Parcels with tax assessor data for SSMMA region. See Code Definitions for Cook County parcel classification details.CAVEAT EMPTOR: Cook County data from 2016, Will County data from 2017.We are currently in the process of collecting Cook County data and processing Will County data for 2019.For up-to-date parcel tax records, visit the Cook County GIS Viewer or Will County GIS Viewer, or access the Cook County Tax Assessor's databases [1] [2] or the Will County Tax Assessor's Office.Municipalities in SSMMA's GIS Consortium may contact the GIS staff if more recent data is available to display on municipal viewers.

This data identifies current as well as proposed zoning and land use designations that are adopted by ordinances for unincorporated Pierce County. Zoning for cities is not included in this dataset. Zones are adopted by ordinances with specific technicalities for each community. Land Use designations offer a broad spectrum of allowable uses within a community. It is used to create a Comprehensive Plan Map or used for a Generalized Proposed Land Use Map or GPLUM. This dataset is also used to create the Land Use Designations theme, which covers proposed zoning use. The meaning of proposed is that the property might not be currently used for the purpose stated. It should be noted that Council adopted amendments to land use designations/zoning that will be effective at the beginning of 2006. Also, the Council is in the process of adopting the Mid-County Community Plan which amends land use designations/zoning as well. The Cities polygons found in the zoning data does not necessarily match the current cities boundaries. This is because the zoning data is updated once a year per the "Pierce County Comprehensive Plan" and does not allow for changes to be made during the year. The Comprehensive Plan is generally updated in November and generally becomes effective the following March. Use the "Cities in Pierce County" data set to determine current city boundaries. City boundaries can change more often than the current adopted Pierce County Zoning data. The zoning data contains the "Cities in Pierce County" boundaries at the time that the Pierce County Zoning was adopted. When determining the current zoning of a parcel near a city, the current "Cities in Pierce County" data set needs to be reviewed. Zoning codes for parcels within incorporated cities are determined by the city that the parcel is within. Please read metadata for additional information (https://matterhorn.piercecountywa.gov/GISmetadata/pdbplan_zoning.html). Any use or data download constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use (https://matterhorn.piercecountywa.gov/disclaimer/PierceCountyGISDataTermsofUse.pdf).

HEPGIS is a web-based interactive geographic map server that allows users to navigate and view geo-spatial data, print maps, and obtain data on specific features using only a web browser. It includes geo-spatial data used for transportation planning. HEPGIS previously received ARRA funding for development of Economically distressed Area maps. It is also being used to demonstrate emerging trends to address MPO and statewide planning regulations/requirements , enhanced National Highway System, Primary Freight Networks, commodity flows and safety data . HEPGIS has been used to help implement MAP-21 regulations and will help implement the Grow America Act, particularly related to Ladder of Opportunities and MPO reforms.

Download In State Plane Projection Here. Boundaries of designated high quality ADID wetlands established as a result of a formal process under the direction of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Part 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act authorizes the USEPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers to identify in advance of specific permit requests aquatic sites which will be considered as areas generally unsuitable for disposal of dredged or fill material. This process is called an Advanced Identification or ADID. Under the ADID process identification of an area as generally unsuitable for fill does not prohibit applications for permits to fill in these areas. Therefore the ADID designation of unsuitability is advisory not regulatory. An ADID designation lets a potential applicant know in advance that a proposal to fill such a site is not likely to be consistent with the 404(b)(1) guidelines, and the USEPA will probably request permit denial. ADID wetland information is also useful in watershed planning, land use planning, public land acquisition programs, natural resource studies and other purposes. The wetland selection criteria and methodology are documented in the publication entitled "Advanced Identification (ADID) Study, Lake County, Illinois. Final Report, November 1992" which is included in this download. Boundaries were delineated by the ADID project team on orthophotograph background with an intended usage scale of 1" = 400', a scale ratio of 1:4800.

A complete, historic universe of Cook County parcels with attached geographic, governmental, and spatial data.

When working with Parcel Index Numbers (PINs) make sure to zero-pad them to 14 digits. Some datasets may lose leading zeros for PINs when downloaded.

