What a difference a month makes. Before September, despite a few hiccups and several civic groups opposing the project, approval looked to be just around the corner for Manchester Development’s Pacific Gateway, the proposed 14.7-acre multi-use development along San Diego’s waterfront, whose land is currently owned by the Navy.
That would have given the project enough time to pass through Congress for approval by its Jan. 1 deadline.
But while the project has been mired in controversy, September was no ordinary month, even by the project’s own tumultuous standards.
Perhaps most significantly, on Sept. 19 City Council held an information session on the matter. The Council, according to the City Attorney’s office, who was present, has no authority to vote on the matter, which they ceded long ago to the Centre City Development Corporation, the redevelopment arm of the City of San Diego. Nonetheless, the meeting was heated, as those for and against, along with several of Manchester’s higher-ups, spoke “” including Doug Manchester himself, who rarely makes public appearances of this sort.
CCDC officials outlined the project and how it conforms to the specifications set in the 1992 development agreement, which laid out guidelines for any redevelopment on the property “” an agreement which opponents claim is now obsolete. CCDC, in fact, was expected to make their consistency determination by Sept. 27th.
So confident was Manchester of CCDC’s approval that he told City Council, “I expect we’ll sign an agreement [with the Navy] on the 27th or 28th.” When Councilwoman Toni Atkins asked what would happen if CCDC hadn’t voted by then, Manchester replied, “We’ll just set up a lease contingency.”
Any contingency to the lease agreement “” stating that Manchester will build a class-A office building for the Navy in exchange for a long-term land lease on which they plan to build offices, hotels, retail, open space and possibly a museum “” would likely cause Congress to hesitate in approving the contract, as it may or may not allow for contingencies. Furthermore, the Navy has since gone on the record saying they will not approve a contingency lease in the first place.
Contingencies aside, however, CCDC appeared to balk at Manchester’s forgone conclusion soon after, as it pushed back the consistency determination indefinitely. Manchester Development, in an attempt to get the project back on track, agreed with the City of San Diego last week to sell the lease rights to a half block along Harbor Drive to the city to increase the amount of park space “” something of which opponents say the proposed development has too little. This is in addition to the 1.9 acres of open space already designated by Manchester and would result in one less 250,000-square-foot office building on the site.
The funds would reportedly come from money set aside for parks. Figures have not been released yet, as the city is currently looking to have the 40,000-square-foot space appraised.
Another consistency vote was also shelved for Oct. 5, and as of press time, CCDC has tentatively agreed to reconvene on Friday, Oct. 13 to either vote or continue the meeting to a later date. The Oct. 5 date was postponed at the hands of the City Attorney’s office, which is determining whether City Council has the authority to request a new Environmental Impact Report. However, timing is now of the essence for Manchester and the fate of Pacific Gateway. For while Manchester and the Navy must come to an agreement in terms by Jan. 1, a look at the lengthy approval process suggests they have far less time than that “” perhaps only a couple of weeks. Beyond several internal Navy reviews, the House Armed Services Committee subjects the agreement to a 21-day waiting period. With several congressional breaks on the horizon, time is running out. Manchester explained that he has already spent $3 million on this project prior to its approval, and he would no doubt rather not see that money wasted.
A failed agreement would then leave the project at the mercy of the Base Realignment and Closure Process (BRAC). The fate of the land then becomes unpredictable as it is made available to other federal organizations down the list, starting with other branches of the military, but also to groups such as Native American tribes. Indeed, speakers at the City Council meeting suggested that a helicopter pad or a casino right on the waterfront is a legitimate possibility with BRAC. However, opponents of Pacific Gateway have always been more optimistic of the uncertain BRAC process than of Manchester’s development, whose future now hangs in the balance.
