General Permits (7802)

-Y
CERTIFICATION OF EXEMPTION
FROM REQUIRING A CAMA PERMIT
as authorized by the State of North Carolina,
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources and the Coastal Resources Commission
in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15 NCAC Subchapter 7K .0203.
Applicant Name Phone Number A 319to
Address
City State Zip -7
Project Location (County, State Road, Water Body, etc.)
Type and Dimensions of Project l l
The proposed project to be located and constructed as described
above is hereby certified as exempt from the CAMA permit re-
quirement pursuant to 15 NCAC 7K .0203. This exemption to
CAMA permit requirements does not alleviate the necessity of
your obtaining any other State, Federal, or Local authorization.
This certification of exemption from requiring a CAMA permit is
valid for g0 days from the date of issuance. Following expiration,
a re-examination of the project and project site may be necessary
to continue this certification.
I SKETCH (SCALE: )
f
C7'�,.Z
TX
— - T_
Any person who proceeds with a development without the con-
sent of a CAMA official under the mistaken assumption that the
development is exempted, will be in violation of the CAMA if there
is a subsequent determination that a permit was required for the
development.
The applicant certifies by signing this exemption that (1) the ap-
plicant has read and will abide by the conditions of this exemp-
tion, and (2) a written statement has been obtained from adjacent
landowners certifying that they have no objections to the
proposed work.
CAMA Official's signature
Issuing date
Expiration date
Attachment: 15 North Carolina Administrative Code 7K .0203

JAN 01 '93 12:01AM
an
ADJACENT RIPAR AN PROPERTY OWNER STATEMENT
I hereby certify that I own property adjacent to R k- - 7? ►"L S`ft, tT-* 's
(Name of Property Owner)
property located at DK --r-H AV -t:--
(Lot, Block, Road, etc.)
on , in 0 Q16l R Tm2 , N. C.
(Waterbody) (Town and/or County)
He has described to me m shown below, the development he is proposing at that location,
and, I have no objections to his proposal.
DESCRIPTION AND/OR DRAWING OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
(To be flied in by individual proposing development)
?2o P©stP S' Qgs 6KAeO 5�rAw4u.
--tv (0k) o�-'
p9, (L--NTA-'IV MAN
-
�1� �J�
Signatur
-Fow O' «
Print or Type Name
a 4-q -o
Telephone Number
Date: 7— 2 — 00

JAN 01 192 12r02AM r
P.5
—010
-�O )- 11-le, 4e,
ru-
ru
s,
r- Poetaga
.-9
CCndled Fep
t7
Return Roce pt Fee
r4 (E:ndor-^ment Rcgwredl
O (E don eteMdeDeiveapqu Fe-
d)
Toml Pactage a Fans
O
mNBrne (Pleq^e Prl ,I Cres
_Jay .l.
Cr el Apt No,; or PO t
Ir
t7 GrT �t9{s, 7lP+4
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3, Also complete
item 4 1 Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
to Attach this card to the back Of the maiipiec®,
or on the front if space permits.
1, Article Addressed to: r� -� ,"
A-
C, signature ❑ Agent
! pddra
D. Is d-! very addFON dttterard from item 11 d' Yes
It Yes, enter delivery addtsss below: ❑ No
3. S2rvI�TYPe
Qr��� ertifit:d Mail ❑ Expret3a Mali
` ❑ Reg-rstered C1 Return Racelpt for MereHendise
C] Insured Mail ❑ CA.D,
4. Restricted Deiivery7 (EXIM Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number (Copy rrnm service label) 7_0
L67 `Y v C_ v (�
PS Form 3811, July 1999
Domestic Return Receipt 02595 do•M•0952

