City of Shelbyville officials spent a major portion of the Jan. 2 study session on a series of rezoning ordinances and related planning issues, with extended debate over a request to increase density at 900 Withorne and a separate contested proposal on Belmont Avenue.

The council opened with a second and final-reading public hearing on a rezoning of about 1.7 acres at 426 Dover Street (tax map 079, parcel 41). The transcript records the hearing announcement but does not record a formal vote during the study session.

A longer discussion focused on a rezoning request by DCC Strategic Realty Partners for approximately 5.85 acres at 900 Withorne Street (tax map 078, parcel 16). Planning staff told the council the planning commission issued a favorable recommendation but identified several neighborhood concerns. Staff noted a postal/addressing discrepancy: some county assessment records list the road as Horse Mountain while maps and major online map services show Whitorn/Withorne; Shelbyville Power is coordinating with the post office to correct records. The planner said fencing or screening between the proposed development and adjacent lots had been discussed during the prior rezoning and subdivision processes but is not an enforceable condition at rezoning because Tennessee does not permit “contract zoning” in the city’s practice; any screening could be requested at the subdivision phase but cannot be required as a rezoning condition in Shelbyville.

Staff presented density figures: the current R3 zoning showed a gross density of 33.97 units per acre; the applicant’s requested R3A designation showed a gross figure of 50.96 units per acre, an increase of about 27 percent. Staff emphasized the 50.96 figure is a gross density estimate that must be reduced for public right-of-way and other deductions, and that a final unit count depends on the subdivision and design. The original concept plan indicated a single entrance, and staff said no updated concept had been submitted. Public-works and Shelbyville Power staff flagged traffic and infrastructure concerns: one department recommended against increased density because of the geometry and condition of the adjacent roadway (Barksdale/Marks­dale area), and noted the developer had not proposed repaving the road; the developer had, however, committed to some localized intersection improvements.

Council members and staff discussed a pattern they said is common: rezoning sets the allowable density, while specific infrastructure obligations and improvements typically appear at the subdivision stage through dedication and pro rata improvement requirements. Several council members urged better concept-level submissions from applicants and said the city needs clearer policies to ensure developers pay proportionate infrastructure costs.

The council also considered multiple other rezoning items on the agenda: two Elm Street parcels owned by the Shelbyville Housing Authority (one proposed to C2 commercial, the other to R4 high-density residential), a 0.114-acre rezoning at North Main Street (Curl Properties LLC / Joe M. Lambert Jr.) to C2 general business, and a separate request to remove the Belmont Historic overlay on 812 Belmont Avenue and rezone that 0.44-acre parcel to R4. Planning staff said the Belmont rezoning drew a 6–2 favorable recommendation from the planning commission and noted that the parcel currently has three dwelling units (a main house and a duplex in the rear); in staff’s analysis, the property could accommodate up to four multifamily units given its area, and sewer improvements would be required if the owner expands beyond the existing configuration. The transcript records discussion of neighborhood compatibility, the future land-use map’s guidance and the need for design standards if multifamily development occurs.

No formal final vote results on the ordinances were recorded in the study-session transcript; staff and council members indicated several items will return for formal action on the next meeting’s agenda.