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.

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

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.

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.

The Atlas of Washington County, published in 2018, is a highly-detailed street atlas that includes streets with block numbers, terrain, rivers and streams, building footprints, schools, hospitals, places of worship, parks, trails, subdivisions, and much more. This atlas was created to take the place of the discontinued ADC Street Map Book. This collection of PDF's is available for download for printing. Please visit Avenzamaps.com for the mobile version.

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 undeveloped land layer represents lands appearing unimproved on aerial photography, without regard to developability and accessibility. On partially developed parcels, only undeveloped areas 1/2 acre or larger are included.

Metro's Vacant Land Definitions Every tax lot is determined to be vacant, partially vacant, or developed. Vacant tax lots are those that have no building, improvements or identifiable land use. Developed lots must have improvements and specific land uses. For example, a paved parking lot is developed but an unpaved lot where trucks are parked is vacant. Lots under site development show building activity, but development is incomplete and they are considered vacant. If a developed tax lot has 1/2 acre (20,000-sq. ft.) or greater portion that is vacant, the lot is considered to be partially vacant and partially developed. The vacant portion is added to the vacant land database. Parks and open spaces are treated as developed. During the assessment of each tax lot, no consideration is given to constrained land, suitability for building, or to redevelopment potential. Date of last data update: 1993-06-30 This is official RLIS data. Contact Person: Al Mowbray al.mowbray@oregonmetro.gov 503-797-1843 RLIS Metadata Viewer: https://gis.oregonmetro.gov/rlis-metadata/#/details/2932 RLIS Terms of Use: https://rlisdiscovery.oregonmetro.gov/pages/terms-of-use

An official index map of tax maps by municipality for the County of Berks Assessment Department.

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

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.

The purpose of this web application is to keep the public informed on current sale values for property within Washington County, Arkansas. All data used to generate this web application is public except for the basemap which would need expressed permission from the Assessor's Office to use. There is a report function within this appliction that can be used to generate a csv file of the sales that are selected.

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

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.

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 2005 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 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 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.

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 2010 dataset unless otherwise noted):

polygons / points
Anoka - 129271 / 129271
Carver - 38205 / 38205
Dakota - 136067 / 150436
Hennepin - 424182 / 424182
Ramsey - 149101 / 168152
Scott - 55213 / 55213
Washington - 98933 / 104100 (October 2009)

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 2009 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

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

The W&OD Trail Features data has been collected by volunteers from AOL working with the Loudoun County Office of Mapping and Geographic Information and the Employer Services Division of the Loudoun County Department of Transportation and Capital Infrastructure and the staff of the Washington and Old Dominion Regional Park. Anyone interested in adding information to the map may contact the Office of Mapping and Geographic Information at 703-771-5778 or by email.Data current as of Summer 2016.

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

Digital data from VG2015-3 Springston, G, Thomas, E, and Kim, J, 2015,�Surficial Geologic Map of the Southern Two-Thirds of the Woodbury Quadrangle, Vermont, Washington County, Vermont: Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report VG2015-3. Data may include surficial geologic contacts, isopach contours lines, bedrock outcrop polygons, bedrock geologic contacts, hydrogeologic units and more. The surficial geologic materials data at a scale of 1:24,000 depict types of unconsolidated surficial and glacial materials overlying bedrock in Vermont. Data is created by mapping on the ground using standard geologic pace and compass techniques and/or GPS on a USGS 1:24000 topographic base map. The materials data is selected from the Vermont Geological Survey Open File Report (OFR) publication (https://dec.vermont.gov/geological-survey/publication-gis/ofr). The OFR contains more complete descriptions of map units, cross-sections, isopach maps and other information that may not be included in this digital data set.

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