Laserfiche WebLink
i The CMP provides that the purpose of the easements is to "ensure <br />legal*access of the public tc the properties served by the <br />Drivate road." CMP 7-12. The Transportation Plan provides that. <br />[t]he arrangement of streets shall provide for the <br />continuation of streets between adjacent properties <br />when such continuation is necessary for convenient <br />movement of traffic, effective fire protection, for <br />efficient provision of utilities and where such <br />continuation is in accordance with the City Compre <br />hensive Municipal Plan. <br />City of Orono Municipal Code, S 11.32, subd. (H)(1). <br />Pursuant to the CMP and the Municipal Code, the easements <br />may be utilized by the City to ensure legal access of properties <br />served by the private road. In making its decision to exercise <br />its easement rights, the City may decide that the opening of <br />private roads for use by homeowners in new subdivisions is <br />necessary for the convenient movement of traffic. <br />B.The City of Orono may compel private owners to allow <br />public passage on a private road by "eX’.Tcising its <br />oeneral* welfare powers. <br />The Minnesota State Legislature has provided specific <br />powers for city councils. Among its enumerated powers. <br />The Council shall have power to provide for the <br />government and good order of the city, the <br />suDoression of vice and immorality, the prevention <br />of*crime, the protection of public and private <br />property, the benefit of residents, trade and <br />commerce, and the promotion of health, safety and <br />order,- convenience, and the general welfare by such <br />ordinances noc inconsistent with the Constitution <br />and laws of the United States or of this state as it <br />shall deem expedient. <br />M.S.A. S 412.221, Subd. 32 (emphasis added). The welfare powers <br />which are outlined in M.S.A. S 412.221 are to be interpreted <br />broadly so as to sustain municipal activities reasonably related <br />to the needs of the city. Sverkerson v. City of Minneapolis, <br />204 Minn. 388, 283 N.W. 555, 556 (1939). <br />The Supreme Court of Minnesota has held that the general <br />powers contained in M.S.A. S 412.221 are broad enough to allow a <br />village to regulate traffic and to expend funds to enforce such <br />regulations upon privately-owned roads. Borchert v. Village of <br />-2-