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
©ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
1 ��f� DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
August 14, 2000
NCDENR
Mrs. Jan Hinman JAMES B. HUNT JR. Post Office BOX 998
GOVERNOR Oriental, North Carolina 28571
Dear Mrs. Hinman:
BILL HOLMAN
SECRETARY This correspondence is in reference to your objection to a proposed bulkhead project by
Mr. Tom Smith, an adjacent riparian property owner. The proposed project site is located
at 402 South Street in Oriental along the Neuse River in Pamlico County. The project
DONNA D. MOFFITT involves the installation of approximately 113 feet of vinyl bulkhead landward of the
DIRECTOR existing rock rip rap and the normal water level.
In a letter dated August 3, 2000, and during our site meeting on August 9, 2000, you
discussed your concerns with me in some detail. The primary issue that you raised
involved the inability of the proposed bulkhead to allow stormwater and/or groundwater
to drain through the face of the structure. You indicated to me during our August 9t'
meeting that if the proposed project could be modified to include drainage allowance
measures then your concerns would be alleviated. I have spoken with the contractor
regarding this issue and he intends to install weep holes through the bulkhead face to
allow for some natural drainage to occur. I informed you of this modification earlier
today by phone and as previously discussed, you indicated that the proposed drainage
modification adequately addressed your concerns.
As we discussed, this project is consistent with the appropriate regulations and I am
proceeding with the issuance of a Certificate of Exemption to Mr. Tom Smith for the
aforementioned project as of the date of this correspondence.
Thank you for your comments and consideration regarding this matter. Please do not
hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.
Sincerely-,
Scott Jones
Coastal Management Field Representative
Cc: File
Mr. Bill Plumlee, Contractor
Mr. Skip Lee, Pamlico Co. Inspections
R9577
!N' AMER 7'GA"'
MORE EAD CITY OFFICE
HESTRON PLAZA II, 1S1-B HIGHWAY 24, MOREHEAD CITY NC 28557
PHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED / 10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER
DENR TOLL FREE HOTLINE: [phone]

rr� NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
©. , ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
August 14, 2000
NCDENR
Mrs. Jan Hinman .TAMES B. HUNT JR. Post Office Box 998
.GOVERNOR Oriental, North Carolina 28571
Dear Mrs. Hinman:
BILL HOLMAN
SECRETARY This correspondence is in reference to your objection to a proposed bulkhead project by
Mr. Tom Smith, an adjacent riparian property owner. The proposed project site is located
at 402 South Street in Oriental along the Neuse River in Pamlico County. The project
DONNA D. MOFFITT involves the installation of approximately 113 feet of vinyl bulkhead landward of the
DIRECTOR existing rock rip rap and the normal water level.
In a letter dated August 3, 2000, and during our site meeting on August 9, 2000, you
discussed your concerns with me in some detail. The primary issue that you raised
involved the inability of the proposed bulkhead to allow stormwater and/or groundwater
to drain through the face of the structure. You indicated to me during our August 9t'
meeting that if the proposed project could be modified to include drainage allowance
measures then your concerns would be alleviated. I have spoken with the contractor
regarding this issue and he intends to install weep holes through the bulkhead face to
allow for some natural drainage to occur. I informed you of this modification earlier
today by phone and as previously discussed, you indicated that the proposed drainage
modification adequately addressed your concerns.
As we discussed, this project is consistent with the appropriate regulations and I am
proceeding with the issuance of a Certificate of Exemption to Mr. Tom Smith for the
aforementioned project as of the date of this correspondence.
Thank you for your comments and consideration regarding this matter. Please do not
hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.
Sincerely:
Scott Jones
ram t`n Coastal Management Field Representative
Cc: File
Mr. Bill Plumlee, Contractor
,/f Ir. Skip Lee, Pamlico Co. Inspections
MOREHEAD CITY OFFICE
HESTRON PLAZA 11, 1 51 -8 HIGHWAY 24, MOREHEAD CITY NC 28557
PHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED / 10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER
DENR TOLL FREE HOTLINE: [phone]

