New Land-Use Map May Appease Harbor Tenants : Theme park: Disney and port officials study compromise that promises efficient use of space, 35 more acres of landfill.

In what could be a significant step toward bringing a Walt Disney resort to Long Beach, Disney and port officials appear to be on the verge of a compromise that could mollify tenants worried about a giant theme park in their busy harbor.

While a land-use plan unveiled last week leaves many questions unanswered, it appears to solve at least one of the powerful tenants’ worst nightmares: that some of Disney’s 13 million annual tourists will wander into the busiest cargo port in the nation.

A one-page map--designed by Disney-paid engineers and presented Thursday to about 20 of the port’s largest tenants--also promises more efficient use of space and an extra 35 acres of landfill to accommodate a booming maritime complex.

“My gut reaction is this is a very good plan--one the industry can live with,” port Executive Director Steven Dillenbeck said when asked to comment on the proposal.

Tenant opposition has been a major stumbling block in the city’s negotiations with Disney over its proposed $3-billion resort that would spread six hotels, a DisneySea theme park and various tourist lures between the downtown shoreline and the port. Port administrators have vowed to scuttle the deal if Disney’s plans threaten to upset port operations in any way.

Disney has yet to commit to building in Long Beach, saying it might select a site in Anaheim instead. But the very idea of a Port Disney in the harbor has sent waves of worry all the way to Tokyo, where Pacific Rim businesses are asking how a port can profitably coexist with a theme park.

Indeed, Maersk Pacific Ltd. refused to sign a valuable lease for more land until the port included an escape clause promising to release the shipping giant if Disney proved a disruption. And officials at the competitive Port of Los Angeles have been known to invoke the word Disney when trying to lure away Long Beach shipping tenants.

Acceptance of the latest land-use plan, then, could push Disney and the city significantly closer to agreement as negotiations over the resort move toward their second year, some harbor officials said.

The port tenants are scheduled to submit their opinions on the plan by the end of this week. A representative of at least one major tenant reached last week, however, said the plan fails to relieve his biggest fear.

“Already, that 710 (Long Beach) Freeway is congested and this won’t solve the bottlenecks at the 405 (San Diego Freeway) and the 91 (Artesia Freeway) interchanges. That has been my biggest concern since this project was first announced,” said John Miller, executive vice president of International Transportation Service Inc.

If the port is ever to agree to a Disney park, observers say, three influential tenants must be satisfied: International Transportation, Maersk and Sea Land Services Inc. Since those three are in closest proximity to the proposed theme park, any plan that meets their approval will likely please the other tenants, port officials said.

The new plan--the product of months of bandying--would reconfigure the port to make more efficient use of terminal space, provide 35 additional acres of landfill and allow for future growth, officials said.

More importantly, it clearly divides port traffic from tourist traffic with separate roads that do not intersect for miles. Where they do cross--at the Long Beach Freeway and Anaheim Street--remains an invitation to gridlock, however.

“That is the only negative I’ve heard,” Dillenbeck said. “Traffic stops there now at 5 o’clock. What are they going to do with more trucks and more Disney tourists?”

Looming larger still is the question of who will pay for it all. Harbor officials are reluctant to invest money in a project that will not directly benefit the port, which expects to make not a penny off a Disney venture.

Although Disney-paid consultants drew up the map, it remains unclear whether even the Walt Disney Co. can approve it. Disney officials continue to study whether the new configuration means any loss of land to the resort.

“We believe this plan will separate recreational traffic from port traffic and allow for port growth,” said David Malmuth, the Disney Development Co. vice president in charge of the Long Beach project. “We needed to see what the tenants would accept.”

As for what Disney will accept? “We’re working on it,” he said.