what is the definition of waterline? 2

[engineerlee1]

I am town engineer defending an old easement with poor language. The easement allows for a single waterline. My contention is that we are abandoning an old line (60 years old cast iron) and replacing with a new pvc line and that only the new line will convey water making the old line simply a pipe or conduit. Without water in it, it could be used as conduit for power, a casing for a smaller sewer line, a storm drainage line etc. Does anyone know a good way to proceed?

 

[TDAA]

Check with your lawyer.

If you are only allowed the waterline, then you may not be able to place other utilities there without getting a new easement, even though you have a "conduit" there.

 

[hokie66]

It is very unusual for an easement to restrict the number of lines which can be installed. Therefore, I think if there is already one pipe, another would be in violation of the terms. That would certainly be my argument if I were a property owner opposed to new work through the easement.

 

[cvg]

i have seen any number of plans that show abandoned "waterlines". They rarely just say abandoned "pipes" or "conduits". I'm not an attorney, however I would think that abandoning the old and installing a new would be in the spirit of the original easement, even though it doesn't specifically state that only one line - working or abandoned can exist. Another option would be to burst the old pipe and pull in a new HDPE line. That would leave one waterline, surrounded by a lot of iron debris.

 

[bimr]

It will depend on who owns the property. From your message, there already appears to be a problem.

You will have to have you and your attorney read the existing legal document very closely. Your document should spell out the procedures for maintenance. Typically, you are allowed to maintain the property.

In your case, the maintenance should include replacement in kind of the same type of water main.

If you are upsizing the water main and the size of the existing water main is stated in the legal document, you may have to pay for upsizing.

 

[Hoagie]

if the easement was established over the servient estate for the use of a waterline only, then that's all it can be used for. if you were to use it for a different purpose, then the dominant estate could lose the easement entirely.

i see no problem with you upsizing or changing the material of the (water) pipe unless the legal description of the easement clearly restricts either.

 

[GoldDredger]

I suppose you could always remove the old waterline rather than abandon in place, then you wouldn't be violating the 1-waterline caveat.

Be curious to know how this ends, hope you keep us posted.

 

[engineerlee1]

Part of the problem was that that owners wanted the pipe removed because it has lead joints. Their contention is that the lead could some day be considered a toxic waste. We have contacted the EPA to get their take and we spoke with 3 individuals there and they stated that there is currently nothing wrong with leaving the pipe and lead in place. In fact they prefer it there because buried, it is safe from the public, where as removing could spread it to the surface where it could be a potential issue, similar to lead buckshot with wildlife eating it and such. After some discussions with the property owners we settled on a small amount of money to purchase an easement, similar to what we expected to get with eminant domain. It was cheaper then fighting the issue.
Thanks for all of the responses, they helped me think it through.

 

[msquared48]

"Waterline" is an ambiguous term by nature as it can also refer to the level line established by a body of water.

This gets into the INTENT of the writer of the original easement, which, if ambiguous in itself, leads to the lawyers and courts, unfortunately, to decide the outcome.

Good luck!

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto: KISS
Motivation: Don't ask