City staff proposed a text amendment to Shelbyville’s zoning ordinance to add transfer stations as a regulated use in I‑2 industrial areas, and councilors spent substantial time on Jan. 2 reviewing proposed supplementary regulations and operational limits.

Planning staff described the draft changes as updates to Article 2 (definitions), Article 6 (supplementary regulations) and Appendix 1 (table of uses), adding a new section for transfer stations that would allow outside work in I‑2 zones (unlike lighter industrial categories that assume enclosed operations). Staff said the draft regulations would require that transfer-station activities be controllable and cleanable, that no solid waste be stored overnight, and that certain waste streams be prohibited (hazardous waste, medical and biological waste, tires). The proposed rules also include measures to control traffic and minimize adverse impacts when a transfer station is not located in a fully industrial area.

Staff identified an initial potential location on Cedar King Road, within an existing industrial cluster, and said the draft rules include options to limit hours and require additional conditions if a site is not in a fully industrial corridor. Staff noted the city’s interlocal contract for disposal expires in April; one council member and staff said a privately operated transfer station could yield significant savings, and an estimate cited in the meeting placed total community savings “well above $100,000,” with fuel savings of “30, 40,000” dollars mentioned separately.

Council members asked a series of operational and regulatory questions: how the city would prevent outside municipalities’ trash from routing through Shelbyville; what enforcement mechanisms would control odors, overnight storage and prohibited materials; what the permitting process and inspections would look like; and whether the city’s existing burn pit or other sites might be repurposed. Staff responded that the code currently lacks detailed transfer‑station language and that the proposed supplementary regulations were drawn from other Tennessee jurisdictions and tailored to local conditions. Staff agreed to provide example operational slides and to identify nearby jurisdictions’ experience.

Several council members said they wanted a site visit and operational examples from nearby communities before approving an ordinance; others stressed the urgency because the interlocal disposal contract terminates in April and the city needs to know future disposal options. With the city attorney absent and because the change is an ordinance, staff said they would either table or return the item for formal action at an upcoming meeting after providing more detailed materials.

No final vote was recorded in the study-session transcript. Council directed staff to return with a more detailed operational presentation, example regulations and information on enforcement and origin-of-waste restrictions.