upr000093 238

prntm* (latlf Jmmraun? atti* (kmupamj May 9, 1953 -5. Northeasterly along the center of the alley so described to the aEorth^XISesof said Bloch 11; thence Northwesterly'along the North line of Block 11 to the center line on Eleventh Street; thence along & eurviB to the left to an intersec­tion with the North\ine of Fairview Tract, the sane being the South line of the Replat of Grand- view Addition which Intersection is approximately 30 feet Easterly from the Southeast comer of lot 5 in Block k of jthe Replat of Grand- view Addition; thenfce Westerly along the South line of the Replat cn^randvfew Addition to the Bast line of Tenth Strbebt'wience Northerly along the Hast line of Tenth Street to the North line of Section 35# the same being]the North line of the Replat of Grandview Addition; thence Easterly along said North line no the point of beginning* Said condemnation order did satfprovide for the retention of easements heretofore granted car dedicated for existing lines owned by the las Vegas Land and^hter Company. 8. lines crossing lots 3 to 8 incisive in Block f of F&irview Tract and Lots 6 and 7 in Block the Replat of Grandview Addition, the only instrument of record is an assignment fro® the Grandview Water Company, Inc. to the Las Vegas land and Water Company conveying the lines and the certificate of pub­lic conveyance, which instrument was recorded July 28, 19V* as Document No. 181*103, Clark County, Nevada records. 9. Line located in the alley in Block IS of Bucks Subdivision between Mesquite Avenue and Ninth Street. This alley was vacated by Order of City Oomiss loners which order was re­corded November 11, 19**5 as Document No. 207333# dark County, Nevada records. There is a mention made that retention of easements for public utilities was reeooffljeaded by the Planning Commission, however, the order does not recite that such ease­ments are to be retained. Therefore, the effect of the order as to the retention of existing easements is questionable.