Additional notes:

• Non-taxing district data is attached via spatial join (st_contains) to each parcel's centroid.
• Tax district data (school district, park district, municipality, etc.) are attached by a parcel's assigned tax code.
• Centroids are based on Cook County parcel shapefiles.
• Older properties may be missing coordinates and thus also missing attached spatial data (usually they are missing a parcel boundary in the shapefile).
• Newer properties may be missing a mailing or property address, as they need to be assigned one by the postal service.
• This dataset contains data for the current tax year, which may not yet be complete or final. Assessed values for any given year are subject to change until review and certification of values by the Cook County Board of Review, though there are a few rare circumstances where values may change for the current or past years after that.
• Rowcount for a given year is final once the Assessor has certified the assessment roll all townships.
• Data will be updated monthly.
• Depending on the time of year, some third-party and internal data will be missing for the most recent year. Assessments mailed this year represent values from last year, so this isn't an issue. By the time the Data Department models values for this year, those data will have populated.
• Current property class codes, their levels of assessment, and descriptions can be found on the Assessor's website. Note that class codes details can change across time.
• Due to discrepancies between the systems used by the Assessor and Clerk's offices, tax_district_code is not currently up-to-date in this table.

Read about the Assessor's 2025 Open Data Refresh.

Parcels with tax assessor data for SSMMA region. See Code Definitions for Cook County parcel classification details.CAVEAT EMPTOR: Cook County data from 2016, Will County data from 2017.We are currently in the process of collecting Cook County data and processing Will County data for 2019.For up-to-date parcel tax records, visit the Cook County GIS Viewer or Will County GIS Viewer, or access the Cook County Tax Assessor's databases [1] [2] or the Will County Tax Assessor's Office.Municipalities in SSMMA's GIS Consortium may contact the GIS staff if more recent data is available to display on municipal viewers.

This data set was generated through the 2020 LU/LC update mapping effort. The 2020 update is the seventh in a series of land use mapping efforts that was begun in 1986. Revisions and additions to the initial baseline layer were done in subsequent years from imagery captured in 1995/97, 2002, 2007, 2012, 2015 and now, 2020. This present 2020 update was created by comparing the 2015 LU/LC layer from NJDEP's Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database to 2020 color infrared (CIR) imagery and delineating and coding areas of change. Work for this data set was done by Aerial Information Systems, Inc., Redlands, CA, under direction of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Bureau of Geographic Information System (BGIS). LU/LC changes were captured by adding new line work and attribute data for the 2020 land use directly to the base data layer. All 2015 LU/LC polygons and 2015 LU/LC coding remains in this data set, so change analysis for the period 2015-2020 can be undertaken from this one layer. The mapping was done by USGS HUC8 basins, 13 of which cover portions of New Jersey. This statewide layer is composed of the final data sets generated for each HUC8 basin. Initial QA/QC was done on each HUC8 data set as it was produced with final QA/QC and basin-to-basin edgematching done on this statewide layer. The classification system used was a modified Anderson et al., classification system. Minimum mapping unit (MMU) is 1 acre for changes to non-water and non-wetland polygons. Changes to these two categories were mapped using .25 acres as the MMU. (See entry under the Advisory section concerning additional review being done on NHD waterbody attribute coding and impervious surface estimation.) ADVISORY This data set, edition 20231120, is a statewide layer that includes updated land use/land cover data for all HUC8 basins in New Jersey. The polygon delineations and associated land use code assignments are considered the final versions for this mapping effort. Note, however, that there is continuing review being done on this layer to update several additional attributes not presently evaluated in this edition. These attributes include several from the National Hydrography Database (NHD) that are specific to the waterbodies mapped in this layer, and several attributes containing impervious surface estimates for each polygon. Evaluating the NHD codes facilitates extracting the water features mapped in this layer and using them to update the New Jersey portion of the NHD. Those NHD specific attributes are still being evaluated and may be added to a future edition of this base data set. Similarly, additional review is being done to assess the feasibility of incorporating data on impervious surface (IS) amounts generated from two independent projects, one of which was just completed by NOAA, into this base land use layer. While the NHD and IS attributes will enhance the use of this base layer in several types of analyses, this present layer can be used for doing all primary land use analyses without having those attributes evaluated. Further, evaluating these extra attributes will result in few, if any, changes to the polygon delineations and standard land use coding that are the primary features of this layer. As such, the layer is being provided in its present edition for general use. As the additional attributes are evaluated, they may be added to a future edition of this data set. The basic land use features and codes, however, as mapped in this version of the data set will serve as the base 2020 LU/LC update. As stated in this metadata record's Use Constraints section, NJDEP makes no representations of any kind, including, but not limited to, the warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use, nor are any such warranties to be implied with respect to the digital data layers furnished hereunder. NJDEP assumes no responsibility to maintain them in any manner or form. By downloading this data, user agrees to the data use constraints listed within this metadata record.The data for Somerset County data was extracted & processed from the latest dataset by the Somerset County Office of GIS Services (SCOGIS).

