Residents and biking enthusiasts packed a room in the Jefferson County government building on Wednesday night, when critics and supporters clashed over a proposed bike park on state land near Conifer.

At issue is the proposal to create the “Shadow Mountain Bike Park,” the majority of which is currently zoned as agricultural but also includes some residential and bucolic uses. The Colorado State Land Trust owns the property.

First proposed in 2021, developers and downhill bikers Phil Bouchard and Jason Evans want to create a downhill mountain bike park with lift access and 16 miles of ridable trails on 235 acres of the state land located approximately 2.2 miles west of Route 73 on Shadow Mountain Drive, county documents show.

“We know it’s been a long and trying period for everyone involved,” Evans said.” “You all helped shape our perspective and approach on how best to build this park, and ultimately, how to make it an asset to and a part of this community.”

“About four years ago, we noticed a series of problems with mountain biking in Colorado,” Evans added. “Just a few of those include significant pressure on trail systems today, a lack of dedicated biking infrastructure, significant user conflict, the overuse leading to trail degradation, and many more. So, what we are proposing is a seasonal, day-use dedicated mountain bike park on this parcel of state land trust land with a chairlift, day lodge, and parking lot to service our customers.”

Evans explained that the lift would be specifically designed for bikes, allowing riders to access exceptional trails without the need to climb.

The proposal is drawing a fierce reaction from both sides of the argument. Supporters said a dedicated bike park would provide another recreational avenue for young people, not to mention benefit their mental health, and alleviate issues of overcrowding at other open spaces.

Critics said they fear parking and overcrowding problems, as well worries about fire.

Stop the Bike Park organizer John Lewis said residents oppose the project due to environmental and quality-of-life concerns, pointing to the increased number of visitors. estimated to be upwards of 1,000 a day.

Others, like Evergreen resident Scott Dunlap, are worried about fire.

“Our services in our community will not support this development,” Dunlap wrote in an email to the county. “The Elk Creek Fire Protection District would be overextended. A wildfire or any emergency response would be staffed by the mostly voluntary and already underfunded Fire District, which is funded by property taxes that the proposed commercial bike park would not be paying (as) the property is exempt.”

The proposed development area is in an extreme wildfire risk area, according to Dunlap.

“Adding more than 1,000 people on a peak day at the proposed bike park will greatly increase this risk, as 84% of fires are human caused,” he wrote. “Narrow, winding Shadow Mountain Drive will not be able to handle the traffic load in the event of a fire evacuation, which will be managed by the understaffed Sheriff’s Office.”

Taylor Carpenter, a resident of the Elk Falls neighborhood who supports the bike park project, cited mental health benefits for young people.

“Our mountain bike area children need a positive and safe place to gather more than ever,” Carpenter told the packed gathering. “Shadow Mountain Bike Park would be a central gathering place for our kids, where they can challenge themselves, work, and be among peers who share the same enthusiasm for the sport.”

“The bike park has the potential to alleviate some of the conflicts on the Jeffco Open Space, multi-use trails, which we all know can be very crowded, particularly on weekends,” said Shadow Mountain resident Tammy Deranleau. “While the people opposed to the bike park are making the most noise, I know far more people that are in favor of this unique recreational opportunity in our community, parents of young kids, older student-athletes, coaches, local businesses and my neighbors — not the ones that are here so much.”

Evans also argued that the bike park would mean lease payments going to public education and that it would “enhance the character of Conifer and be a great way to preserve the land from more disruptive development.”

Carpenter, a developer, said the bike park would have a less overall impact on the area than other projects.

More than 170 people joined the discussion online, and at the time the meeting started, close to 930 email comments had been added to the record.

The specific issue deals with a special use application.

“This request is the first of its type we’ve seen, and we’ve evaluated,” said Dylan Monke, the county case manager for the project. “So, we are somewhat breaking ground in terms of the use.”

“I bring this up because we are not in a rezoning process tonight,” Monke noted. “We are considering a special use process, which, in effect, would retain the permitted uses of the agricultural zone district.”

The Sept. 12 public hearing ended shortly after 10 p.m. with the commission voting to to continue the case to Sept. 23 at 6:15 p.m.