land parcels identifying - national cadnationalcad.org/download/minnesota-gisparcel.pdf · parcel...

NOVAK

NORELL

AVENUE NORTH

POND

AVENUE

NORTH

DRAINAGE EASEMENT

POND

DRAINAGE EASEMENT

OAKGREEN

1 2

1

3

2

1

7

2

3

4

5

6

15

16

173

Minnesota Governor�s Councilon Geographic Information

Parcel Data CommitteeSeptember 1997

IdentifyingLand Parcels

Is a StatewideStandard Needed?

The Governor�s Council on Geographic Information was created in 1991by Governor Arne H. Carlson to provide leadership in the development,management and use of geographic information and related technology.With assistance from Minnesota Planning, the council provides policyadvice to all levels of government and makes recommendations regardinginvestments, management practices, institutional arrangements, education,stewardship and standards.

Minnesota Planning is charged with developing a long-range plan for thestate, stimulating public participation in Minnesota�s future andcoordinating activities with state agencies, the Legislature and other units ofgovernment.

Upon request, Identifying Land Parcels: Is a Statewide Format Needed? willbe made available in alternate format, such as Braille, large print or audiotape. For TTY, contact Minnesota Relay Service at (800) 627-3529 and askfor Minnesota Planning.

658 Cedar St.St. Paul, MN 55155(612) 296-3985www.mnplan.state.mn.us

September 1997

For additional information or copies of Identifying Land Parcels, contact thecouncil staff coordinator at (612) 296-1208 or via e-mail [email protected]. An electronic copy of this report can be found onthe Governor�s Council on Geographic Information�s World Wide Webhome page: www.lmic.state.mn.us/gc/gc.htm.

Cover Map: Washington County Surveyor's OfficeCover Inset: Historical Plat Map, Dakota County Historical Society

Identifying Land Parcels: Is a Statewide Standard Needed? 1

P

Summaryarcels are the basic unit of land ownership in Minnesota.Approximately 2.5 million exist within the state. Uniquelyidentifying and accurately locating parcels is a daily task for

governments at all levels. Counties assign each parcel a unique parcelidentification number; this PIN identifies a parcel but may not containinformation about its location.

The Governor�s Council onGeographic Information created aParcel Data Committee to promoteunderstanding of the complicatedissues surrounding the use of parcelidentification numbers. IdentifyingLand Parcels: Is a Statewide FormatNeeded? lays out these issues andpresents the findings andrecommendations of the ParcelData Committee regarding theneed for a statewide parcelidentifier standard.

The committee investigated the useof parcel identification systemsthroughout Minnesota anddeveloped a list of parcelidentification code formats used byeach of Minnesota�s 87 counties. Itfound that while developing astandard PIN format might beadvantageous for many users ofstatewide GIS data, it has minimalbenefits for others, primarilybecause changing existing PINformats would be prohibitivelyexpensive for most counties.

The council recommends,therefore, that unique PINsstatewide be created by attachingeach county�s unique numericalcode to each parcel identifier. Thissimple solution creates a statewidePIN format that is unique for everyparcel in the state. It does notrequire counties to make changesto their existing PINs and placesthe burden of reprogramming onthose who have the most to gain �statewide and regional parcel datausers.

In addition to identifying parcels, itis important to be able togeographically locate them. Thiscan and has been done in severalways, including with geographiccoordinates (latitude and longitude),Public Land Survey descriptions(township, range, section, quarter-quarter section, government lot) andother legal descriptions such as plat,block and lot.

Some counties incorporatelocational information into theirPIN formats. While this practicecan be useful, it is also possible touse database technology to linkgeographic information to a parcelwithout having a geographicreference embedded in the PIN.Any technique can be used to locatea parcel, as long as the locationalreferences are linked to the PIN.

The council strongly urges thatcounties that do not yet have anoperational GIS layer or areconsidering changes to theircurrent parcel identifier formatconsider linking Public Land Surveyinformation to their parcelidentification numbers. Thiscapability, along with theavailability of low-cost PLS GISlayers, would allow counties tomap and analyze their parcelattribute information at a quarter-quarter section or government lotlevel. Though this is far morelimited than what can be done witha complete parcel GIS layer, itwould still enable usefulcountywide planning and analysis.

