Shelby launches legislative step to give firehouse new life
By David Jacobs
The city of Shelby is taking steps toward transferring ownership of its historic Main Street firehouse to a private entity, with the goal of revitalizing the long-vacant 1872 structure.
At its May 19 meeting, Shelby City Council held a first reading of Ordinance No. 11-2025.
The proposed legislation determines that certain real property owned by the city — specifically the old firehouse — be sold, and it designates the Community Improvement Corporation of Shelby (CIC) as the city’s agent in that process.
The ordinance must undergo three readings before the council votes on final approval.
City officials believe that moving the building into private hands could lead to revitalization and active use.
Except for serving as a storage site for equipment, the firehouse has been unused since 2022, following its vacancy by a private ambulance service. Previously, the Shelby Fire Department operated out of the building until relocating to a modern facility on High School Avenue in 2018.
The city will retain the authority to review any proposals for how the old firehouse would be used under private ownership.
Councilman Nathan Martin asked if the CIC would process the submission and provide a recommendation.
"This is kind of unlike any other sale that we've done before," he said.
Mayor Steve Schag said: "I would like City Council's input on that process, whatever that looks like," which could include a review by the city of Shelby's law director, Gordon Eyster.
Because the firehouse sits in Shelby’s historic district, Councilman Nathan Martin spoke of the need to address potential certificate of appropriateness (COA) issues early in the process. Shelby's Historic Preservation Commission deals with such matters.
“I think it would be good to have those COAs approved prior to the submission to City Council,” Martin said, saying buyers should submit these COAs for what they plan to do with the building.
He explained why -- and described a scenario to avoid: “If we approve it and we say, ‘Yes, this is a great development plan’ and then it goes to the Historic Preservation Commission and they say, 'You can't do that to this building because of X, Y, and Z. They go back and forth, back and forth and all of a sudden, it's a much different project than what we envisioned or approved."
Martin stated that the city needs to be able to have those COA approvals in advance, or at least notes to that effect, because building buyers can appeal to the City Council.
Martin said the council ultimately has authority but emphasized the value of early collaboration, which would involve the preservation commission and potentially contractors doing work on behalf of an owner.
Martin said: "I think it would be good to have that input on the front end versus waiting on the back end.”
He added: "That would also be nice to know if I'm buying a building that I already have the approvals, everything's ready to go as soon as I can move dirt as soon as the ink on the contract is signed versus having to go through more bureaucratic red tape to get this project underway."
The ordinance is to return to the council for a second reading on June 2.
An official look at the legislation is below
