By VICKI URBANIK

It was the classic rezoning case, pitting a farmer who wants to develop his property for a new subdivision against neighboring residents who say they want to maintain their rural quality of life.

In the end, Porter County Commissioners John Evans and Robert Harper both voted Tuesday against the petition of Keith Freyenberger, who wanted to rezone his agriculturally zoned land off Ind. 8 to Rural-Residential in order to develop a 22-lot subdivision on the 40 acres.

Though the case involved land in Pleasant Township, the arguments raised and the impact of the decision have countywide implications, since the case is one of many in which county officials must weigh the sometimes conflicting issues of the rights of property owners to develop, the impact on the county’s current zoning and land use plan, and the rights of neighbors fighting for their community.

Several of those who spoke against the rezoning say they are long-time residents of the area or that they moved to the community for its rural quality -- complete with the pig farm and the large-scale cattle operation nearby. They also said residential subdivisions ought to be built in or closer to established towns and cities.

Roger Hefner said people who have recently moved to the area have complained about the goats and donkeys at one farm and about the use of fertilizers. “They want to come to the country, but they don’t want the country,” he said.

Other residents said they find it a shame that so much good farm ground in Porter County is being turned into subdivisions. Daryl Jarnecke said property just north of Freyenberger’s is for sale, and that he fears that if the commissioners rezone his parcel, others would want to do the same, resulting in many more subdivisions.

David Sharp said existing housing in the area is sparse with eight houses in one direction of C.R. 450E and 11 houses in the other direction. “We’re out there in the country, and we’d live to keep it that way,” he said.

But Freyenberger said it isn’t fair to “put the world’s problems on my shoulders.” He said while he, too, is concerned about farming, the fact is that this country is producing more corn than needed and that corn prices last fall were lower than they were 31 years ago.

He also said the development of his property is his 401 K and that if the county doesn’t want to see farm ground developed, then it should help out the property owners financially.

“Give farmers a tax incentive not to do this,” he said.

Evans said he usually tells opponents of new developments that if they don’t like the proposed view, then they should buy the property themselves. But the problem with this case, he said, is that the property is too far removed from most residents. He said the commissioners should defer to the expertise of the Porter County Plan Commission, which recommended against the rezoning. Harper, a member of the plan commission, made no comments on the case, but seconded Evans’ motion. The third commissioner, Carole Knoblock, was absent.

•The commissioners on Tuesday had an unusually light agenda. The only other significant item they dealt with concerned the approval of a resolution transferring a county easement to the city of Portage as part of the city’s plans to extend Willowcreek Road. In exchange for the property, Portage will replace county sign and a lamp in front of the North Porter County Government Complex.

Posted 2/22/2006