Jan Hinman
Charles Hinman
William Thorp
Pat Webster
c/o Jan Hinman
P.O. Box 998
Oriental, North Carolina 28571
Mr. Scott Jones
Coastal Management Field Representative
North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza II, 151-B Highway 24
Morehead City, NC 28557
RE: Seawall of Mr. Tom Smith at 402 South Avenue, Oriental, NC
28 August 2000
Dear Mr. Jones:
RECEIVE®
AUG 2 9 2006
COASTAL AMAUEMENT
This is from the landowners of the adjacent property immediately to the west of Mr. Tom
Smith in response to your letter of 14 August to Jan Hinman. .
1. Your letter does not accurately convey the concerns of Mrs. Hinman. The
modification of the seawall as you suggested in your telephone conversation a few days
after your visit the week of August 9 is better that no attention to drainage, but it does
not adequately addresses our concerns, as so stated to you by Mrs. Hinman. We still
have serious questions that remain unanswered.
2. Upon your visit to the site in Oriental, you indicated that Mr. Smith would have to file
for a higher level permit since he did not follow the proper protocol in his first application.
He sent a misleading document to the Hinmans by certified mail, in which it was stated
that there should be an accompanying drawing. There was no drawing included. He
requested a waiver on the 15' distance between construction and the neighboring
property line, and this apparently was an inappropriate request.
3. Further, no notification whatsoever was sent to the other owners of the adjacent
property. You assured the Hinmans that all parties would be notified of the next level
request for a seawall permit along with explanatory d awings by certified mail. To date,
none of us has received these documents, and there ;gas been no communication to Dr.
Webster and Mr. Thorp whatsoever about this matter. (For the record, Mr. Thorp came
to Oriental for the purpose of discussing this matter with Mr. Smith, and Mr. Smith flatly
refused to meet with him)

Ar.
L. . . . . . . . . . . .

Sri' =�"rr. � •wl,_-
�F �. �1, it S A¢ !~ �' ..1� ..'�•
., Wry ♦ iC •� i.}� _ � n4.
r 46 ..
glk-
t SI' • %fir � - r 4 �i;�,,.s 7 ."
rw�'� �,�+ c , �♦ tr..i �st����,r y �r cy✓ �'�'St}ft` ��er``?Rt�
-� J ►�•�sp'Jr� i b �. �'''+li�`.'F+� y':.� ,.3.Olif .Vry♦j, 50+'- al!•si:`:;H

-/�- 0-�Oc)
4

le
4. We want to be clear that we strongly object to your issuance of a Certificate of
Exemption to Mr. Tom Smith for the aforementioned project.
While you indicated in your letter of 14 August that you have spoken with the contractor
regarding this issue and that he intends to install weep holes through the bulkhead face
to allow for some natural drainage to occur, we have to date no substantive proof that
the installation of weepholes would prevent erosion on our adjoining property. This is
despite the fact that we have repeatedly asked for proof from either Mr. Tom Smith or
from you since the time at which we became aware of this proposed project. Substantial
proof would consist of either scientifically documented studies of the existence of such
seawalls and the related safety of adjoining land from erosion, or any information
regarding the existence of such seawalls in this or other areas along the Neuse, and
credible testimony as to the lack of erosion of adjacent property by property owners of
adjoining land.
Enclosed are photographs of a similar vinyl seawall installed at Dolphin Point with
noticeable erosion on adjoining property. These seawalls at Dolphin Point were installed
after fast year's hurricanes, the one installed by Mr. Smith's contractor about one month
ago. There is evidence of erosion even before any major storms occurred.
Your speaking to the contractor about the installation of weep holes does not in fact
insure that weep holes will be installed, nor does it insure that weep holes will be
installed in sufficient quantities to prevent erosion of our property.
We are assuming that your letter of 14 August 2000 is not a substitute for the
aforementioned next level permit, since it was only addressed to Ms. Hinman and did
not arrive by certified mail.
We have some confusion about Administrative Code 1100, .1104(d), as we read it, and
your issuing a permit to Mr. Tom Smith for this bulkhead. GS .1104(d) reads as follows:
BEWS131-119
tQ rt dsct� cong6bb$ Where the
on awnitial review of this application, that
is ne5sary because there are
"�i� Ns Wi�' ning the proposed ads impact on adjoining
pt't�'t� etc.
To date, we have unresolved questions concerning the proposed activity's impact on
(our) adjoining property and are not sure upon what data you believe these questions to
be resolved. We have requested engineering drawings of the proposed bulkhead as well
as evidence of such bulkheads that were in place before the advent of hurricanes
Dennis and Floyd. Thus far, we have had no cooperation from anyone in demonstrating
that this method of protecting the shoreline is valid.
It is our understanding that the Division of Coastal Management itself is debating these

