Planning Commission recommends special exception for Renew Hope Behavioral Health at 135 Big Elk Mall pending child-care clarification

Ayo Oyeneyin, the applicant for Renew Hope Behavioral Health, told the Town of Elkton Planning Commission on June 8 that he intends to open a psychiatric rehabilitation program (PRP) and counseling office at 135 Big Elk Mall. "We are looking to open a psychiatric rehabilitation program (PRP)," Oyeneyin said, adding the service will be "mostly based on therapy" with staff helping adults with housing, job searches and navigating social services. He said pediatric services will include scheduled after‑school engagement programs and that the clinic will not dispense prescription medications: "no, no prescription."

The commission asked detailed questions about operations, including staffing and hours. Oyeneyin said the model is community based, with roughly three staff on site daily for front-desk and PRP staff and planned hours of "nine to five, Monday through Friday." He said most contacts will be scheduled appointments and some services provided in clients' homes. When asked how clients will be recruited, Oyeneyin said he expects to rely on existing client connections and outreach to other mental‑health providers; he had not yet contacted the county social‑services office.

Director of Planning Jeanne Minner flagged potential zoning and building-code implications for any classroom‑style or child‑care activity, advising the applicant to notify the Zoning Administrator and provide details on counts and egress. Commissioner Jean Broomall pressed for clarity on who would be on site for after‑school services and how many children would be served; Oyeneyin said staff would be hired for those programs and participation would be scheduled.

After discussion, Commissioner Edward Ginder moved for a favorable recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special Exception to operate a mental‑health clinic in the C‑2 (Highway Commercial) zone at 135 Big Elk Mall, contingent upon clarification of the proposed child‑care/after‑school operation; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Keith Thompson and passed unanimously. The commission record notes no public comments for or against the project at the hearing.

The matter will advance to the Board of Zoning Appeals for final action; the Planning Commission decision was a recommendation only and is contingent on the applicant providing the requested operational details to the Zoning Administrator.