As mentioned over, the SIPOA agreed. But it was Erroneous to do so. It was not the SIPOA’s place to unilaterally abandon the easement, because other parties had special property interest in it – specifically, the homeowners of tons 21-28 that benefitted with the drainage easement. Faisal Mumtaz ~ Ny, https://waylonazngk.weblogco.com/31229334/everything-about-covenants-and-land-use-restrictions-advocate-in-karachi-near-me