IdentifyingLand Parcels

1 Summary

2 Glossary

2 Parcel DataCommittee Members

3 Introduction

4 Identifying Parcels

5 Locating Parcels

7 Developing CountyPIN Formats

9 PIN Formats Used byMinnesota Counties,1996

2 Minnesota Governor�s Council on Geographic Information

that is not exactly 40 acres. Theseunits resulted from imperfections inthe early Public Land Survey, thecurvature of the earth and otherfactors. Quarter-quarter sectionsthat contain a meander line are alsogiven the designation of agovernment lot.

Land parcel � Publicly recordedright, title or interest in realproperty.

Meander lines � Approximateboundaries of water bodiesencountered by the surveyors whoconducted the Public Land Survey.

Parcel identification number �Code assigned to a land parcel thatdistinguishes it from other parcels.

Attribute � A code used todescribe the characteristics of ageographic feature.

Character field � Type of columnin a table or database that containsletters or numbers.

Federal information processingstandards � Standards adopted bythe U.S. government and approvedfor use by federal agencies. FIPSdeal with a wide range of computersystem components, including datafiles, codes, documentation, storagemedia, hardware, softwareengineering and security.

Government lot � Unit of thePublic Land Survey system thatdesignates a quarter-quarter section

Public Land Survey � Gridlikesystem of defining lands in much ofthe western and central portions ofthe United States, known generallyas the township, range and sectionsystem. In Minnesota and manyother states, most legal descriptionsare based on the PLS system.

Right-justified � Type of table ordatabase format where codes aremoved to the right, eliminating anyspaces along the right margin.

GlossaryBelow are generally accepted definitions for terms used in this report.

Parcel Data Committee MembersMar Alojado, Minnesota Department of TransportationJill Bornes, Minnesota Department of Natural ResourcesRichard E. Elhardt, Northern States Power Company (co-chair)John Gellatly, St. Louis CountyMark Kotz, Metropolitan Council (co-chair)Jay Krafthefer, Washington CountyJim Krautkremer, Minnesota Department of Administration,

Intergovernmental Information Systems Advisory CouncilLee Meilleur, Minnesota Legislative Coordinating CommissionLowell Pommerening, Minnesota Department of Natural ResourcesMichael Pressman, 4Ever Land Conservation AssociationLisa Skipton, Dakota CountyKenneth Whitehorn, Itasca CountyDavid Windle, City of Roseville


T

Introductionhe need for a unique, statewide parcel identification number hasbeen an issue for many years within Minnesota�s geographicinformation system community. Some users want a standard format

for identifying and locating land parcels, while others maintain that thiswould be costly and disruptive for many local governments. Needed now isa discussion that includes the views of those interested in a standard and thelocal governments that would be affected by such a standard.

The Governor�s Council onGeographic Information created aParcel Data Committee to promoteunderstanding of the complicatedissues surrounding the use of parcelidentification numbers. IdentifyingLand Parcels: Is a Statewide FormatNeeded? lays out these issues andpresents the findings andrecommendations of the ParcelData Committee regarding theneed for a statewide parcelidentifier standard.

Parcels are the basic unit of landownership in Minnesota.Approximately 2.5 million exist

within the state. A parcel may bedefined as a right, title or interest inreal property. For a parcel to bemappable, it must be recorded inthe county recorder�s office andhave a defined spatial extent.

Uniquely identifying and accuratelylocating parcels is a daily task forgovernments at all levels. Countiesassign each parcel a unique parcelidentification number, which theymay call a PIN, PID or parcel ID.

The PIN identifies a parcel but maynot contain information about itslocation. If a county uses a

geographic information system, thePIN can be used to link the graphicrepresentation of a parcel to suchdescriptive information asownership, assessed value andzoning designation, allowingcounty departments andorganizations to map parcelinformation stored in theirdatabases. Because many differentpeople, departments andorganizations may have datarelating to the same parcels, havingthe PIN as an element of the parceldatabase will give each of thesedata holders the ability to map theirdata as well as the data of others.