issues and is considering the prohibition of hardened seawalls along the rivers. If they,
too, are in doubt, then it seems to us that our misgivings should be given serious
attention
We will begin immediately to measure land at the edge of our property and will hold both
your department and Mr. Smith accountable for erosion on our property pursuant to the
installation of a bulkhead in front of Mr. Smith's property.
It sincerely is not our wish or intent to be difficult or adversarial in this process, either
with you or with Mr. Smith. However, our unease about the potential erosion of our
property has not been laid to rest and we continue to feel unheard and unresponded to
in any way in this process. We want to go on record that we object and do not give our
consent to the installation of this bulkhead. Either of two actions would be alleviate our
anxieties about this matter
A. The installation of a revetment that permits high water to return to the sea as rapidly
as possible over and through the ground;
B. Reassuring substantive data as mentioned in paragraph 2, subsection 1., above.
Sincerely,
\X"\�
Charles Hinman
Jan Hinman
W4��-�-�.-
William Thorp
Patricia Webster
Addendum: As of the date of this mailing, the installation of the seawall is almost
complete, and there are no weepholes and the drainage is grossly inadequate.
Cc: Bill Holman, Secretary, NCDENR
Donna Moffitt, Director

• . .•
11c �s
a? 2 5-7(, S•�,
SERVICE
R.uk-
oute 11
R
Del ivery Polnt
1 6 3 8
Coastal mana ement
Pksreiii #
70993400000055087971
IIIII IIIIi.IIIiIIIIIIIi li illli I Idlll
IGo6
1vG f7cPf� o—f �,v;ec�a�su1el
A4 1i- ,oJ S UG.rcc,s /
oaJ al c� 5 /� / /ijG h a 5 e Ise
1!!�117!11%!j)!!Ill1i�117/�llit�tt!!!1t1�7

A
a

8 -/9- a" °
4(,v41
�L (ti 41 a d a

41�
I
A
Va
Yo

Y- /9- ca" -6
1

�.,�, ���
�d Q c��'a cev� �_,� �� f ���

Jan Hinman
Charles Hinman
William Thorp
Pat Webster
c/o Jan Hinman
P.O. Box 998
Oriental, North Carolina 28571
Mr. Scott Jones
Coastal Management Field Representative
North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza II, 151-B Highway 24
Morehead City, NC 28557
RE: Seawall of Mr. Tom Smith at 402 South Avenue, Oriental, NC
28 August 2000
Dear Mr. Jones:
This is from the landowners of the adjacent property immediately to the west of Mr. Tom
Smith in response to your letter of 14 August to Jan Hinman. .
1. Your letter does not accurately convey the concerns of Mrs. Hinman. The
modification of the seawall as you suggested in your telephone conversation a few days
after your visit the week of August 9 is better that no attention to drainage, but it does
not adequately addresses our concerns, as so stated to you by Mrs. Hinman. We still
have serious questions that remain unanswered.
2. Upon your visit to the site in Oriental, you indicated that Mr. Smith would have to file
for a higher level permit since he did not follow the proper protocol in his first application.
He sent a misleading document to the Hinmans by certified mail, in which it was stated
that there should be an accompanying drawing. There was no drawing included. He
requested a waiver on the 15' distance between construction and the neighboring
property line, and this apparently was an inappropriate request.
3. Further, no notification whatsoever was sent to the other owners of the adjacent
property. You assured the Hinmans that all parties would be notified of the next level
request for a seawall permit along with explanatory drawings by certified mail. To date,
none of us has received these documents, and there has been no communication to Dr.
Webster and Mr. Thorp whatsoever about this matter. (For the record, Mr. Thorp came
to Oriental for the purpose of discussing this matter with Mr. Smith, and Mr. Smith flatly
refused to meet with him)

