Public and staff press for a river-focused route as DuPage County advances East Branch DuPage River Trail study

Monica Powers and local trail advocates urged DuPage County’s Transportation Committee to prioritize a nature‑focused alignment for the East Branch DuPage River Trail, arguing a sidewalk beside a highway would not deliver the educational and recreational benefits the community expects.

“ I would really like you to consider the com alternative on this map which is the purple part,” Monica Powers told the committee during public comment, saying a trail that follows the river would offer safer, quieter space for cyclists and opportunities for nature education and mental‑health benefits.

Steve Johnson, who identified himself as representing the Friends of the East Branch DuPage River Trail, echoed those remarks and urged consideration of what he called the KMAT alternative, describing it as “more expensive, better value, greater trail usage of greater long‑term investment.” He warned that a Route 53 alignment would function primarily as a transportation corridor and “entirely removes the recreational component.”

County staff gave an update on the study and schedule. Steve Travia said the project consists of two segments: a northern segment (Great Western Trail to the Illinois Prairie Path) whose alignment is largely set and a southern segment (Prairie Path south toward Illinois Route 56/Butterfield) where three primary alternatives (east, west and a ComEd‑adjacent option) remain under review. He said the northern construction planning estimate for a particular underpass option was “approximately $3.2 million.”

Travia said the southern study is following the Illinois Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration NEPA process because federal funds support the preliminary engineering; that process will examine feasibility, right‑of‑way needs, environmental impacts and costs for each alignment. He said the county expects to select a preferred alignment over the summer and hold a public information meeting in fall 2026; final preliminary engineering and design approvals from IDOT and FHWA are anticipated in early 2027.

On the study budget, Travia told members that carrying multiple alternatives forward for detailed evaluation will require more work—additional survey, environmental analysis and agency coordination—and staff expects to bring a supplemental agreement for the committee’s consideration in the next meeting cycle (April or May) to complete that work. Staff’s ballpark figure for the supplement in the transcript was about $800,000.

Committee members pressed staff on specific constraints. Member Cobert sought clarification of the west (Route 53) alternative and where it would run; staff confirmed the west alignment would generally use Route 53 right‑of‑way where space allows. Member Evans asked whether cost estimates for each alternative will be presented; staff said costs, environmental impacts and long‑term maintenance needs will be part of the technical memorandum included in the NEPA study. Members and public commenters also raised negotiating prospects with ComEd/KMED and wetland and terrain constraints for certain alignments.

Staff noted that at a northern crossing near the north end of Route 53 at Roosevelt Road the study currently anticipates a pedestrian crosswalk rather than a tunnel or overpass; separation of grade is not part of that design at present. The committee did not take action to select an alignment at this meeting.

The committee will receive the supplemental agreement request and the updated technical analysis later this spring; staff expects to present a preferred alignment to the public this fall and pursue design approval with IDOT and FHWA in early 2027.