York County approves three conditional-use permits for Double Barrel Farms with biosecurity and measurement conditions

The York County Board of Commissioners on May 27, 2025, approved three conditional‑use permits for operations run by Double Barrel Farms after a public hearing that drew multiple neighbors, livestock producers and technical witnesses.

The permits -- for an existing breeder/hatchery complex, an existing breeder site near a residence, and a proposed site on Road 3 -- were approved with conditions set by the board after staff, the zoning board and residents testified. The board required that an up‑to‑date biosecurity plan be filed with county zoning administration and that measurements for required setbacks be verified at the time of any building permit for the Road 3 site; the board also approved a numerical cap for the main site tied to figures on the initial animal‑feeding inspection dated Dec. 23, 2024.

Why it matters: County zoning and animal‑health concerns intersected in the hearing. Neighbors and nearby livestock producers raised disease‑transmission and nutrient‑management questions tied to proximity of game‑bird operations to wetlands and other livestock; the board’s conditions aimed to preserve the county’s regulatory oversight while allowing the farms to continue operating.

Nate, the county zoning administrator, told the board the York County Planning and Zoning Board had recommended approval of the three permits with conditions, including setback adjustments to ensure buffers from neighboring residences and other animal feeding operations. He said one of the sites required an updated setback mapping because the previously drawn circles did not reflect the required north‑south setback.

Multiple neighbors testified at the hearing. Matt Clark, who identified himself as owner of Blue River Fork swine operation, raised concerns about disease spread (including recent highly pathogenic avian influenza incidents nationally), potential quarantine impacts on his hog operation, and how manure application buffers or setbacks could affect his nutrient management plan. He read a letter into the record from a veterinarian advising caution about siting new bird facilities near migratory waterfowl and recommending large separations to reduce pathogen transmission risk.

Other nearby residents, including Dennis Clark, Mary Scott and Randy Cunningham, told the board they had not received timely written notice of the permit applications, said the proposed siting was close to wetlands and private wells, and asked who would be financially liable to neighboring livestock or producers if an outbreak required quarantines or euthanasia.

Dustin Christman, the applicant, described the farms’ operations, biosecurity practices and the business reasons for spreading breeder houses across multiple locations (risk diversification from weather and past avian influenza losses). Travis, an engineer with Century Agri Services who advised the applicant, said the company had worked to coordinate inspections and that state agencies (NDE and other auditors) had inspected sites and that many of the locations were exempt from certain controls under state rules.

The board’s actions were procedural and narrowly drawn: the commissioners voted to approve each conditional use with the set conditions. For the site labeled “Terry’s,” the board approved the permit and required that updated biosecurity documentation be filed with county zoning administration. For the main hatchery/breeder complex the board approved the permit with a cap tied to the numbers shown on the initial animal‑feeding operation inspection dated Dec. 23, 2024, and required the biosecurity plan on file; the board also declined at this time to impose additional building restrictions beyond the county’s current zoning rules pending a broader zoning update. For the Road 3 site (“Dean’s”), commissioners approved the permit but required that measurements be verified by zoning staff at time of building permit and that setbacks comply with the recommended north‑south and east‑west distances set by the zoning board.

The board and staff discussed technical mapping errors in the setback circles produced by zoning staff and instructed that all measurements must be rechecked during the building‑permit process so the approved uses actually meet the county’s setback rules.

The hearing produced several directions: zoning staff will keep the biosecurity plan and inspection paperwork on file and will verify setbacks during permit review; commissioners urged the applicant to work proactively with neighbors to reduce conflict; and the board noted that broader zoning updates and the county’s comprehensive plan revision are the forum for addressing larger questions about setback distances, how structures are defined, and other county‑wide rules.

The board’s approvals were unanimous on the three permits. The decisions allow Double Barrel Farms to continue operating under the stated caps and conditions but leave longer‑term questions about county setback rules and how to treat netted flight enclosures, shade structures and low‑profile pens to the county’s forthcoming zoning update.

The board recessed for other business after the votes; zoning staff will record the filings and the building‑permit verification requirement will be enforced in the normal permit workflow.