4. We want to be clear that we strongly object to your issuance of a Certificate of
Exemption to Mr. Tom Smith for the aforementioned project.
While you indicated in your letter of 14 August that you have spoken with the contractor
regarding this issue and that he intends to install weep holes through the bulkhead face
to allow for some natural drainage to occur, we have to date no substantive proof that
the installation of weepholes would prevent erosion on our adjoining property. This is
despite the fact that we have repeatedly asked for proof from either Mr. Tom Smith or
from you since the time at which we became aware of this proposed project. Substantial
proof would consist of either scientifically documented studies of the existence of such
seawalls and the related safety of adjoining land from erosion, or any information
regarding the existence of such seawalls in this or other areas along the Neuse, and
credible testimony as to the lack of erosion of adjacent property by property owners of
adjoining land.
Enclosed are photographs of a similar vinyl seawall installed at Dolphin; Point with
noticeable erosion on adjoining property. These seawalls at Dolphin Point were installed
after last year's hurricanes, the one installed by Mr. Smith's contractor about one month
ago. There is evidence of erosion even before any major storms occurred.
Your speaking to the contractor about the installation of weep holes does not in fact
insure that weep holes will be installed, nor does it insure that weep holes will be
installed in sufficient quantities to prevent erosion of our property.
We are assuming that your letter of 14 August 2000 is not a substitute for the
aforementioned next level permit, since it was only addressed to Ms. Hinman and did
not arrive by certified mail.
We have some confusion about Administrative Code 1100, .1104(d), as we read it, and
your issuing a permit to Mr. Tom Smith for this bulkhead. GS .1104(d) reads as follows:
To date, we have unresolved questions concerning the proposed activity's impact on
(our) adjoining property and are not sure upon what data you believe these questions to
be resolved. We have requested engineering drawings of the proposed bulkhead as well
as evidence of such bulkheads that were in place before the advent of hurricanes
Dennis and Floyd. Thus far, we have had no cooperation from anyone in demonstrating
that this method of protecting the shoreline is valid.
It is our understanding that the Division of Coastal Management itself is debating these

issues and is considering the prohibition of hardened seawalls along the rivers. If they,
too, are in doubt, then it seems to us that our misgivings should be given serious
attention
We will begin immediately to measure land at the edge of our property and will hold both
your department and Mr. Smith accountable for erosion on our property pursuant to the
installation of a bulkhead in front of Mr. Smith's property.
It sincerely is not our wish or intent to be difficult or adversarial in this process, either
with you or with Mr. Smith. However, our unease about the potential erosion of our
property has not been laid to rest and we continue to feel unheard and unresponded to
in any way in this process. We want to go on record that we object and do not give our
consent to the installation of this bulkhead. Either of two actions would be alleviate our
anxieties about this matter
A. The installation of a revetment that permits high water to return to the sea as rapidly
as possible over and through the ground;
B. Reassuring substantive data as mentioned in paragraph 2, subsection 1., above.
Sincerely,
\ � Vtk Q__
Charles Hinman
Jan Hinman
William Thorp
Patricia Webster
Addendum: As of the date of this mailing, the installation of the seawall is almost
complete, and there are no weepholes and the drainage is grossly inadequate.
Cc: Bill Holman, Secretary, NCDENR
Donna Moffitt, Director

-08/29/2000 14:17 2527457067 BUILDING INSPECTIONS PAGE 01
FAX TRANSMISSION
PAMLICO COUNTY BtUVING INSPECTIONS
PO Box 776
BAyQ0RQ. NC 28515
252/745-3e8 1
FAX: [phone]
To:
Scott Jones Date:
Fax #:
247-3330 Pages:
From:
.Amy W. Spruill
Subject:
Hirinw
CONI1ti1ENTS:
August 29, 2000
3, including this cover sheet.