1234 B. Johnson 78,910 R1

1235 L. Anderson 94,731 R1

1236 M. Smith 89,512 R1

1237 Acme Co. 175,318 R2

1238 Acme Co. 183,665 R2

1239 GasNFood Inc. 236,844 C1

Data TableParcel Map

1234

1235

1236

1237

1238

1239

PIN Owner Value Zoning

PINs are commonly used to link the graphic representation of a parcel stored in a GIS to descriptive information aboutthat parcel stored in a data table.

Using the PIN as the link to a geographic information system


Identifying Parcels

All but seven counties start theirPIN with a code � usually twodigits � for the civil jurisdiction(city or township).

In 71 counties, the PIN is ninedigits. The next most common PINlength (in five counties) is 12 digits.

Thirty-five counties use a nine-digit PIN consisting of a two-digitmunicipal code, a three-digit PublicLand Survey section number orplat/subdivision code (dependingon whether the parcel is platted)and a four-digit code to uniquelydefine the parcel within the sectionor subdivision. These last fourdigits may or may not have built-ingeographic references such as aquarter-quarter section code or lotand block.

Another 17 counties use a nine-digit PIN consisting of a two-digitmunicipal code, four-digit uniquenumber and three more digits forparcel splits, where a parcel isdivided into more than one.

Counties using a PIN with morethan nine digits usually have a largepopulation and, consequently, alarge number of parcels. Some ofthese counties had used a nine-digitPIN but began running out ofnumbers.

Although many of these formatsare similar, the significantvariations among them would makechanging to a different systemdifficult and expensive for mostcounties.

and disruptive. Also, a standardPIN would not necessarilystandardize the descriptiveinformation attached to parcels,which is critical to any consistentregional and statewide planningand analysis. Finally, someobservers are concerned that a statestandard may eventually besuperseded by a federal standard,making it inefficient to develop astate standard first.

Council FindingsIn reviewing the need for astatewide PIN standard, the councilarrived at the following findings:

A parcel identificationnumbering system that uniquelyidentifies every parcel in Minnesotais needed. Such a system wouldallow access to both geographicand descriptive data for parcels thatlie in more than one county.

County and local governmentshave the least to gain from astatewide PIN standard. Astandard PIN format wouldprovide long-term benefits muchmore to statewide and regionalusers of parcel data than to countyand local governments.

While several counties haveexpressed interest in having a PINstandard or guideline available,most seem satisfied with theirexisting PIN formats. Countiesand municipalities with PINformats not in line with the statestandard would face substantialreprogramming costs.

It is unrealistic and inappropriateto demand that counties change

ach of Minnesota�s 87 counties has a heavily used parcelidentification system with PINs that are unique within each county.Many counties use similar formats:E

Pros and Cons of aStatewide PIN StandardA standard PIN would beadvantageous for many users ofstatewide GIS data because it would:

Prevent problems that arise whenthe same PIN is assigned to parcelsin different counties.

Simplify parcel-related databasedevelopment for organizations thatwork across county boundaries andencourage use of parcel data forregional and statewide planningand analysis.

Enable software and systemdesign vendors to develop parcel-related GIS products for multiplecities and counties, instead ofcustomizing products for eachclient.

In addition, a standard PIN thatincludes township, range, section,quarter-quarter and government-lotinformation would allow mappingof all parcels statewide at thequarter-quarter section orgovernment-lot level using readilyavailable GIS base maps. Because ofthe variety of PIN formats in usetoday, this type of statewidemapping is not possible.

On the other hand, a statewide PINstandard would require mostcounties and many cities to changethe way they store parcel data intheir computer systems.Reprogramming these systemswould be costly, time-consuming


identifier for the parcels within itsborders, anyone using data frommore than one county simplywould need to add the three-digitcounty code to the front of eachcounty�s PINs to create uniquestatewide parcel identifiers. Thisapproach would not requirecounties to change how theystructure their PINs � a majorbenefit. The GIS communityimmediately would gain a uniquestatewide parcel identifier, and thenow-lower costs of reprogrammingwould be placed on those who havethe most to gain � statewide andregional parcel data users.