Data is refreshed Jan, Mar, May, Jul, Sep, Nov. To determine the last date edited, refer to the Date_Changed/GIS_Edit_Date fields for each individual layer. To see the latest refresh date, refer to the Item updated date noted in the AGO Item Description page.Property information attributes in parcel polygons are refreshed monthly.To download the full Cadastral Dataset for Milwaukee County click here * Note: download will begin when link is clicked*Other Property Information related layers:Milwaukee County Parcels with Property InformationMilwaukee County Owned ParcelsMilwaukee County Cadastral DatasetMilwaukee County Tax Exempt Parcels

This dataset is a compilation of county parcel data from Minnesota counties that have opted-in for their parcel data to be included in this dataset.

It includes the following 55 counties that have opted-in as of the publication date of this dataset: Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Benton, Big Stone, Carlton, Carver, Cass, Chippewa, Chisago, Clay, Clearwater, Cook, Crow Wing, Dakota, Douglas, Fillmore, Grant, Hennepin, Houston, Isanti, Itasca, Jackson, Koochiching, Lac qui Parle, Lake, Lyon, Marshall, McLeod, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Mower, Murray, Norman, Olmsted, Otter Tail, Pennington, Pipestone, Polk, Pope, Ramsey, Renville, Rice, Saint Louis, Scott, Sherburne, Stearns, Stevens, Traverse, Waseca, Washington, Wilkin, Winona, Wright, and Yellow Medicine.

If you represent a county not included in this dataset and would like to opt-in, please contact Heather Albrecht (Heather.Albrecht@hennepin.us), co-chair of the Minnesota Geospatial Advisory Council (GAC)’s Parcels and Land Records Committee's Open Data Subcommittee. County parcel data does not need to be in the GAC parcel data standard to be included. MnGeo will map the county fields to the GAC standard.

County parcel data records have been assembled into a single dataset with a common coordinate system (UTM Zone 15) and common attribute schema. The county parcel data attributes have been mapped to the GAC parcel data standard for Minnesota: https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/committee/standards/parcel_attrib/parcel_attrib.html

This compiled parcel dataset was created using Python code developed by Minnesota state agency GIS professionals, and represents a best effort to map individual county source file attributes into the common attribute schema of the GAC parcel data standard. The attributes from counties are mapped to the most appropriate destination column. In some cases, the county source files included attributes that were not mapped to the GAC standard. Additionally, some county attribute fields were parsed and mapped to multiple GAC standard fields, such as a single line address. Each quarter, MnGeo provides a text file to counties that shows how county fields are mapped to the GAC standard. Additionally, this text file shows the fields that are not mapped to the standard and those that are parsed. If a county shares changes to how their data should be mapped, MnGeo updates the compilation. If you represent a county and would like to update how MnGeo is mapping your county attribute fields to this compiled dataset, please contact us.

This dataset is a snapshot of parcel data, and the source date of the county data may vary. Users should consult County websites to see the most up-to-date and complete parcel data.

There have been recent changes in date/time fields, and their processing, introduced by our software vendor. In some cases, this has resulted in date fields being empty. We are aware of the issue and are working to correct it for future parcel data releases.

The State of Minnesota makes no representation or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the use or reuse of data provided herewith, regardless of its format or the means of its transmission. THE DATA IS PROVIDED “AS IS” WITH NO GUARANTEE OR REPRESENTATION ABOUT THE ACCURACY, CURRENCY, SUITABILITY, PERFORMANCE, MECHANTABILITY, RELIABILITY OR FITINESS OF THIS DATA FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This dataset is NOT suitable for accurate boundary determination. Contact a licensed land surveyor if you have questions about boundary determinations.

