground surface. These four criteria were overlaid and polygons were generated that included the maximum spatial extend of the above-listed criteria. These polygons represent Extreme Risk Areas. High Risk Areas: These are areas that fall outside of the Extreme Risk Areas and are currently at infrequent risk of inundation or are at risk in the future from sea level rise. Criteria and source data used to define these High Risk Areas include: Area bounded by the 1% annual flood risk zone (FEMA A zones). Added 3 feet to NOAA NWS high tide flooding advisory threshold and extended this elevation inland over the DEM to point of intersection with ground surface.Polygons were created that were upland of the Extreme Risk Area boundary and included the maximum spatial extent of the above-listed criteria. These polygons represent High Risk Areas. Moderate Risk Areas: These are areas that fall outside of the Extreme and High Risk Areas, but are currently at moderate risk of inundation from infrequent events or are at risk in the future from sea level rise. Criteria and source data used to define these High Risk Areas include: Area bounded by the 0.2% annual risk (500 year) flood zone, where available. Added 3 feet to the Base Flood Elevation for the current 1% annual risk flood event and extended this elevation inland over the DEM to point of intersection with ground surface. Area bounded by SLOSH category 3 hurricane inundation zone. Polygons were created that were upland of the Extreme & High Risk Area boundaries and included the maximum spatial extent of the above-listed criteria. These polygons represent Moderate Risk Areas. (June2021)View Dataset on the Gateway

Orthoimagery from Spring 2021. The service provides a color infrared (CIR) view at approximately 12 inch resolution. The source orthoimagery is 4-band at resolutions of 12 or 6 inches. This is for the following counties: Albany, Columbia, Dutchess, Greene, Rensselaer, Rockland, Saratoga, Schenectady, Ulster, and Westchester. For more information see http://gis.ny.gov/gateway/mg/index.html

This layer is sourced from gis.ulstercountyny.gov.

This dataset is a combination of 2 data projects: 1- Data were updated within NYC watershed portions using 1m resolution LiDAR and 1ft orthoimagery collected in 2009 as part of the NYS Digital Ortho Program under contract with NYCDEP under CAT-371.For NYC reservoirs only: NYCDEP BWS GIS Staff (T. Spies) edited all polygons representing NYC reservoirs to show the true inundation area of water impoundment when the reservoir is full, including all areas separated from the main pool by a road or bridge. Therefore, any streams or rivers wider than 5m and represented in this NHDArea feature class were also edited as needed to match any edges where they transitioned from a NYC reservoir polygon. All edges and vertices were snapped to eliminate any gaps or slivers between reservoirs/lakes/ponds (NHDWaterbody) and stream/rivers (NHDArea).QA edits to NHD hydrography, including this feature class, were also made where needed based on field verification and correction of the NYCbasin1m boundary.As an additional departure from standard NHD to meet DEP’s needs, DEP GIS staff attributed all flowlines by their respective NYC reservoir basin and NYC water supply “region” as defined in the feature class “NYCbasin1m”. This was done using the “select by location” tool rather than “identity” tool, so as not to split any flowlines across boundaries. Any flowlines crossing basin boundaries in error were corrected by splitting the lines and snapping their endpoints to the appropriate spillway or basin edge instead. 2- Data was updated within portions of Ulster County outside the NYC watershed using NYS 1ft orthoimagery collected in 2013 and multiple Elevation datasets (2013 NYS DEC 1m Lidar Hudson River, 2005 NYS DEC 3m Lidar Ulster Stream Corridors, 1992 USGS 10m Digital Elevation Model (DEM)).Primary quality control was performed visually using enhanced symbology and supporting reference data. A detailed QC checklist is provided in the QC report. Specific emphasis was placed on the areas bordering the NYC Watershed and the areas encompassed by the Town of Woodstock’s local hydrography data. To the extent connections occurred, the data captured on this project was “snapped” to the corresponding locations in the NYC Watershed so that the data could be seamlessly integrated. The hydrography data from the Town of Woodstock, however, was inconsistent when applied to the data capture protocol. Many locally derived features did not appear to be supported by the source data (i.e., they did not exist) and were not included. All visual inspections were made at 1:1000 scale or better. During data capture, the Data Capture Analyst used a separate point feature class named “Flags” to identify locations where there may have been some interpretation or confusion. Later, the QC Analyst also used additional bookmarks in ArcGIS to track locations where additional investigation or interpretation was required. Finally, after an initial pass through the data, the QC Analyst evaluated and resolved all such flags and bookmarks, collaborating with the Data Capture Analyst as necessary to discuss findings and resolve questions.As data was completed, naming convention and separate storage locations were used for data management to ensure that source and modified datasets were clearly separated. In addition, a detailed QC tracking spreadsheet was used to track and manage effort on completing QC and resolving any issues.Finally, after the initial data delivery, several rounds of QC review were performed by Ulster County to include: additional visual inspection of flow line connectivity, geometric network tracking, and utility network analysisMost of the issues that were not readily apparent in the manual QC process were attributed to minor errors in data capture and discovered here. Examples include digitizing lines in the wrong direction (not downstream), existence of multi-part features, and topology errors. In all cases, issues were evaluated and resolved

This layer is a component of Supplemental Layers for use with Parcel Viewer.