Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Activities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Auto‑auction request tabled while applicant provides licensing and operational details
Summary
Jim/ JB Butner asked the BZA to allow on‑site auto auctions at 125 West Lewis and Clark; the board raised concerns about legal elements and policing impacts and voted to table the request to the April meeting for additional documentation and clarification on state auction licensing.
A proposed auto‑auction operation at 125 West Lewis and Clark was tabled by the Clarksville Board of Zoning Appeals on Feb. 25 after members said the applicant had not yet met several elements staff cited as necessary to justify a use variance.
Staff described the request as a use variance: auto sales are permitted in the B‑2 zone but auction operations are not. The applicant said auctions would be held only during regular business hours and likely monthly or quarterly, with traffic controls and onsite staff directing parking; staff noted Clarksville Police expressed concerns about hours, frequency and customer volumes and recommended conditions—such as limiting auctions to once per month, requiring operable vehicles only and making any approval time‑limited so the board could review impacts.
JB Butler (who identified himself as JB Butler/Butner) said the dealership has been in the community for decades and that the auction would provide public buyers access to wholesale cars at lower cost. Supporters in the audience praised the plan; one local bicycle‑shop owner said the dealership "seems to run a really class act."
Board members questioned whether the applicant proved required variance elements (including whether a condition peculiar to the property exists and whether denial would cause undue hardship). Members discussed a proof‑of‑concept one‑time event, but noted some state licensing requirements for auction operations may preclude a temporary workaround. Given the open questions the board voted to table the item until the April meeting (April 22) to allow the applicant to gather more documentation and clarify state licensing and operational plans.
The board encouraged the applicant to return with evidence addressing items C, D and F from the staff report (conditions peculiar to the property, unnecessary economic hardship and extraordinary need as defined in local variance review criteria).
