Areas we buy
Sell your Colorado land for cash
Parcel Buyers buys vacant lots and land directly from owners across Colorado, with a written, no-obligation cash offer within 24 hours and closings through an independent title company. The counties below hold 69,123 vacant residential lots in the published parcel and assessment data. Each page shows local lot sizes, county assessor values and the rules that affect what a lot is worth.
Official state references
State land rules and records
General information, not legal advice. Rules can change and facts about one parcel can change the result; confirm current requirements with the agency, clerk, title company or attorney handling the transaction.
| Topic | What the official sources say |
|---|---|
| Deed documentary fee | Colorado charges a documentary fee when a deed or other written instrument conveys real-property title. No fee is due when total consideration is $500 or less. Above $500, the fee is one cent for each $100, or major fraction of $100, and the county clerk and recorder collects it. [1][2][3] |
| Property-tax sale system | Colorado counties sell a tax lien, not the land. A certificate of purchase does not change ownership. After the redemption period, the certificate holder may start the statutory process, which now includes a public auction for an option certificate before a treasurer's deed may issue. System: certificate. Interest cap: not a bid cap; the statutory annual redemption rate is nine percentage points above the September 1 federal discount rate, rounded to the nearest whole percent. Redemption or time to deed: The owner may redeem before deed execution; the certificate holder generally waits three years from the original tax-lien sale before beginning the deed process. [4][5][1] |
| Adverse possession | Colorado's general period is 18 years. A fee-simple claimant must prove the claim's common-law elements by clear and convincing evidence and show that the claimant or a predecessor reasonably and in good faith believed the possessor was the actual owner. Public property is excluded from this route. Period: 18 years under C.R.S. § 38-41-101, subject to the statute's proof requirements and exceptions. [6][1] |
| Agricultural classification changes | Colorado uses an agricultural property classification. Qualifying land is valued from its earning or productive capacity. Land that does not meet an agricultural qualification is classified according to its actual use on January 1 and valued using the applicable cost, market and income approaches; parcel facts and statutory exceptions matter. [7] |
| Remote online notarization | Colorado permits remote notarization of electronic records through real-time audio-video communication. The notary must hold an active Colorado commission, complete the required remote training and exam, register, use an approved provider and be physically in Colorado during the act; the signer may be elsewhere. [8] |
| Sale-price disclosure | Colorado's real-property transfer declaration is not publicly available for general inspection. The assessor may show it only to the grantee or filer and specified state valuation personnel. Because the declaration can supply the total sale price when the deed does not, public parcel records may have missing sale-price detail. [2][1] |
Statewide roll summary
Statewide, all 17 counties on the roll
- Matching records
- 117,292
- Counties in full file
- 17
- Outside-state mailing share
- 31%
Top five counties in the full file
Matching records
- 1. Pueblo County: 31,438
- 2. Park County: 21,975
- 3. El Paso County: 12,613
- 4. Douglas County: 10,637
- 5. Arapahoe County: 6,755
Median assessed value
- 1. Eagle County: $160,000
- 2. Mesa County: $75,000
- 3. Douglas County: $73,900
- 4. Lake County: $70,200
- 5. Archuleta County: $44,200
Outside-state mailing share
- 1. Rio Grande County: 63%
- 2. Archuleta County: 56%
- 3. Huerfano County: 41%
- 4. Park County: 38%
- 5. Pueblo County: 36%
County dataset
County-by-county land records
Stated rule: County-specific vacant residential lot classes documented in the source build; description-only counties use the published vacant class under 35 acres. Counties without a defensible state-layer rule are not measurable.
| County | Records matching stated rule | Size mix | Median assessed value | Outside-state share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adams County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Arapahoe County | 6,755 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 23% |
| Archuleta County | 3,988 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 56% |
| Boulder County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Broomfield County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Clear Creek County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Custer County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Denver County | 2,706 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 22% |
| Dolores County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Douglas County | 10,637 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 16% |
| Eagle County | 1,748 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 25% |
| El Paso County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Elbert County | 1,559 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 17% |
| Garfield County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Gilpin County | 1,262 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 29% |
| Grand County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Gunnison County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Hinsdale County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Huerfano County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Jefferson County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| La Plata County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Lake County | 1,235 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 30% |
| Larimer County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Logan County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Mesa County | 3,387 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 7% |
| Moffat County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Montezuma County | 1,492 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 27% |
| Morgan County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Ouray County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Park County | 21,975 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 38% |
| Pitkin County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Pueblo County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Rio Blanco County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Rio Grande County | 2,881 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 63% |
| Routt County | 3,188 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 31% |
| Saguache County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| San Juan County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| San Miguel County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Sedgwick County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Summit County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Teller County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Washington County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
| Weld County | 6,310 |
| Not measurable — The state file does not identify one reliable assessment year for this county value. | 18% |
| Yuma County | Not measurable — The state layer is present, but its attributes do not support the published vacant-lot rule. | Not measurable — No reliable matching-record count is published, so no lot-size distribution is measurable. | Not measurable — The state layer does not identify a reliable vacant-lot value with one assessment year. | Not measurable — No reliable owner mailing-state share is published for this county. |
Dataset schema and method
Aggregates only; no parcel rows, owner names, parcel numbers, or addresses. Assessed values are withheld because the state file does not identify one reliable assessment year. State of Colorado Public parcels were accessed on 2026-10-01 from https://gis.colorado.gov/public/rest/services/Address_and_Parcel
- county
- County name from the state-lane aggregate.
