Lots vs. Tax parcels, PLSS

[Zeke]

I'm unclear on what the difference is between lots and tax parcels. In the video I watched on Bloomfield Twp. editing, they appeared to represent the same spatial area. The city I work for doesn't handle taxes; that's all done at the county level, so we don't use tax parcels. Our areas consist of subdivisions, lots and outblocks (parcels not in a subdivision). Lots and outblocks are stored in the same Parcels layer, but with different attribute values to differentiate them. Subdivisions can also have areas called tracts, Parcels records that aren't actually lots (usually parks, drainage, or areas planned for lots in the future).

In migrating to a parcel fabric, I might add blocks as well. In reading the Loading Data... white paper, the PLSS system appears to be used, but not sure it's required. We don't use it in Texas, at least in this area. We use metes & bounds measured from known survey monuments.

1. What is the difference between lots and tax parcels, and are both required?
2. Is the PLSS required, or can we continue with the system we have?

Thanks! Sure I'll have more questions as the process continues.

[ChrisBuscaglia]

Question 1:

Lots are definitely different than tax parcels, since you work for the city most likely you have a mixture of platted lands (subs, blocks, lots) and metes and bounds descriptions from deeds.  Tax shops will sometimes "merge" two adjacent lots to create a new Tax Parcel for the purpose of sending one tax bill. Sometimes tax parcels reference existing lots, blocks, subdivisons but don't correspond to the original platted lot(s) shape.  Sometimes Tax Parcels don't follow legal subdivision rules and regulations as the City/County may require, these are for taxes only.  Does that clear up the first question?  By the way, Tax Parcels are not necessarily required and you can bypass the last step to create tax parcels.  Moreover, would you ever merge lots at the city?  Would't that be a new subdivision, replat, tract, etc.?

The image attached shows that lots 6, 7, 8 were combined to create a new Tax Parcel (selected).  Most likely the same dude/dudette owns all 3 parcels and want's a single tax bill.  They will most likely need to go through the legal subdivision process to build anything new, and you'll have a new subdividion with new lots, blocks, etc.


Question 2:

Think of the PLSS as the "Survey Framework" in the example data from the Bloomfield Township.  You'll actually see this change with the 10.1 version of the resource center download.  The term "PLSS" could be replaced with "OTLS" in your example (Old Texas Land Survey).  This parcel type also contains many other types of "survey framework" parcel types that may apply to the republic of Texas.  This again is a non-required parcel type, but we urge you to give them a whirl.

[Zeke]

Thanks again Chris. I guess all the examples/videos/templates/etc using the term Tax Parcel made me think they were mandatory. I can see their purpose now - they're often the same as lots, but not always - but since we don't maintain tax info, we shouldn't need them.
Yes, any new divisions get platted into subdivisions & lots, but there are lots of legacy parcels that aren't platted. Merges and replats are usually, but not always, entered as new subdivisions, although we should always get a new survey for them.
I like the PLSS system, used it in Michigan, but they don't use it here. I saw the fields named PLSS in some of the schema data, and used in the white paper. Not sure the white paper is current on everything. For example, step 2, page 5, refers to the Parcels class with a Name field. I don't see that class, or a Name field in Owner or Tax Parcel classes. Maybe in an earlier version?

[ChrisBuscaglia]

All you really need to do is make sure that the proper parcel 'type' is set on the source data before you load.  For example, type 6 is conveyance divisions, you'll have to calculate thay value.  The 'Name' field is just like the type field, but it's aliased in the map document to make sense for what parcel type you are working with (Lots, Parcel Identification Number, etc.).

Does that answer the question?

[Zeke]

Thanks Chris. I've gotten test data into a parcel fabric, but haven't got as far as the LGM schema yet. The LGM model I downloaded wouldn't open the parcel fabric properties at first, although just now it seemed to work. Hmm. I will check it out. There's an LGM class coming up down in Austin next month at TNRIS, maybe I'll get to go to that.

[JohnFell]

Greg,

Instead of PLSS we use the Original Texas Land Survey or Abstracts. You may already have these in use at your organization. If not here is a link to download abstracts for your region of interest.

[Zeke]

Thanks John, I'm sure that will be useful.

[LauraTolar]

I don't do this very often so i'm rusty.  I have a new updated tax roll and want to merge the parcels together as so to group by the Tax ID.  What tool do I use?  (Actually I haven't done it in years so i'm more than rusty!) lol

Thanks,
Laura

[ChrisBuscaglia]

Hello Laura, there is a workflow for that.

http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/main/10.1/index.html#/Parcel_merge/00wp0000005p000000/

Hope this helps

Chris