We awarded the City this appeal. Initially, we shall review the applicable principles of law. The action of city council denying the owner's petition was legislative action, presumed to be reasonable. The presumption, while not conclusive, stands until surmounted by evidence that the legislative action was unreasonable. The litigant attacking the legislative act has the burden to establish unreasonableness.
Legislative action is reasonable if the matter in issue is fairly debatable.
An issue is fairly debatable if, when measured by quantitative and qualitative tests, the evidence offered in support of the opposing views would lead objective and reasonable persons to reach different conclusions. The following test is employed to determine whether the presumption of reasonableness should stand or fail. If the presumptive reasonableness of zoning action is challenged by probative evidence of unreasonableness, the challenge must be met by evidence of reasonableness. Upon appellate review of a trial court's ruling that the refusal of a rezoning request was arbitrary and capricious, we accord the court's finding, as in other cases, a presumption of correctness. But we also give full credit to the presumption of validity of the challenged legislative action and then, meshing the presumptions, we examine the record to determine whether the evidence sustains the court's finding.