This map shows specific water-quality items and hydrologic data site information which come from QWDATA (Water Quality) and GWSI (Ground Water Information System). Both QWDATA and GWSI are subsystems of NWIS (National Water Inventory System)of the USGS (United States Geologic Survey). This map is for Washington County, Utah. The scope and purpose of NWIS is defined on the web site: http://water.usgs.gov/public/pubs/FS/FS-027-98/

These data were created for planimetric display and tax area analysis.Procedures_Used:The principal method of data entry used coordinate geometry software.Digitizing from paper maps and use of digital planimetric data were supplemental. Conversions, filling of gaps, georeferencing, reconciliations, and reformatting were often necessary to create a coherent database. Boundary updates are occasionally accepted from local GIS departments when the USTC has not received all relevant boundary change information through required channels. Updates have been made in this manner to Sandy, some Cache, Washington, Utah, Wasatch, and Carbon County cities.Revisions: Municipal boundaries are revised as documents are filed with the Lt. Governor's Office.Reviews_Applied_to_Data:Digital sources were visually compared with planimetric data. Digitized data were overlaid with source material and visually compared. Technical errors were also identified and corrected with ArcGIS Software.Notes: This metadata document contains a composite of information for alltiles in the library.Current thru April 29, 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)

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.

Statewide Traffic Volume Historic and Forecast Historic traffic volume observations, future traffic volume forecasts, and adjustment factors -- are summarized using Utah's roadway planning summary segments -- for the Wasatch Front Regional Council metropolitan planning organization travel model area. This dataset can be viewed in an interactive map at: https://wfrc.org/traffic-volume-map/. This dataset provides segment level traffic volume data (historic estimates and future forecasts) within the state of Utah. Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) metropolitan planning organization's travel model boundaries (including Salt Lake, Davis, western Weber, and southern Box Elder counties' urbanized areas). Future forecasts have been developed with the support of the Wasatch Front Travel Demand Model (v8.3.1) in conjunction with the adopted 2019 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). This dataset was first released May 5th, 2020 (check the RELEASE field/column attribute for most recent update date). MAG travel model boundaries include the urbanized areas of Utah County. Cache travel model boundaries include Cache County. Dixie travel model boundaries include Washington County. Also contained within this dataset are adjustment factors, developed as part of a statewide effort led by UDOT, that can be used to scale the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes estimates and forecasts to provide more time-period specific volumes for a time period subsets (e.g. weekdays, weekends, specific months, seasons, maximum month, etc). Contact and additional information is available from https://wfrc.org/models-and-forecasting or through email contact to analytics@wfrc.org.UPDATE 12/31/2021: Highland Drive revised forecasts for SEGIDs 2082_009.0, 2082_009.6, 2082_011.5, 0152_002.5, 0152_002.8. Field names and descriptions are as follows: RELEASE (version of dataset) SEGID (Segment ID, combination of Route_ID and BMP) ROUTE_ID (Route Identification, <1000 for Interstate/State Routes, >1,000 for Federal Aid Routes) BMP (Begin Milepost, or milepost of beginning of segment) EMP (End Milepost, or milepost of ending of segment) FULLNAME (name of segment) CO_FIPS (County Federal Information Processing Standard, unique code for each county) CO_NAME (Name of county) X (Centroid of Segment, UTM Zone 12N) Y (Y Centroid of Segment, UTM Zone 12N) DISTANCE (length of segment in miles) F2050...F2024 (forecast AADT volumes for model years per 2019 RTP) CH17TO50...CH17TO19 (change in AADT volumes between model years) FNOTES (forecast notes, typically when drop or large increase in volumes) MOREINFO (url to more general information on models and forecasts) WFRC_FLG (flag value used internally by WFRC) AADT2017...AADT1981 (AADT estimates for a given year from UDOT) SUTRK2017 (Single-Unit, Box Type Truck percentage for 2017) CUTRK2017 (Combo-Unit, Semi Type Truck percentage for 2017) DOWFACFC (Day-of-Week Factor Functional Class) DOWFACAT (Day-of-Week Factor Area Type) FAC_MON...FAC_SUN (Day-of-Week factors for given days) FAC_WDAVG (Average Weekday Factor Monday-Thursday, multiply AADT by factor to get AWDT, divide AWDT by factor to get AADT) FAC_WEAVG (Average Weekend Factor Friday-Sunday) FAC_WEMAX (Max Weekend Factor Friday-Sunday) SSNGRP (Seasonal Factor Group) SSNVOLCLS (Seasonal Factor Volume Class) SSNATGROUP (Seasonal Factor Area Type Group) FAC_JAN...FAC_DEC (Month Factors, multiply AADT or AWDT get month ADT or AWDT) FAC_WIN (Winter Factor, December-February) FAC_SPR (Spring Factor, March-May) FAC_SUM (Summer Factor, June-August) FAC_FAL (Fall Factor, September-November) FAC_MAXMO (Month in which Maximum Month Factor is found) FAC_MAX (Maximum Month Factor)