FARMINGTON — A Franklin County commissioner, who attended a meeting last week on the proposed modernization of the Coburn Gore Land Port of Entry in northern Franklin County, gave an update on the project at Tuesday’s meeting. 

U.S. General Services Administration held the June 24 meeting to seek more input on the project as required by the National Environmental Policy Act process.

Commissioner Bob Carlton of Freeman Township said there were 40 people at the meeting in Coburn Gore, near the border with Canada.

The entry point is in an isolated setting about 20 miles northwest of Eustis.

“This is a long process,” Carlton said.

A study in October 2023 was done all north of the border road and now they are looking south on the same side of the border road, he said.

“This will increase commerce coming down from Canada,” Carlton said.

With increased traffic, it will cause increased issues. It is not only Coburn Gore that will be affected by traffic, he said, it will be like a funnel down through the county.

They are looking at more property, he said. The county has property in the area of Coburn Gore Township, which Carlton said was an old landfill.

“The U.S. General Services Administration expanded the study area to include south of the road,” Paul Hughes, regional public affairs officer for New England, wrote Wednesday in an email.

It is important to note that no decision has been made as to site selection, Hughes added. This is part of the National Environmental Policy Act process, he said.

The project has been reported to cost up to $95 million. It is expected to improve the operational efficiency, safety, and security of U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel and cross-border travelers at the port of entry.

The U.S. General Services Administration awarded a $760,350 contract in March for architectural and engineering services to Dattner Architects of New York. The company will provide predesign services, a budget and information on the availability of land, according to the administration.

According to information available at the June 27 meeting, and provided to the Sun Journal by Hughes, the deficiencies at the border entry fall into two broad categories: 1) limited capacity and facilities for port operations; and 2) the existing buildings’ condition.

A draft environmental assessment is being prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, as implemented by Council on Environmental Quality, code of federal regulations and policies of the General Services Administration as the lead federal agency.

View 12 photos

The draft environmental assessment process provides steps and procedures to evaluate the potential natural and
human environmental impacts for the proposed modernization and expansion of the land port. The current main building and two single-family residences located on site were built in 1932 and are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

The administration is providing an opportunity for the public, stakeholders, and government agencies to provide input
during environmental assessment preparation. The social, economic, and environmental considerations are evaluated and measured, as defined in the regulations, by their magnitude of impacts.

Since the initial public scoping meeting in October 2023, the study area for the modernization efforts has expanded.

The assessment will consider “action” alternatives and a “no action” alternative.

The action alternatives may include:
• Constructing new land port of entry facilities—Main port building, commercial processing, a separate non-intrusive inspection, secondary inspection, garage, traffic lanes, parking, and supporting facilities.
• Acquiring additional land.
• Keeping or removing the existing historical main port building.
• Constructing new Custom and Border Protection housing.
• Creating a cul-de-sac at the end of state Route 27.
• Grading for new land port of entry facilities, and,
• Building a retaining wall for new land port of entry facilities. Constructing on -site stormwater measures.

Under the ‘no action’ alternative, current land port of entry facilities would continue to operate under existing conditions.