DOWNLOAD NOTES: This dataset is only provided in Esri File Geodatabase and OGC GeoPackage formats. A shapefile is not available because the size of the dataset exceeds the limit for that format. The distribution version of the fgdb is compressed to help reduce the data footprint. QGIS users should consider using the Geopackage format for better results.

This dataset contains street centerlines for vehicular and foot traffic in Allegheny County.

Street Centerlines are classified as Primary Road, Secondary Road, Unpaved Road, Limited Access Road, Connecting Road, Jeep Trail, Walkway, Stairway, Alleyway and Unknown. A Primary Road is a street paved with either concrete or asphalt that has two (2) or more lanes in each direction. A Secondary Road is a residential type hard surface road, or any hard surface road with only one (1) lane in each direction. An Unpaved Road is any road covered with packed dirt or gravel. A Limited Access Road is one that can only be accessed from a Connecting Road such as an Interstate Highway. A Connecting Road is a ramp connecting a Limited Access Road to a surface street. A Walkway is a paved or unpaved foot track that connects two (2) roads together. Walkways within College Campuses will also be shown. Recreational pedestrian trails and walkways through parks and wooded areas are not considered transportation and will not be digitized during this update. Walkways will not have an Edge of Pavement feature. A Stairway is a paved or wooden structure that connects two (2) roads together. Recreational pedestrian trails and walkways through parks and wooded areas are not considered transportation and will not be digitized during this update. An Alleyway is a road, usually narrower than a Secondary Road that runs between, but parallel to, two (2) Secondary Roads. Generally, Outbuildings will be adjacent to Alleyways. A Jeep Trail is a vehicular trail used for recreation. A Jeep Trail will not have an associated edge of pavement feature. A road coded as Unknown is a road, which in the judgment of the photogrammetrist, does not fall into any of the categories listed.

Centerlines will be visually placed between the edges of pavement. One (1) centerline will be placed between each edge of pavement. Roads with medial strips, such as Limited Access Roads, will have two (2) centerlines for those portions of the road where the medial strip is present. For roads that terminate with a cul-de-sac, the centerline shall continue through the center of the cul-de-sac and stop at the edge of pavement.

All attribute data will remain for all Street Centerlines that are not updated. For Street Centerlines that are new, the only attribute field that will be populated is the FeatureCode and UPDATE_YEAR. If a Street Centerline is graphically modified, the existing attribute data will remain and the UPDATE_YEAR will be set to 2004. The attribute values for 2004 Street Centerlines should be considered suspicious until verified.

The ArcInfo Street Centerline coverage that is being updated has 800 segments of Paper Streets, 66 segments of Vacated Streets and 78 segments of Steps. Street Centerlines that are coded as Paper Streets in the OWNER field will remain unchanged in the updated dataset unless the area has been developed. In the event the area has been developed, the Street Centerlines will be modified to reflect the true condition of the visible roads. Street Centerlines that are coded as Vacated in the OWNER field will also remain unchanged in the updated dataset. In the event the area coinciding with the Vacated Streets has been developed, the Vacated Street Centerlines will be removed in order to reflect the true condition of the area. Street Centerlines that are coded as Steps in the OWNER field will be updated to reflect the current condition of the area. The Street Centerlines dataset consists of an external table that links to the supplied coverages and the Geodatabase created for this project using the "-ID" (UserID) field. In order to maintain the link to the external table and not loose valuable data the decision was made to keep all database information currently in the Street Centerline dataset. When a Street Centerline is modified during the update process, the field "UPDATE_YEAR" is set to 2004. All other database attributes will remain unchanged from the original values. All Street Centerline database data with an "UPDATE_YEAR" of 2004 should be verified before used. In some occasions the Street Centerline was divided into two (2) sections to allow for a new road intersection. Both sections of the resulting Street Centerline will have the same database attributes including Address Range. All new Street Centerlines will have zero (0) for "SystemID" and "UserID".

This dataset was previously harvested from Allegheny County’s GIS data portal. The new authoritative source for this data is now the PASDA page (https://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/DataSummary.aspx?dataset=1224), which includes links to historical versions of the shapefile representations of this data.

