Washington State Ferries is once again looking at moving the Keystone ferry terminal outside the existing harbor.

That controversial option was on the back burner for a while, but now it’s one of six options ferry officials are actively considering to redesign the terminal.

The current terminal is served by antiquated Steel Electric vessels and trips are often cancelled due to low tides and ebb currents. Ferries have also run aground while trying to maneuver into the narrow harbor.

Preliminary plans for the new option call for moving the terminal southeast of Admirals Cove and installing an access road from the terminal to Highway 525. Plans also show a signalized intersection complete with turn lanes.

Hadley Greene, spokesperson for Washington State Ferries, said the new option developed out of a recent public scoping process for the project. She said several agencies, including state Fish and Wildlife, the Army Corps of Engineers, the National Park Service, the Swinomish Tribe and the Port of Port Townsend, wanted an out-of-harbor option considered to ensure a balanced process when an environmental impact statement is developed.

Dan Thompson, a Telaker Shores resident who opposed the ferry system’s plan two years ago to move the terminal to Driftwood Park, was surprised at the new option being considered.

He cited several concerns, saying the land is too valuable; the ferry run would be too long; and at that location it would interfere with shipping and boating traffic.

“It just doesn’t make sense,” Thompson said.

Ferry officials looked at four different sites for moving the terminal and settled on including the proposed option because it provided an area that is easy for ferry boats to maneuver and it offered quick access to Highway 525, said Charlie Torres, project manager for Washington State Ferries during a Wednesday morning Port of Coupeville meeting.

He said comments have been received concerning traffic impacts around Coupeville schools, and the project’s impact on Ebey’s Landing National Historical Reserve.

“A lot of people want Keystone Spit left untouched as much as possible,” Torres said.

He added the new alternative moves the ferry terminal outside the reserve.

The new option comes after a state-appointed citizens group came up with four options to upgrade the current ferry terminal inside the harbor. Two options call for dredging the harbor to allow larger vessels and either extend or move the jetty. The other two options call for purchasing smaller 100-vehicle or 65-vehicle boats that could serve the current terminal.

The group was formed at the prompting of Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, chair of the Senate Transportation Committee, after residents at the east end of Keystone Spit complained about the ferry system’s original plans. Haugen, whose district includes Whidbey Island, wanted to make sure other options in and near the existing harbor were thoroughly studied. Haugen was on vacation this week and unavailable for comment.

Greene said the citizens’ group finished its work in January 2005 and Washington State Ferries isn’t under any legislative mandate to consider only options inside Keystone Harbor.

Officials are currently drafting discipline reports for the Keystone Ferry Terminal project. They will soon begin drafting an environmental impact statement. That is expected to be finished next spring and ready for another round of public comments.

Torres added the terminal needs to be upgraded because the timbers at the dock are deteriorating and the holding areas need to be expanded to accommodate expected population growth in coming years and to limit backups to the ferry terminal.