Downtown’s Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal, where more than 50,000 containers of bananas enter San Diego each year, is the subject of a likely Nov. 4 ballot measure called "The Port Of San Diego Marine Freight Preservation And Bayfront Redevelopment Initiative."

In language supporting the measure, backers say it offers voters the chance to ensure maritime uses are not pushed off of the landfill-turned terminal in 1958, and to supplement that with tourism-type uses and bike paths. Opponents, who cheer safeguarding industrial marine activities like the terminal accommodates, say when you peel back the details, the measure is actually quite slippery.

Whitney Benzian, a spokesperson for the Save Our Working Waterfront Coalition formed to defeat the initiative, says it is ballot box planning designed to marginalize maritime industry. He is dubious that industrial and tourism can mix. "Are you going to have huge cranes carrying windmills out of cargo ships right next to hotels?" he asks. "It is just not going to work."

Nancy Chase, who with her husband Richard is behind the initiative, declined to comment until the signature counting — 60,000 were submitted while 35,000 are needed — is complete later this month.

The 16-page document supporting the Chase proposal describes new recreational and cultural attractions supportive of marine freight operations. Examples listed include an aquarium, cruise ships, parks, bike paths, pedestrian walkways, an amphitheater or arena for sporting events, hotels, restaurants and specialty shopping.

The changes to the port’s approved master plan — which must be approved by the state Coastal Commission — allow for development of up to 96 acres of air rights above the terminal to accommodate industrial and commercial uses while simultaneously permitting new public, recreational, cultural and visitor-serving commercial uses.

Existing freight would be preserved, the measure says, with new freight attracted by modernizing or constructing new facilities. That language appears to rule out a long-term role for much of the existing, and aging, million square feet of warehouse space.

Also, while the document allows for decking the terminal, Benzian notes the precise plan submitted with the initiative only requires cargo operations on the far right and left of the project site. Indeed, language in the initiative contemplates visitor types of uses at ground level. "The grade level acreage need not be used exclusively for the existing marine related industrial activities, as long as those activities are still given priority in the overall design and allocation of acreage in the redevelopment district," the document says. Community groups, business representatives and visitor or convention organizations would get a seat at the table when planning the project.

If the measure passes, the port is required within 60 days of that becoming official to enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement with a private development entity to come up with a plan to redevelop the terminal according to the new guidelines.

Pete Davis, who when a port commissioner failed to convince his colleagues to explore reuses of the site, is uncertain about binding the port into making a quick decision. He remains enthusiastic about publicly studying the best use of the property and says it would halt reactive efforts like the Chases. "If the port is using the terminal correctly, it should have no concern with telling, perhaps bragging, to the public about what a good job it is doing," Davis says.

The Port Commission has voted to oppose the measure. The agency also will hold off on drafting any type of public request for proposals to redevelop the site until it sees if it qualifies for the ballot or if it passes by simple majority. It will have to act. The measure includes language saying it can be sued to move forward.