The Hydrology Feature Dataset contains photogrammetrically compiled water drainage features and structures including rivers, streams, drainage canals, locks, dams, lakes, ponds, reservoirs and mooring cells. Rivers, Lakes, Ponds, Reservoirs, Hidden Lakes, Reservoirs or Ponds: If greater than 25 feet and less than 30 feet wide, is captured as a double line stream. If greater than 30 feet wide it is captured as a river. Lakes are large standing bodies of water greater than 5 acres in size. Ponds are large standing bodies of water greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres in size. Polygons are created from Stream edges and River Edges. The Ohio River, Monongahela River and Allegheny River are coded as Major Rivers. All other River and Stream polygons are coded as River. If a stream is less than 25 feet wide it is placed as a single line and coded as a Stream. Both sides of the stream are digitized and coded as a Stream for Streams whose width is greater than 25 feet. River edges are digitized and coded as River.

A Drainage Canal is a manmade or channelized hydrographic feature. Drainage Canals are differentiated from streams in that drainage canals have had the sides and/or bottom stabilized to prevent erosion for the predominant length of the feature. Streams may have had some stabilization done, but are primarily in a natural state. Lakes are large standing bodies of water greater than five acres in size. Ponds are large standing bodies of water greater than one acre in size and less than five acres in size. Reservoirs are manmade embankments of water. Included in this definition are both covered and uncovered water tanks. Reservoirs that are greater than one acre in size are digitized. Hidden Streams, Hidden Rivers and Hidden Drainage Canal or Culverts are those areas of drainage where the water flows through a manmade facility such as a culvert. Hydrology Annotation is not being updated but will be preserved. If a drainage feature has been removed, as apparent on the aerial photography, the associated drainage name annotation will be removed. A Mooring Cell is a structure to which tows can tie off while awaiting lockage. They are normally constructed of concrete and steel and are anchored to the river bottom by means of gravity or sheet piling.

Mooring Cells do not currently exist in the Allegheny County dataset but will be added. Locks are devices that are used to control flow or access to a hydrologic feature. The edges of the Lock are captured. Dams are devices that are used to hold or delay the natural flow of water. The edges of the Dam are shown.

This dataset is harvested on a weekly basis from Allegheny County’s GIS data portal. The full metadata record for this dataset can also be found on Allegheny County's GIS portal. You can access the metadata record and other resources on the GIS portal by clicking on the “Explore” button (and choosing the "Go to resource" option) to the right of the "ArcGIS Open Dataset" text below.

Category: Environment

Department: Geographic Information Systems Group; Department of Administrative Services

Data Notes: Coordinate System: Pennsylvania State Plane South Zone 3702; U.S. Survey Foot

Development Notes: Original Lakes and Drainage datasets combined to create this layer. Data was updated as a result of a flyover in the spring of 2004. A database field has been defined for all map features named Update Year". This database field will define which dataset provided each map feature. Map features from the current map will be set to "2004". The earlier dataset map features the earlier dataset map features used to supplement the area near the county boundary will be set to "1993". All new or modified map data will have the value for "Update Year" set to "2004".

Data Dictionary: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16BWrRkoPtq2ANRkrbG7CrfQk2dUsWRiaS2Ee1mTn7l0/edit?usp=sharing

Parcel Viewer makes searching for King County parcel information easy. You can search by address, search by parcel number, or you can just zoom in on the map and click on a parcel. Once a parcel is selected, you will get direct links to the King County Assessor’s eReal Property report and the Districts and Development Conditions report.

WARNING: This is a pre-release dataset and its fields names and data structures are subject to change. It should be considered pre-release until the end of 2024. Expected changes:

• Metadata is missing or incomplete for some layers at this time and will be continuously improved.
  
• We expect to update this layer roughly in line with CDTFA at some point, but will increase the update cadence over time as we are able to automate the final pieces of the process.

Purpose

County and incorporated place (city) boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the authoritative source the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), altered to show the counties as one polygon. This layer displays the city polygons on top of the County polygons so the area isn"t interrupted. The GEOID attribute information is added from the US Census. GEOID is based on merged State and County FIPS codes for the Counties. Abbreviations for Counties and Cities were added from Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA) data. Place Type was populated with information extracted from the Census. Names and IDs from the US Board on Geographic Names (BGN), the authoritative source of place names as published in the Geographic Name Information System (GNIS), are attached as well. Finally, the coastline is used to separate coastal buffers from the land-based portions of jurisdictions. This feature layer is for public use.