..aa .a•aa s¢ • � W r NA—. a -a,
ET VIR CHARLES s
r " NI rpm, ,
78M 1
DOZ
J08Z-(Q)-431-
.
231 BOWERY
NEW YOIt1C CITY KY IOOOZ
AccNium
1408500
Topo: LEVEL
Uto7s: PUB W tR SEP SYS
TraGga.
m
C
UIL DPD UDM995 Info By: E.MM:
WALL ST & SOUTH AVE
Strt: PAVED
LMAT.
TRAC:
N
LD
Review; BS 1010411995
RD.
Deed: 32-7 394
FRONTAGE CORRECTED 8Y SURVEY
Appeal: ! / RUG:8I2912008 15:11
CITY: OR Fire• S
TO DEED
CDoninv
Ca
m
PIAt:
WALL ST & SOUTH AVE
Values - -
Land -- — — — —
i
Assessed Previous
Value Value
CosVAcre: 0
R%f: 0.00
-- — —
$ DescripM1iou Mill Cis Grd Size
De BaseRt
— — — — —
Adjlzate useValue Mkt Value
�
Land-. 73,402
44,070
1 WF iJBS N/UT F 40 K 69-00
250.00 995
1064
Bldg: 0
0 UseVal
73401
Otbr: 1,608
330
0
cNn
ToW: 75,010
44,400
'•
N
Sale: S 1012911997 0
Traats; 0
-j
m
NBHR: 0.001 0.001 0.00
r Building —
AtticJBAsempht
Area Value Built Ins Nrmm Value — — i — — —
LW-, Value Pf Hym Vale i
i
t
PC Section Description
f
Class Grd E:tFin
,
I 1 NoBIQg
999
I
r Other Features
—
Section Description Chess
Grd Coma ,u
ll�o - --—---:------
I cost;
j DBA:
—
YrBk:
YrRmd:
--- I RiPRAP 29
E
Fuel:
YrEtT:
Fb&-.
physC;
Hoof.
FEDP:
WOR:
DM:
0
nor:
sudVAL
Rhut:
Rms:
BR: j
W
T«Aumo lwwe Dep..ARerDe : ~
HeaVAC Area S_yt H )yM RepoMtw Eff•yr FB Value i a
1.00 1.00 Z
! H
Z
m
H
0
(n
sty
Ht Area BeseRt Lund YrBk Value
1.00 100 Z4.75 35 16091
I
v
D
m

.0 �� vcia •aa.ai �ra�
ET VIR CHARLES
�
NC.
S
ffm
TT"
1
B
231 BOWERY
AccWum
/ramom
D02 .f(�ZrEQ�'419-
NEW YORK CITY NY $0002
2408500
WALL ST & SOUTH AVE 401
Tapp:
LEVEL
Tr�4c:
CD
KING ST & SOUTH STREET
UtX
vv PUB TR ELECTR
sFx SYS LMAT:
N
Gist: DPD 8/08/1995 Info By: E
SIM
PAVED
MIIS: TRAC:
Ln
Review. BS 10/0411995
RD
Deed:
189 Ill
Appeal: I I Ran: &* W280o i5: i I
Zouing:
CITY: OR
FYre: S
Win:
m
CS)
m
WALL ST �$. SOUTH AVE 401
- Values --
-
- Land—
Assessed Previous
Cost/Acre:_-
—
— —
A
Value Valvc
Hsi: 5,376.00
� Description Mth Ch Grd Site
—
De h
�Rt Adiliate Use Vaine Mkt
—
Vahie
N
Lands 36,170
34,070
1 RESIDENT WIU
F 28 D 67,00
203.00
490
$ - 84,380
33,570 U*Val
-U9
36770
Othr: 0
0 0
CNn
Tots1: 121,1S0
67,640
N
�
Sale: 3/01/1977 1.200
Tracts: 0
Cn
' NBHR: 0.00 / 0.0010.00
m
m
�
f
- Building
ji
Atti fBasemem Area
Value Built Ins
Num
Value Chmu
N. Value Plmh Nunn
Value 1
ATTIC F 1584
19ti08
---Y-
3FXBTH 2
3600
j
Openings:
+
C
3 4
r
PC Pt inu-
Class Grd ExtFin
TatAmm $*tone Dep:
Heat/AC Area St I t
22608 AfterDep: 7347
WHT RepCztNew EHYr Fit Yaloe I
I-
c7
I
I
100 1 SINGLE FAMILY
] C+ISWOOD FRM NONE
1584 2-50
1.00 169262 ]900
55010
Z
100 2 FRM SCRIP PORCH
]00 2 1 FRM SCRN pORCH
109 C+15
108 C+15
2B8 I.00
1.00 300] 1900
910
75
H
100 3 SINGLE FAMILY
] C+15WOOD FRM NONE
288 1-00
264 1.00
1.00 3001 1900
1.0o
975
100 4 SINGLE FAMILY
I C+15 WOOD ITIM NONE
576 2.00
12004 1900
1.00 49763 190D
3901
16173
H
(
Z
—
iz
Secuon lkscription Class
Grd ConmtentsStyHl
Area
BaseRt Cand YrB# Value
EknMng do - -
-
Cnsi: CAPE COD
Yrilh:1900
DBA:
YrRmd:
PI*L-
YeEB:190D
Frsdt: PIERS
pbyyC; A
D
Roof: HIP
FEDP.
I
;
m
i Wad. PINE/CL BD
DE'PO: D
Flan: SOFTWOOD CARPET VINYL
SodVai:
i
w
J
Rfmt: COMP SHGLS
Rrns: l I BR:

