The proponents of the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline have adopted a new overland route around Coos Bay after federal regulators said an underwater proposal should be avoided.

Unlike previous overland proposals, the new route will bypass Glasgow Heights, though more private property would be affected.

According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s draft Environmental Impact Statement, the new route would have the pipeline travel along the bottom of Haynes Inlet before making landfall near North Bay Drive about a mile east of U.S. Highway 101. It would then traverse less than a mile of terrain before connecting with the original pipeline route identified by Pacific Connector in May 2006.

The pipeline project was first unveiled in February 2006 as a way to transport natural gas from a proposed liquefied natural gas terminal on the North Spit to a pipeline nexus in Malin. The 230-mile long, 36-inch diameter pipeline was proposed by three energy companies, including Williams, the proposed operator.

This original path was set aside in favor of a route under Coos Bay in December 2006. At that time, Williams, said the route change was made in response to concerns by area residents and after consultation with local oyster farmers.

During the FERC review process, however, several concerns arose.

First, the route was thought to cross the archeological sites of several Indian fishing weirs. There also was concern about the amount of eel grass that would be disturbed by the project.

Then there was uncertainty of obtaining easements across the bottom of Coos Bay. Like all underwater land, the Oregon Department of State Lands owns most of the bay floor. It can be leased, but there appeared to be some doubt as to whether a negotiated agreement could be reached.

“Pacific Connector is concerned that it may not be able to obtain a negotiated easement with the ODSL for any alternative that has an extensive crossing of the Coos Bay estuary,” the draft EIS said.

The study offered several alternative routes, including a second underwater path recommended by the Coquille Indian Tribe. It would have less impact on archeological sites.

Instead, FERC recommended the overland route that was first outlined in a letter submitted by Dr. Steven Shimotakahara, a resident of Glasgow Heights.

It said the new route’s impacts would be less than the underwater route because a 250-foot-wide construction right-of-way is needed in the bay, compared to a 95-foot-wide right-of-way on land.

There are several tradeoffs with the new route, however.

It is the longest of the three routes strongly considered by Williams. It is 13.11 miles long, while the previous land route was 10.04 and the underwater route was 9.68, according to the draft EIS.

The new route traverses 4.65 miles of “highly erosive soils” and 1.38 miles of “steep or difficult terrain,” more than either of the other routes.

Less wetlands will be impacted, but it will cross more agricultural and forestlands.

And there are 50 landowner parcels that will be crossed with the new route, compared to 19 that would be impacted by the underwater route and 44 from the previous land route.

One property that apparently won’t be bypassed by the revised route is Kentuck Golf Course. Wally Culp, the course manager, said he hadn’t heard about the change and no one from Williams had spoken to him since they surveyed his land a couple of years ago.

At that time, he said they looked at two different routes across the 18-hole public golf course. One traversed holes 1 and 9, while the other crossed some portion of nearly every hole on the front nine, Culp said. He also was told there would be a pump station on his property.

He said he was more in favor of the underwater route, though he seemed resigned to his fate.

“I don’t think I have much choice,” he said.

Lilli Clausen, co-owner of Clausen Oysters of North Bend, said she hadn’t been contacted by anyone about the change in pipeline routes. She didn’t want to comment about the new route until she had a chance to review a map, though she previously had expressed disappointment that any part of the pipeline would have to go underneath the bay.

One of the reasons Culp and Clausen — or any other property owner for that matter — hasn’t been contacted recently is because Williams does not plan to approach owners about purchasing easements until the route is finalized.

Rodney Gregory, a land department team leader for the Pacific Connector project, said Williams would work with an appraisal or marketing firm to produce a qualified offer based on current market values. The offer also would take into consideration any temporary or permanent impacts of constructing the pipeline under landowners’ property.

Before that can happen, the FERC needs to complete a final EIS, which is scheduled to be completed by February 2009. A final decision on the pipeline project, as well as the proposed LNG terminal, is slated for May 2009.

For now, Williams has yet to formally change its route preference, though chances are good that it will when FERC issues the final EIS.

“It is unlikely the other two routes (the original or the one under Coos Bay) will become the preferred route,” wrote Michele Swaner, a Williams spokeswoman, in an e-mail.