(5/4) The Emmitsburg commissioners voted at their May 3 meeting to seek input from the town’s Planning Commission with regard to establishing definitions for ‘hotel’ and ‘motel,’ and to create deadlines for plans that have not progressed for three years following approval.

The first of the two of proposed ordinances would establish definitions for ‘hotel’ and ‘motel.’

Town Planner Zach Gulden explained to the commissioners that creating the specific definitions would be "to protect the town in order to ensure that a multi-family dwelling would not get approved in the general commercial zoning district, or if they call it a hotel or motel now and it slowly turns into a multi-family dwelling, this clearly defines these uses."

The changes are to be made in the town code. Definitions of motel and hotel already appear in the municipal Zoning Ordinance, Gulden informed the News-Journal.

If the proposed changes are adopted in the wake of the municipal Planning Commission’s review, hotels would be defined as any building consisting of ten or more fully furnished, guest rooms or suites, while motels would be defined as any building containing less than ten fully furnished guest rooms.

The definitions would not be applicable to fraternity or sorority housing, college dormitories, or tourist homes.

While ‘hotel’ traces its origins back to Medieval France (‘hostel’), ‘motel’ is a modern creation having make its debut in 1925 when the first motel was constructed in San Luis Obispo, California.

The new concept was then dubbed ‘mo-tel,’ short for motor hotel, because, according to the Chicago Tribune, Heineman found the term, ‘motor hotel,’ proved as being too long for fit in on the new establishment’s sign.

Through the years, the traditional difference between what constituted a hotel, and a motel was the manner in which guests accessed their rooms. The rooms of a hotel were/are accessed via a lobby or foyer, while the rooms of a motel were/are each accessed individually, directly (or via exterior stairways) from the parking lot.

Also heading to the town Planning Commission for that board’s review is an ordinance which will declare approved development plans null and void if a certain time passes after the plans have been approved, and if the developers have not yet commenced with actual construction (beyond merely engaging in site-excavations).

At the present time, plan approvals are potentially forever, and remain on the books as approved and regardless of any changes that might have taken place in federal, state, and local regulations, even if those changes could/would impact the plans adversely or otherwise.

Specifically, the proposed ordinance would mandate that approved development plans should be terminated if any physical, on-site progress remains stagnate for three years.

Then intent would be for public hearings on both ordinances to be held by the town commissioners on June 7, preceding possible adoption.