-08/29/2000 14:17 2527457067
NORTH CAROLINA
PAMLICO COUNTY
BUILDING INSPECTIONS
took Page
0352 0773
FILED
PAmLIco cOUMTY
03/24/2000 9:24 AM
JOYCE E CAILAWAN
Mgiitet Of Deeds
PAGE 04
Prepared by Dunn & Dunn
WARRANTY DEED
Tax ID# J082-431
THIS DEED, made and entered into this d day of March, 2000, by and between
CHARLES B. HINMAN and wife, JANICE B. HINMAN, parties of the first part; and WILLIAM
L. THORP and wife, PATRICIA B. WEBSTER, whose address is _ Q114A M0(V (� 51-
�W H i f (j V ,.,2�, parties of the second part;
WITNESSETH:
That the parties of the first part, in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10,00)
and other good and valuable considerations to said parties paid by the parties of the second part, the
receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, have bargained and sold and by these presents do bargain,
sell, and convey unto the parties of the second part, said parties' heirs and assigns, a one-half ('/a)
undivided interest in the following described property, to wit:
All that certain tract or parcel of land lying and being situate in Number Two (2)
Township, Pamlico County, North Carolina, lying south of South Avenue, east of
Wall Street (unimproved,) and north of the Neuse River, being more particularly
described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the southern right-of-way line of South Avenue and
�m
the eastern right-of-way line of Wall Street (unimproved,) to run thence from said
POINT OR PLACE OF BEGINNING along the southern right-of-way line of South
8
d
Avenue North 77 degrees 35 minutes 00 seconds East 68.48 feet to a point, thence
leaving the southern right-of-way line to run South 13 degrees 25 00
K
�L ti
minutes seconds
East 222.19 feet to the Neuse River along an agreed Iine in accordance with that
�
M
Boundary Deed recorded in Book 327, at page 384, in the Office of the Register of
m
Deeds of Pamlico County, thence South 35 degrees 36 minutes 43 seconds West
a o
-�
75.85 feet along the Neuse River to a point, thence North 13 degrees 09 minutes I 1
c
seconds West 250.11 feet along the eastern right-of-way line of Wall Street
10;
(unimproved) to the point or place of beginning, in accordance with that "Boundary
Survey for Charles B. Hinman and .lance B. Hinman" by Dennis A. Fornes, RLS,
CCL=
dated October 15, 1997, which appears of record in Book 327, at Page 388, in the
Office of the Register of Deeds of Pamlico County.
rr^ cI