- records
- Records matching the dataset's stated vacant-land rule.
- sizeMix
- Up to three largest measured lot-size groups, with record counts and shares.
- assessedValue
- Median assessed land or parcel value and its assessment year; not a sale price or appraisal.
- outsideStateShare
- Share whose owner mailing state differs from the subject state; mailing address does not prove residence.
Source: State of Colorado, Governor's Office of Information Technology (OIT) - Colorado Public Parcels (county assessor data aggregated by the state). Generated 2026-10-01. License: Commercial aggregate use with State of Colorado attribution; source-data resale prohibited.
Common Colorado land questions
Does Colorado charge a tax when a deed is recorded?
Yes. Colorado calls it a documentary fee. It is zero when consideration is $500 or less and one cent per $100, or major fraction, when consideration exceeds $500. The county clerk and recorder collects it with the recording. [2][3]
Does buying a Colorado property-tax lien give me the land?
No. The certificate of purchase is a lien and does not transfer ownership. The owner may redeem, and a certificate holder generally must wait three years before beginning the current treasurer's-deed process, which includes a public auction step. [4][5]
How long does adverse possession take in Colorado?
Generally 18 years. Time alone is not enough: a fee-simple claimant must prove the required elements by clear and convincing evidence and satisfy Colorado's reasonable good-faith-belief requirement. Government-owned property cannot be acquired through this statutory route. [6]
What happens when Colorado land stops qualifying as agricultural?
It is classified according to its actual use on January 1 and valued under the applicable cost, market and income approaches. Agricultural land itself is instead valued from earning or productive capacity. The county assessor applies the qualification rules to the parcel's facts. [7]
Can a Colorado land document be notarized remotely?
Yes, if it is an eligible electronic record and the remote-notary requirements are met. The commissioned notary must be approved for remote work, use an approved provider and remain physically in Colorado while the parties communicate in real time by audio and video. [8]
Colorado counties and communities
Select any column heading to sort. Open a county's community list to browse every published local page.
| Arapahoe County | 6,755 | — | County hub only |
|---|---|---|---|
| Archuleta County | 3,988 | $60,000 | 5 community pages
|
| Denver County | 2,706 | — | County hub only |
| Douglas County | 10,637 | — | County hub only |
| Eagle County | 1,748 | $350,000 | County hub only |
| Elbert County | 1,559 | — | 2 community pages
|
| Gilpin County | 1,262 | $112,000 | County hub only |
| Lake County | 1,235 | — | 3 community pages
|
| Mesa County | 3,387 | $160,000 | 2 community pages
|
| Montezuma County | 1,492 | $77,500 | |
| Park County | 21,975 | — | 20 community pages
|
| Rio Grande County | 2,881 | $41,000 | 3 community pages
|
| Routt County | 3,188 | $99,500 | 2 community pages
|
| Weld County | 6,310 | — | County hub only |
Don't see your area? We buy land nationwide, in every US state. Send the parcel details through the form and we will review it the same way.
State of Colorado Public parcels were accessed on 2026-10-01 from https://gis.colorado.gov/public/rest/services/Address_and_Parcel Pueblo County GIS parcel layer; aggregate analysis by Parcel Buyers. The parcel screen is a zero-improvement proxy and has a 9.2% sampled building-footprint error band. Huerfano County public parcel layer; aggregate analysis by Parcel Buyers. Transfer dates are parcel-row fields, not prices or deed counts. El Paso County Assessor weekly parcel data; aggregate analysis by Parcel Buyers. Use is subject to the county general disclaimer.
Start to finish
What happens next
From your first message to money in hand, with nothing left out. Requesting an offer costs nothing and commits you to nothing.
See every detail of the process-
Tell us about your land
Fill out the short form (about 60 seconds) or email us. A land specialist reaches out to confirm the details, usually the same business day.
-
Get your cash offer within 24 hours
We review the property and send a written, no-obligation cash offer within 24 hours. It is a real number, not a range. Take it or leave it, with no pressure either way.
-
Sign electronically
If you accept, everyone signs the purchase agreement electronically. There is nothing to print or mail at this stage.
-
We inspect, the title company verifies
Our team inspects the land and an independent title company runs a title search for liens or taxes owed. If the land does not pass inspection, you are never charged anything.
-
Close and get paid
The title company prepares the closing documents for notarization and issues your funds by standard check, overnight check, or wire transfer. A typical sale closes in 10 days.
Your written offer
Get your cash offer
Four short steps, about 60 seconds. We review your property and send a written, no-obligation cash offer within 24 hours. You can take it or leave it.
What happens after you send this
- A land specialist reaches out, usually the same business day, to confirm the details.
- You get a written cash offer within 24 hours: a real number, not a range.
- You decide. Requesting an offer costs nothing and commits you to nothing.
You will never be asked to pay us anything. No deposit, no processing fee, no closing-cost advance.