Related Layers

This dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:

1. Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areas
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers
2. Counties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygon
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers
3. Cities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.
   • With Coastal Buffers (this dataset)
   • Without Coastal Buffers
4. Place Abbreviations
5. Unincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)
6. Census Designated Places (Coming Soon)
   
7. Cartographic Coastline
   • Polygon
   • Line source (Coming Soon)

Point of Contact

California Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.gov

Field and Abbreviation Definitions

• COPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system
• Place Name: CDTFA incorporated (city) or county name
• County: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.
• Legal Place Name: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information System
• GNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.
• GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census Bureau Place Type: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for boundary type published in the Geographic Name Information System
• Place Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of incorporated area names
• CNTY Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of county names
• Area_SqMi: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.
• COASTAL: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".
• GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead.

Accuracy

CDTFA"s source data notes the following about accuracy:

City boundary changes and county boundary line adjustments filed with the Board of Equalization per Government Code 54900. This GIS layer contains the boundaries of the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the state of California. The initial dataset was created in March of 2015 and was based on the State Board of Equalization tax rate area boundaries. As of April 1, 2024, the maintenance of this dataset is provided by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates. The boundaries are continuously being revised to align with aerial imagery when areas of conflict are discovered between the original boundary provided by the California State Board of Equalization and the boundary made publicly available by local, state, and federal government. Some differences may occur between actual recorded boundaries and the boundaries used for sales and use tax purposes. The boundaries in this map are representations of taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates and should not be used to determine precise city or county boundary line locations. COUNTY = county name; CITY = city name or unincorporated

Cook County 10-digit parcels with attached distances to various spatial features.

When working with 10-digit Parcel Index Numbers (PINs) make sure to zero-pad them to 10 digits. Some datasets may lose leading zeros for PINs when downloaded. 10-digit PINs do not identify individual condominium units.

Additional notes:

• Centroids are based on Cook County parcel shapefiles.
• Older properties may be missing coordinates and thus also missing attached spatial data (usually they are missing a parcel boundary in the shapefile).
• Attached spatial data does NOT all go back to 2000. It is only available for more recent years, primarily those after 2012.
• This dataset contains data for the current tax year, which may not yet be complete or final. Assessed values for any given year are subject to change until review and certification of values by the Cook County Board of Review, though there are a few rare circumstances where values may change for the current or past years after that.
• Rowcount for a given year is final once the Assessor has certified the assessment roll all townships.
• Data will be updated annually as new parcel shapefiles are made available.

Read about the Assessor's 2025 Open Data Refresh.

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

In late 1996, the Dept of Conservation (DOC) surveyed state and federal agencies about the county boundary coverage they used. As a result, DOC adopted the 1:24,000 (24K) scale U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) dataset (USGS source) for their Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) but with several modifications. Detailed documentation of these changes is provided by FMMP and included in the lineage section of the metadata.A dataset was made available (approximately 2004) through CALFIRE - FRAP and the California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL), with additional updates throughout subsequent years. More recently, an effort was made to improve the coastal linework by using the previous interior linework from the 24k data, but replacing the coastal linework based on NOAA's ERMA coastal dataset (which used NAIP 2010). In this dataset, all bays (plus bay islands and constructed features) are merged into the mainland, and coastal features (such as islands and constructed features) are not included, with the exception of the Channel Islands which ARE included.This service represents the latest released version, and is updated when new versions are released. As of June, 2019 it represents cnty19_1.

Represents the Bear Creek Greenway from Ashland through Central Point. The "STAGE" field can be used to display the completed vs. the planned routes. This information was based on a survey done in 2012, and the data is no longer aligned with the aerial imagery.Some of the planned routes are slated to be completed soon, while others are more long term plans which may change route prior to completion. The planned routes are shown for display purposes only, and no planning should be done based on any planned routes without first consulting your city planner, as well as Jackson County Roads and Parks. These data were last updated by County GIS staff using engineering survey data collected by OBEC engineering, and with the assistance of Jenna Stanke from Roads and Parks. Jenna will continue to either keep the data maintained and provide GIS Staff with the updates, or send any needed edits directly to GIS to make the edits.