This approach would increase thesize of the PIN and, because parcelidentifiers may have differentformats and lengths, require thatPINs be dealt with as characterstrings of a standard length equal tothe longest PIN in the state plus theunique county code.

Locating Parcelsn addition to identifying parcels, it is important to be able togeographically locate them. This can and has been done in severalways, including with geographic coordinates (latitude and

longitude), Public Land Survey descriptions (township, range, section,quarter-quarter section, government lot) and other legal descriptions suchas plat, block and lot.

IWhile many PINs are simplyunique, randomly generatednumbers, some counties havechosen to embed geographicreference codes in their PINs.This allows users to know generallywhere a parcel is located and canbe particularly useful whencounties do not have the abilityto map their parcels with a GIS.

It is also possible to use databasetechnology to link geographicinformation to a parcel withouthaving a geographic referenceembedded in the PIN. The PIN canbe linked to a data table containingthe township, range, section, plat,and so on.

When the PIN is printed, otherlocational information can also beprinted, giving the user the desiredgeographic references.

Available Public Land Survey InformationOne PLS GIS layer, developed by the Land ManagementInformation Center at Minnesota Planning, is complete for theentire state. This layer defines the Public Land Survey system to thequarter-quarter section, based on 1:100,000-scale U.S. GeologicalSurvey topographic maps. Another layer, being developed by theMinnesota Department of Natural Resources, includes governmentlot and meander lines based on original survey notes andsubsequent surveys. The DNR layer is based on 1:24,000 USGStopographic maps and more accurate section corner control points,where they are available. The DNR layer is complete for much ofnorthern Minnesota and should be complete for the entire statewithin a few years.

their existing formats. Withoutfunding from the state, mostcounties probably could not affordto change their PIN formats, even ifthey were mandated to do so.Moreover, such funding likely willnot be available.

CouncilRecommendationBased on these findings, the councilrecommends a simple solution thatwould create a statewide PINformat which is unique for everyparcel in the state. Because everycounty maintains a unique parcel


CouncilRecommendations

Counties that do not yet have anoperational GIS layer or thoseconsidering changes to their currentparcel identifier format are urged tostrongly consider linking PublicLand Survey information to theirparcel identification numbers.

This capability, along with theavailability of low-cost PLS GISlayers, would allow counties tomap and analyze their parcel

attribute information at a quarter-quarter section or government lotlevel. Though this is far morelimited than what can be done witha complete parcel GIS layer, it canstill enable useful countywideplanning and analysis. Countiescould do in-house mapping ofquarter-quarter section parcelattribute data with desktop GISsoftware.

For example, they could analyzeproperty value trends and land useand ownership patterns. They also

could use the results of parcelmapping and analysis done by stateand regional organizations.

Finally, the PIN-to-PLS link wouldlet municipalities, business groups,academic institutions and otherorganizations within the county�sborders map and analyze the publicparcel information maintained bythe county.

Some counties may find it easy tocreate a data table linking each PINto the county�s PLS information,

Section 18

If PLS data is in a table linked or related to the PIN, attributes can be mapped using existing PLS base data layers.

Parcel Records Data Table

PIN

123412351236123712381239

Acres

20.0020.0040.0040.0020.0020.00

Owner

N. AndersonR. JonesU.S.A.CountyState of MNState of MN

Value

17,60018,40032,30029,30011,9009,500

Etc.

...

...

...

...

...

...

Mapping can occur even if Public Land Survey data is not embedded in the PIN

PLS Geocode

11243183100112431832031124318330411243183400

Ownership

NonpublicFederalCountyState

PIN as the Link

PIN and PLS Data Table

PIN

123412351236123712381239

TWP

112112112112112112

RNG

434343434343

SEC

181818181818

QQ

313132333434

GLOT

000003040000


and some have already done this.For many more counties, however,this will require some work, fromreformatting data to looking upeach parcel on a map and enteringit into a database to going out intothe field to check the location ofparcels. While the potential benefitsof developing a PIN-to-PLSrelationship data table may enticesome counties to invest resources inthis effort, many others will notfind these benefits worth the effortor will simply not have the requiredresources. State funding and

technical assistance will benecessary if every Minnesotacounty is to gain this capability.

