Volume 365 — North Carolina Reports

<bold>1. Appeal and Error — standard of review —</bold><bold>administrative decision — de novo</bold> A <italic>de novo</italic> standard of review applied to plaintiffs argument on appeal that defendant Board of Adjustment's (BOA) interpretation of the term "work" as used in a sign permit issued to plaintiff constituted an error of law. The BOA's interpretation was not entitled to deference. <bold>2. Zoning — sign permit — interpretation of</bold><bold>ordinance — unduly restrictive</bold> The Board of Adjustment (BOA) erred in prohibiting plaintiff from relocating a sign as necessary to accommodate a state highway project based on the BOA's determination that a sign permit issued to plaintiff had expired. The BOA's interpretation of the term "work" as used in the sign permit to mean only visible activities related to construction was too narrow and unduly restrictive. Zoning ordinances are strictly construed in favor of the free use of real property and plaintiffs actions were sufficient to constitute "work."