description: This dataset contains point features representing the approximate location of tax parcels contained in County Assessor tax rolls. Individual county data was integrated into this statewide publication by the Arkansas Geographic Information Office (AGIO). The Computer Aided Mass Appraisal (CAMA) systems maintained in each county are used to populate the database attributes for each centroid feature. The entity attribute structure conforms to the Arkansas Cadastral Mapping Standard. The digital cadastral data is provided as a publication version that only represents a snapshot of the production data at the time it was received from the county. Published updates may be made to counties throughout the year. These will occur after new data is digitized or updates to existing data are finished. Production versions of the data exist in the various counties where daily and weekly updates occur. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This column reflects the date when AGIO received the data from the county. Only parcels with an associated Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) record are provided. This means a CAMA record may exist, but no point geometry or vice-versa. Cadastral data is dynamic by its nature; therefore it is impossible for any county to ever be considered complete. The data is NOT topologically enforced. As a statewide integrator, AGIO publishes the data but does not make judgment calls about where points or polygon lines are meant to be located. Therefore each county data set is published without topology rules being enforced. GIS Technicians use best practices such as polygon closure and vertex snapping, however, topology is not built for each county. Users should be aware, by Arkansas Law (15-21-504 2 B) digital cadastral data does not represent legal property boundary descriptions, nor is it suitable for boundary determination of the individual parcels included in the cadastre. Users requiring a boundary determination should consult an Arkansas Registered Land Surveyor (http://www.arkansas.gov/pels/search/search.php) on boundary questions. The digital cadastral data is intended to be a graphical representation of the tax parcel only. Just because a county is listed does NOT imply the data represents county wide coverage. AGIO worked with each county to determine a level of production that warranted the data was ready to be published. For example, in some counties only the north part of the county was covered or in other cases only rural parcels are covered and yet in others only urban parcels. The approach is to begin incremental publishing as production blocks are ready, even though a county may not have county wide coverage. Each case represents a significant amount of data that will be useful immediately. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This date reflects when the data was received from the county. Digital cadastral data users should be aware the County Assessor Mapping Program adopted a phased approach for developing cadastral data. Phase One includes the production of a parcel centroid for each parcel that bears the attributes prescribed by the state cadastral mapping standard. Phase Two includes the production of parcel polygon geometry and bears the standard attributes. The Arkansas standard closely mirrors the federal Cadastral Core Data Standard established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee, Subcommittee for Cadastral Data. Counties within this file include: Arkansas, Ashley, Baxter, Boone, Carroll, Chicot, Clark, Clay, Columbia, Conway, Craighead, Crawford, Cross, Desha, Faulkner, Franklin, Hot Spring, Howard, Izard, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Little River, Logan, Lonoke, Madison, Mississippi, Montgomery, Nevada, Newton, Perry, Pike, Poinsett, Polk, Pope, Pulaski, Randolph, Saline, Sebastian, Stone, Van Buren, Washington and White.; abstract: This dataset contains point features representing the approximate location of tax parcels contained in County Assessor tax rolls. Individual county data was integrated into this statewide publication by the Arkansas Geographic Information Office (AGIO). The Computer Aided Mass Appraisal (CAMA) systems maintained in each county are used to populate the database attributes for each centroid feature. The entity attribute structure conforms to the Arkansas Cadastral Mapping Standard. The digital cadastral data is provided as a publication version that only represents a snapshot of the production data at the time it was received from the county. Published updates may be made to counties throughout the year. These will occur after new data is digitized or updates to existing data are finished. Production versions of the data exist in the various counties where daily and weekly updates occur. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This column reflects the date when AGIO received the data from the county. Only parcels with an associated Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) record are provided. This means a CAMA record may exist, but no point geometry or vice-versa. Cadastral data is dynamic by its nature; therefore it is impossible for any county to ever be considered complete. The data is NOT topologically enforced. As a statewide integrator, AGIO publishes the data but does not make judgment calls about where points or polygon lines are meant to be located. Therefore each county data set is published without topology rules being enforced. GIS Technicians use best practices such as polygon closure and vertex snapping, however, topology is not built for each county. Users should be aware, by Arkansas Law (15-21-504 2 B) digital cadastral data does not represent legal property boundary descriptions, nor is it suitable for boundary determination of the individual parcels included in the cadastre. Users requiring a boundary determination should consult an Arkansas Registered Land Surveyor (http://www.arkansas.gov/pels/search/search.php) on boundary questions. The digital cadastral data is intended to be a graphical representation of the tax parcel only. Just because a county is listed does NOT imply the data represents county wide coverage. AGIO worked with each county to determine a level of production that warranted the data was ready to be published. For example, in some counties only the north part of the county was covered or in other cases only rural parcels are covered and yet in others only urban parcels. The approach is to begin incremental publishing as production blocks are ready, even though a county may not have county wide coverage. Each case represents a significant amount of data that will be useful immediately. Users should consult the BEGIN_DATE attribute column to determine the age of the data for a given county. This date reflects when the data was received from the county. Digital cadastral data users should be aware the County Assessor Mapping Program adopted a phased approach for developing cadastral data. Phase One includes the production of a parcel centroid for each parcel that bears the attributes prescribed by the state cadastral mapping standard. Phase Two includes the production of parcel polygon geometry and bears the standard attributes. The Arkansas standard closely mirrors the federal Cadastral Core Data Standard established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee, Subcommittee for Cadastral Data. Counties within this file include: Arkansas, Ashley, Baxter, Boone, Carroll, Chicot, Clark, Clay, Columbia, Conway, Craighead, Crawford, Cross, Desha, Faulkner, Franklin, Hot Spring, Howard, Izard, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Little River, Logan, Lonoke, Madison, Mississippi, Montgomery, Nevada, Newton, Perry, Pike, Poinsett, Polk, Pope, Pulaski, Randolph, Saline, Sebastian, Stone, Van Buren, Washington and White.