The Public Land Survey dataelements linked to the parcelidentification number should be thetownship number, range number(and range direction in CookCounty), section number andquarter-quarter section orgovernment lot number or both.The DNR has outlined its best-practices guidelines for coding andformatting PLS information in

Public Land Survey GeocodingStandards for New Systems andData File Interchange. Copies ofthis document may be obtainedfrom Jill Bornes, DNR MineralsDivision, 500 Lafayette Rd.,St. Paul, MN 55155-4045;(612) 296-1879.

Developing County PIN Formatso increase the usefulness of their data, counties that have not yetdeveloped a computerized parcel identifier system or arereprogramming their system may want to consider using PIN

formats that incorporate the following specifications. In talking with countyemployees in each of Minnesota�s 87 counties, the Parcel Data Committeeidentified three important considerations in developing and selecting aPIN format:

Provide room to grow. PINformats can be useful for a longtime if they can handle futuregrowth without running out ofnumbers. For example, a PINformat that allows only 999 uniqueparcels within a section orsubdivision may run into troublewith such developments as largetrailer parks or condominiums,where many legal parcels arelocated in a small area.

Provide for parcel splits. SomePIN formats have geographicreferences built into them, butthese references can be corruptedby parcel splits. For example, a PINmay contain a three-digit number

that equates to thecounterclockwise sequence ofparcels within a township orsection. Once parcels are split,however, this sequence can bedestroyed. For this reason, it isuseful to have a unique numberwithin the PIN that has nogeographic reference. This numbercan be used to handle parcel splitsand other situations that maycorrupt the locational referenceswithin a particular PIN format.

Be aware of varying needs.Different counties may have verydifferent kinds of parcels and mayuse PINs for a wide range ofapplications. The best PIN format

for Hennepin County may not bethe best for Kittson County.Counties planning to change theirPIN format should review the listof PINs used in Minnesota andconsult with neighboring counties.The needs of all countydepartments with a stake in thePIN format should be determined,since they may vary. Finally,counties need to understand howtechnology can help. What wasimpossible 10 years ago may be aroutine process today.

Guidelines forRegional andStatewide UsersUsers of PIN data on a statewide orregional basis may find thefollowing guidelines helpful as theymanipulate county parcel identifiercodes.

PIN length. For a statewideunique PIN format, the Parcel Data

T


Committee recommends a lengthof 21 characters. While the longestcounty PIN is currently 15characters, the 21-character lengthallows county PINs to expand to18 characters. At least one countyis already planning to develop an18-character PIN. The 21-characteridentifier should be treated as acharacter field type, because somecounties use, or plan to use, alphacharacters in their PINs. Use of thecharacter field type also recognizesthat a 21-digit integer is notallowed or recommended in manysoftware packages and computerplatforms.

Suggested PIN format. The firstthree characters of a statewideunique PIN should consist of thethree-digit federal informationprocessing standard county codefor Minnesota, as detailed in FIPSPublication 6-4. This code has beenapproved as an official state datastandard by Minnesota�sInformation Policy Office. Thethree-digit county code should bezero-filled (e.g., 001). The countyPIN portion of the identifier shouldbe right-justified to the last 18spaces. Any blank spaces betweenthe county code and the countyPIN should be filled with zeros, asshould any other blanks in thecounty PIN. Filling spaces withzeros promotes a consistent format,for example:

001000000000123456789 =a hypothetical statewide parcelidentifier for Aitkin County,which has a nine-digit countyPIN format

035000123456789012345 =a hypothetical statewide parcelidentifier for Crow WingCounty, which has a 15-digitcounty PIN format

PIN Format Notations

The Parcel Data Committee developed the following notation scheme forthe PIN format table on page 9:

BK = 2-digit block number/codeCO = 2-digit county numberF = 1-digit code to differentiate fractional lotGL = 2-digit government lot or railroad lot numberLT = 2-digit lot numberLOT = 3-digit lot numberP = 1-digit plat code, or to indicate

platted versus unplattedPL = 2-digit plat codePLT = 3-digit plat codePLAT = 4-digit plat codePLAT5 = 5-digit plat codeQ = 1-digit quarter section code (1-4 MLMIS

standard; e.g., 1 = NE, 2 = NW, 3 = SW, 4 = SE)QQ = 2-digit quarter-quarter code (11-44 MLMIS

standard; e.g., 11 = NENE, 43 = SWSE)qq = 2-digit quarter-quarter code

(not MLMIS standard)qq# = 3-digit code, ranges of which relate to

specific quarter-quarter sectionsREM = 3-digit code for remarks (e.g., specifying

personal property or mobile home)RG = 2-digit PLS range numberSC = 2-digit PLS section numberSEC = 3-digit PLS section number

(the first digit will always be 0)S = 1-digit number used to keep track of parcel splitsSP = 2-digit number used to keep track of parcel splitsSPL = 3-digit number used to keep track of parcel

splits (also may be used for lot number)TC = 2-digit township or city (political taxing

jurisdiction) code (also called �district�or �taxing district�)

TCC = 3-digit township or city (political taxingjurisdiction) code (also called �district�or �taxing district�)

TP = 2-digit PLS township numberTWP = 3-digit PLS township number## = 2-digit unique number### = 3-digit unique number#### = 4-digit unique number##### = 5-digit unique number######= 6-digit unique number####### = 7-digit unique number


Aitkin . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC P ######

Anoka . . . . . . 12 . . . SC TP RG QQ SUFF

Becker . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SC ## SPL (unplatted)TC BK LT SPL (platted)

Beltrami . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP

Benton . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP

Big Stone . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Blue Earth . . . 12 . . . CO TC SC qq# ### . . . . . . . . . . . . . The TC code here is a unique code for each Public LandSurvey township and range in the county.

Brown . . . . . . 14 . . . TCC SEC qq# ## SPL (unplatted) . . . �qq#�: e.g. NE = 001, NW = 002, etc.TCC PLT BLK LT SPL (platted)

Carlton . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC QQ ## (unplatted) . . . . . . . . Last 4 digits may be some other unique number instead ofTC PLT BK LT (platted) �QQ ##� or �BK LT�.

Carver . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Cass . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC QQ ## (unplatted)TC PLT BK LT (platted)

Chippewa . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC QQ ## (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Chisago . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP

Clay . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC QQ ## (unplatted) . . . . . . . . Some variations on the QQ code do not match MLMISTC PLT BK LT (platted) (5 = N1/2, 6 = W1/2, 7 = S1/2, 8 = E1/2).

Clearwater . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Cook . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC P BK LOT S (organized) . . . . . . . . �P� = plat number; �T� = last digit of PLS townshipRG T SC QQ SP (unorganized) number; �S� = parcel splits.

Cottonwood . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Crow Wing . . 15 . . . TC SEC QQ GL ### SPL (unplatted)TC PLT BLK LOT F SPL (platted)

Dakota . . . . . . 13 . . . SC TWP RG qq #### (surveyor) . . . The surveyor�s office uses a new code. A lookup table exists12 TC PLAT5 LOT BK (assessor) to match the old PIN (assessor�s) to the new one.

Eventually all county departments will change to the new PIN.

Dodge . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Douglas . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 4-digit number is the section or parcel number.

Faribault . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted) . . . . . . . . Last 4 digits may be some other unique number instead ofTC PLT LT BK (platted) �LT BK�.

Fillmore . . . . . . 8 . . . TC ######

Freeborn . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

PIN Formats Used by Minnesota Counties, 1996County Digits Format Comments


Goodhue . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Grant . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 4-digit number is parcel number by location in city ortownship.

Hennepin . . . . 13 . . . SC TWP RG QQ ####

Houston. . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Hubbard . . . . . 9 . . . TC SC ##### (unplatted)TC PL ##### (platted)

Isanti . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Itasca . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC QQ ## (unplatted) . . . . . . . . Last 4 digits may be some other unique number instead ofTC PLT BK LT (platted) �QQ ##� or �BK LT�.

Jackson . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Kanabec . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 5-digit unique parcel number represents chronologicalorder of parcel creation; geographic reference for everyparcel has been lost over time.

Kandiyohi . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Kittson . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ? SC #### . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The �?� indicates if a parcel is in traction.

