upr000275 79

? agreed upon number of homes in the Tract, an arrangement similar to that in effect during the development of War Housing project subdivision in which the subdivider develops raw land by instal­lation of streets and public utilities and thereafter sells lots upon which the purchaser may or may not construct improvements atsA in which case it may be several years before any substantial number of water consumers are served by the mains. Nomellini, however, contends, and I agree, there is merit to his argument^ that in the case of a housing project in which a substantial number of homes are to be immediately constructed, the Water Company will shortly after - completion of the housing facilities receive substantial revenue from sale of water to consumers located in the Tract. lation of Rule 9-C in 1943, the order provided; nThat if, at some future time, the growth of Las Vegas, Nevada, demands that the rule again is necessary, the Company will be required to reinstate this rule in its rules and regulationsrl, ' - . ::"1| and I a m t h a t , if the Nomellini Company should take the matter to the Commission, it would order a reinstatement of the rule. I feel our Rule 9-A is equitable in the case of a When the Public Service Commission1 agreed to the cancel- -2-