The link is not intended to insult you...personally, I am annoyed a bit with the word dummy because I am looking for information and need some direction. However, the article makes good points and may help you a lot.

https://www.dummies.com/education/law/ways-to-terminate-easements/

Wow. I can’t believe they’re just dumping this all on you and citing the easement. I am not litigious, but I would be pissed about this. I’m guessing that your location matters and hope there is someone reading this that can help you.

Not an attorney but, have dealt with a similar issue. Removal of this abandoned pipe is, unfortunately, your problem. The Municipality will not bear the cost of removal...nor will they open themselves to claims of "structural damage to the home" if they did remove it. Suggest you make an in-person appointment with the City's Chief Civil Engineer and ask for any help he can offer (a referral to a company that does removals) and obtain, in writing, assurance that the pipe is "empty". Good luck.

I agree with chiflipper. After reading the information at the link that judianna provided, it would seem if the pipe has been abandoned the lease is no longer valid. I would do as chiflipper suggested. Sorry the responsibility has fallen on your shoulders.

The easement can be terminated when the easement becomes unusable because the easement holder has failed to maintain, repair, and keep it clear. Which happened...

So the pipe is not used anymore because they installed a new sanitary sewer that you are presumably tied to? Once you verify with the city this is dead yup its on you to remove. Joys of old house ownership.

Did you know that your property contained an easement when you bought the house?

It should be listed in your documents. If you did not know/your documents do not acknowledge it, then, maybe you have another recourse?

Thanks everyone. I'm pretty versed on right of way easements and I'm not too worried about having the easement removed, as there are miles of evidence that the city has destroyed the purpose of easement and many documents make it clear there is no intent to ever use it again - I could easily win that battle... But if I do clear the easement, I lose some leverage because they are liable for any damage to my property resulting from the easement, which I think is imminent. "Failure to maintain" is tough to prove because "maintain" is too broadly defined - pipe could break open and flood my basement, but since they consider leaks routine, they've set a precedent repairing leaks after-the-fact is satisfactory maintenance - it's not like keeping a road clear. I'm an engineer myself who specializes in the mechanical integrity of piping and pressure vessels and I've sat down with city engineers and representatives and they agree - it's not if, it's when... I've tried explaining being proactive is cheaper and safer, so everybody wins, but I need a more persuasive method that threatens their pocket books now because they flat out refuse to help. It's taxpayer money, so I really don't want to go that route, I just want them to steer a little overhead into my basement for a day or two and take the pipe out.

FWIW, I ran your situation past my spouse, who runs a municipal water authority and deals with this on a regular basis. He said almost verbatim what Chiflipper said above - there is no way they would touch that and as far as he knows, at least here in NY, you have no legal way to compel them to do anything differently.

Yes I know, that and $3 gets you a cup of coffee at Dunkin - but I thought I'd share...

Just an update, I exhausted all the legal recourse and there truly seems to be no way to force someone to remove their property after they have abandoned their easement. It's also surprisingly hard to have the easement holder, when it's a municipality/county, voluntarily remove the easement, even when it's mutually beneficial to both parties - they have been very good at filibustering... The municipality has agreed that the easement is abandoned and will remove it, but they will not provide assurance that the line is empty and has been permanently abandoned without the potential for water to be returned to the pipe via valves, pumps, controls, auxiliaries, etc.. Essentially, they don't want to say it is safe to remove the pipe; however, they said I could keep the pipe and scrap it for cash after its removed, how thoughtful...

@J B - If this pipe is present in adjacent homes it might be of value to consider a group action with demand for removal..."it presents a clear and present danger to the safety of the occupants and the value of the property (to the owners and the mortgage holders)". Good luck, you have my sympathy.

Gave up on trying to get the city to do the right thing. They basically said they didn't know or care if the pipe could be leaking harmful gas or fluids that could kill my family, but I cared... So I cut it out myself, plugged the foundation holes with reinforced concrete and am moving on. Found some very thin spots on the bottom, so I definitely made the right choice and it's a huge weight off of my shoulders. Thanks everyone for your feedback. Here's some pics, and yes, it was very very tiring...

I'm impressed! Good job and congratulations.

"they will not provide assurance that the line is empty and has been permanently abandoned without the potential for water to be returned to the pipe via valves, pumps, controls, auxiliaries, etc."

You may want to dig at your property lines and cut it at each side as well. Leaving the open end right up against the outside foundation wall, at worst, if it is still connected somewhere in the street and a valve fails, will be a battering ram of water against your foundation. Or left open, after some seasons of rain, the surrounding soil will wash into the pipe and you'll have a never-ending sinkhole to fill up against the house.

Thank you for the update.

@J B - I'm glad you rolled up your sleeves and took care of the problem. Here's the "issue" I faced. Every Saturday I would wash 3 loads of laundry interspersed with housekeeping duties. After finishing I'd take a shower. And every time water would "backup" from the shower drain BUT, only after doing the wash. Enter the plumber and his drain snake with transmitter attachment to trace the run from the house to the sewer hookup at the street. Surprise! The drain tracked away from the street. No sewer hookup. House when built in 52 had a septic and drain field. When the now-busy street (core of a major SW city) was widened and sewers installed "someone forgot" to do the hookup. Turns out ALL of the water exiting my house (including the toilets) was being diverted underground onto adjacent desert land owned by either the City or the State (no official entity could tell me exactly who owned it). Several properties on my street had been re-zoned to allow for "light traffic Professional offices" (such as lawyers & accountants). A few years later I sold to a graphic design firm. Hey, it's the desert (water table depth is 300 feet), and I knew they wouldn't be taking showers or doing laundry.

Well where I live a long time ago sewers were not apparently needed you just dug a huge whole and filled it with rocks and let the sewage go there of course the town built up around these old places and lots of home owners are surprised when they learn they do not even have septic system and unfortunately they fix is on them. I do however think if you now this is there and you do not disclose you are in for a lawsuit even in Canada not to mention the states.

Have to agree, that's a known condition that should be disclosed during a sale. Assuming there are regulations requiring hookup, it's a potential cost to a new owner not to mention putting them at risk for fines or something. Of course it's all water under the bridge now, so I'm only posting this for the benefit of other future readers.

So according to the city, this fell under a typical utility easement and the deed had a catch-all that says a buyer will "take subject to all recorded easements", so there was no recourse through title insurance because it was technically disclosed. I don't think there was anything typical about it... Luckily, this wasn't a sewage line and was theoretically a potable water transmission line without any distribution lines connected to it. It fed a large storage tank from a mountain reservoir about 30 miles away. Some of the line was iron and clay, but most was timber piping - looks like a never ending wooden barrel!