Koochiching . . . 9 . . . TC SC QQ ### (unplatted QQ)TC SC �0� GL ##(unplatted government lot)TC PL BK LT # (platted)

Lac qui Parle . . 9 . . . TC #######

Lake . . . . . . . . 11 . . . TC TP RG ##### (unplatted)TC PLAT ##### (platted)

Lake of theWoods . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SC QQ ### (unplatted)

TC PL BK ### (platted)

Le Sueur . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted) . . . . . . . . The 4-digit unique number involves ranges of numbersTC PLT LT BK (platted) that relate to parcels within a particular quarter section

(e.g., 0100 - 2500 = NW).

Lincoln . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Lyon . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

McLeod . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Mahnomen . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Marshall . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL



Martin . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Meeker . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Mille Lacs . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Morrison . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Mower . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Murray . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC ### S (unplatted) . . . . . . . . �S� = parcel splits.TC PLT ### S (platted)

Nicollet . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted) . . . . . . . . The county uses a map number in conjunction with theTC PLT #### (platted) PIN on tax records to help locate the parcel.

Nobles . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### REM

Norman . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Olmsted . . . . . 10 . . . T R SC ##### . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �T� = the last digit of the PLS township number;�R� = the last digit of the PLS range number.

Otter Tail . . . . 14 . . . TC REM SC #### SPL (unplatted) . . The TC code is a unique code for each Public Land SurveyTC REM PL #### SPL (platted) township and range in the county.

Pennington . . . 9 . . . TC SC ### SP (unplatted)TC PL ### SP (platted)

Pine . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 4-digit unique parcel number represents chronologicalorder of parcel creation; geographic reference for everyparcel has been lost over time.

Pipestone . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Polk . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 5-digit unique parcel number is ordered by section,but randomly within sections.

Pope . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Ramsey . . . . . 12 . . . SC TP RG QQ ####

Red Lake . . . . . 4 . . . ####

Redwood . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC Q ### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Renville . . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 5-digit unique parcel number is grouped in numericalranges based on school district area.

Rice . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Rock . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #######

Roseau . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #######



St. Louis . . . . . 12 . . . TCC �0010� ##### (unplatted) . . . The 5-digit unique number started in northeast corner ofTCC PLAT ##### (platted) the northeast-most section and went counterclockwise

around each section. This system has broken down due tothe sheer number of splits and passage of time. Severedmineral rights, railroad leases and so on are identified byplat numbers greater than 7000.

Scott . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Sherburne . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC QQ ## (unplatted) . . . . . . . . Last 4 digits may be some other unique number instead ofTC PLT BK LT (platted) �QQ ##� or �BK LT�.

Sibley . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SC ## SPL

Stearns . . . . . 11 . . . TCC ##### SPL

Steele . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT BK LT (platted)

Stevens . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Swift . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Todd . . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL

Traverse . . . . . . 9 . . . TC #### SPL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 3-digit �SPL� indicates a split in a parcel or a lotnumber.

Wabasha . . . . . 9 . . . TC ##### SP

Wadena . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC Q ### . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 3-digit unique number is a counterclockwise counterfor the quarter section starting from NE1/4-NE1/4.

Waseca . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Washington . . 13 . . . SC TWP RG QQ #### . . . . . . . . . . . In transition from old 9-digit to new 13-digit format.9 PLAT5 #### (old PIN)

Watonwan . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Wilkin . . . . . . . 9 . . . TC SEC #### (unplatted)TC PLT #### (platted)

Winona . . . . . . 9 . . . TC PLT ####

Wright . . . . . . 12 . . . TC1 TC2 SC QQ ## (unplatted) . . . . �TC1� = the city or civil township, �TC2� = a unique codeTC1 PLT BLK LT # (platted) for each PLS township and range.

Yellow Medicine 9 . . . TC SEC Q#Q# (unplatted) . . . . . . . . �Q#Q#� = similar to MLMIS standard; �#�s used for tractTC PLT BK LT (platted) numbers and splits (e.g., 1020 = NW-NE).


land parcels identifying - national cadnationalcad.org/download/minnesota-gisparcel.pdf · parcel...

Documents