Ballot Measure Is Referendum on Rural Area’s Quality of Life : Development: The 150 homes and private country club would generate much-needed revenue, but opponents say the project would irreparably damage the city’s ambience.

Jill Kowalik’s vision of La Habra Heights includes lush hillsides, winding roads and grazing deer. Where Kowalik sees an escape from city life, Donald Miller sees million-dollar homes and an 18-hole golf course.

On Tuesday, voters will decide which vision prevails.

On the ballot is a measure that would allow a developer to build 150 homes and a private country club in one of the area’s most secluded canyons.

For months, sparring factions have exchanged insults publicly, but they agree on one point: The proposed Powder Canyon project has become a referendum on the city’s future.

La Habra Heights was established by a group of residents who wanted to protect their rural enclave against development. Fifteen years later, the community of 6,000 residents, where the median value of homes is $450,000, still has no grocery store, gas station or post office.

But it is entertaining a plan to dig, grade and build on 540 acres in a remote canyon on the city border with Rowland Heights and Hacienda Heights. Residents and officials have been debating the proposal for six years.

Critics fear that the project will open their mountainous hideaway to noise, traffic and other problems. The developer of the Powder Canyon project proposes bulldozing more than 8 million cubic yards of earth--enough to cover all the city’s roads 40 feet high, Kowalik said.

Opponents also contend that the project will destroy fragile plant and animal life in the canyon, which is part of a wildlife corridor stretching from the Puente Hills to the Whittier Hills.

“If this goes through, La Habra Heights is going to look like any other Southern California subdivision in 10 years,” said Kowalik, co-chairwoman of a citizens committee that is fighting the plan. “We think that other developers are watching the outcome of this election to see if they can expect to receive the same leniency from the city.”

Supporters cite the financial benefits for the cash-strapped city, which has only one business--another country club. To balance its $3-million budget, the city has cut the time City Hall is open from 40 to 36 hours a week and slashed staff salaries 10%.

The city will receive $6.8 million in fees under the agreement with the developer, Torrance-based Forum Country Clubs of California. Annual property and sales tax revenues are expected to generate an additional $100,000 once the project is completed in 10 to 20 years, according to the developer.

Four of the five City Council members support the plan, in part because of those benefits. They said the city cannot deprive a property owner of the right to develop a site, but can place limits to ensure that the result fits with the city’s character.

Officials said that expensive homes have been built in the city for years, and that the Powder Canyon proposal is a continuation of the trend. “Some of the old-timers still have this vision of wide-open spaces where you can do whatever you want,” Mayor Diane Kane said. “Newer residents want a more upscale style of life. They like their tennis courts, swimming pools, 8,000-square-foot homes and six-car garages.”

Before the developer can break ground, he needs voter approval for General Plan amendments that would allow more grading and more homes than are accepted elsewhere in the city.

Kane and her council colleagues insist that the homes and golf course have been designed to complement the city’s rural charm. Four miles of equestrian trails will be added, along with trees and vegetation to replace those lost during construction.

The developer said those measures will help minimize any disruption to the area’s ecosystem. However, a state-required environmental review said the project will cause irreparable harm to some wildlife habitats in the canyon area.

In recent months, the debate has taken on a decidedly nasty tone. Opponents of the project have heckled and booed council members during meetings. Earlier this month, Kane closed a meeting on city finances before public testimony could be heard because of disruptions at two previous meetings.

While jeering the council, opponents of the project complained that a proposed 3% utility users tax also on the ballot is the result of the city spending an estimated $400,000 over six years on legal fees and costs for the development.

Kane said the tax increase is needed to counteract state cuts and the effects of the recession, including lower than expected developer fees.

Opponents also produced a flyer detailing four recent real estate bankruptcies that Forum’s chief executive officer, Donald Miller, was involved in. Miller said the bankruptcies are unrelated to the Powder Canyon project.

City Hall was accused of censorship earlier this month after officials prohibited the project’s opponents from airing a videotape of a meeting on the local public access channel. Officials said the channel was not for community groups but for governmental use.

Councilmen Richard Newbre and John G. Powers had to disqualify themselves from voting on the project last year because of conflicts of interest. However, they have joined Kane and Councilman George B. Cooke in lobbying for the project.

Powder Canyon Proposal Plan calls for the construction of 150 homes and a golf course in Powder Canyon in the northeast corner of La Habra Heights.