WARNING: This is a pre-release dataset and its fields names and data structures are subject to change. It should be considered pre-release until the end of March 2025. The schema changed in February 2025 - please see below. We will post a roadmap of upcoming changes, but service URLs and schema are now stable. For deployment status of new services in February 2025, see https://gis.data.ca.gov/pages/city-and-county-boundary-data-status. Additional roadmap and status links at the bottom of this metadata.

Purpose

County boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA). These boundaries are the best available statewide data source in that CDTFA receives changes in incorporation and boundary lines from the Board of Equalization, who receives them from local jurisdictions for tax purposes. Boundary accuracy is not guaranteed, and though CDTFA works to align boundaries based on historical records and local changes, errors will exist. If you require a legal assessment of boundary location, contact a licensed surveyor.

This dataset joins in multiple attributes and identifiers from the US Census Bureau and Board on Geographic Names to facilitate adding additional third party data sources. In addition, we attach attributes of our own to ease and reduce common processing needs and questions. Finally, coastal buffers are separated into separate polygons, leaving the land-based portions of jurisdictions and coastal buffers in adjacent polygons. This layer removes the coastal buffer polygons. This feature layer is for public use.

Related Layers

This dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:

1. Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areas
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers
2. Counties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygon
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers (this dataset)
3. Cities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.
   • With Coastal Buffers
   • Without Coastal Buffers
4. City and County Abbreviations
5. Unincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)
6. Census Designated Places
7. Cartographic Coastline
   • Polygon
   • Line source (Coming Soon)

Point of Contact

California Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.gov

Field and Abbreviation Definitions

• CDTFA_COUNTY: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.
• CDTFA_COPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system. The boundary data originate with CDTFA's teams managing tax rate information, so this field is preserved and flows into this dataset.
• CENSUS_GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census Bureau
• CENSUS_PLACE_TYPE: City, County, or Town, stripped off the census name for identification purpose.
• GNIS_PLACE_NAME: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information System
• GNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.
• CDT_COUNTY_ABBR: Abbreviations of county names - originally derived from CalTrans Division of Local Assistance and now managed by CDT. Abbreviations are 3 characters.
• CDT_NAME_SHORT: The name of the jurisdiction (city or county) with the word "City" or "County" stripped off the end. Some changes may come to how we process this value to make it more consistent.
• AREA_SQMI: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.
• OFFSHORE: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".
• PRIMARY_DOMAIN: Currently empty/null for all records. Placeholder field for official URL of the city or county
• CENSUS_POPULATION: Currently null for all records. In the future, it will include the most recent US Census population estimate for the jurisdiction.
• GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead.