{
  "id": "nexus-ext-1-0034-139474",
  "citation": "Res. 00239-2011 Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
  "section": "nexus_decisions",
  "doc_type": "court_decision",
  "title_es": "Nulidad de aval municipal de agua potable para urbanización sin dictamen técnico del AyA",
  "title_en": "Annulment of municipal water approval for development without AyA technical ruling",
  "summary_es": "El Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo, Sección III, anula un acuerdo del Concejo Municipal de Paraíso que aprobó la dotación de agua potable para el proyecto urbanístico “Las Terrazas”. La decisión se fundamenta en que la municipalidad otorgó el aval sin contar con la aprobación previa y obligatoria del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (AyA), entidad que por ley debe certificar la factibilidad técnica del abastecimiento de agua para cualquier desarrollo urbano. El tribunal descarta un “Estudio de Optimización” genérico del AyA como sustituto del dictamen específico requerido, y resalta que ese mismo estudio advertía sobre el estado deficitario del acueducto de Paraíso, con riesgos inminentes de desabastecimiento futuro y la urgente necesidad de obras de infraestructura como el Tanque Páez antes de autorizar nuevos proyectos. Concluye que el acuerdo municipal carece de sustento técnico y viola los artículos 15 y 16 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, por lo que es absolutamente nulo por un vicio grave en su motivo. La apelación se acoge y se agota la vía administrativa.",
  "summary_en": "The Administrative Contentious Court, Section III, annulled the Paraíso Municipal Council's agreement that approved water supply for the “Las Terrazas” urban development. The ruling is based on the fact that the municipality granted approval without the mandatory prior authorization from the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (AyA), the body legally required to certify the technical feasibility of water supply for any urban project. The court dismissed a generic “Optimization Study” by AyA as a substitute for the required project-specific ruling, emphasizing that this same study had already warned of a deficit in the Paraíso aqueduct, imminent future shortages, and the urgent need for infrastructure such as the Páez Tank before allowing new developments. The court concluded the municipal act lacked technical foundation, violating Articles 15 and 16 of the General Public Administration Law, and was therefore absolutely null due to a serious defect in its reasoning. The appeal was granted and the administrative route exhausted.",
  "court_or_agency": "Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
  "date": "2011",
  "year": "2011",
  "topic_ids": [
    "water-law"
  ],
  "primary_topic_id": "water-law",
  "es_concept_hints": [
    "abastecimiento de agua potable",
    "AyA",
    "factibilidad técnica",
    "vicio en el motivo del acto",
    "Ley General de la Administración Pública art. 15 y 16",
    "nulidad absoluta",
    "tanque Páez",
    "acueducto municipal"
  ],
  "concept_anchors": [
    {
      "article": "Art. 2",
      "law": "Ley 2726"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 21",
      "law": "Ley 2726"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 38",
      "law": "Ley 4240"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 15",
      "law": "Ley 6227"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 16",
      "law": "Ley 6227"
    }
  ],
  "keywords_es": [
    "abastecimiento de agua potable",
    "AyA",
    "Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados",
    "nulidad de acuerdo municipal",
    "urbanización Las Terrazas",
    "Paraíso de Cartago",
    "factibilidad técnica",
    "ley 2726",
    "ley de planificación urbana 4240",
    "ley general de la administración pública",
    "vicios del acto administrativo",
    "estudio de optimización",
    "tanque Páez",
    "desabastecimiento",
    "derecho al agua",
    "ambiente sano",
    "desarrollo urbanístico"
  ],
  "keywords_en": [
    "drinking water supply",
    "AyA",
    "Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers",
    "municipal agreement annulment",
    "Las Terrazas development",
    "Paraíso de Cartago",
    "technical feasibility",
    "Law 2726",
    "Urban Planning Law 4240",
    "General Public Administration Law",
    "administrative act defects",
    "optimization study",
    "Páez tank",
    "water shortage",
    "right to water",
    "healthy environment",
    "urban development"
  ],
  "excerpt_es": "“Pues bien, a partir de este informe técnico del AyA, no queda duda de que la decisión del Concejo Municipal de aprobar la dotación de agua potable para el proyecto urbanístico Las Terrazas, resultó sumamente prematura y en ningún momento estuvo amparada en la aprobación por parte del Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados de los planos del anteproyecto, en su carácter de ente técnico especializado en la materia, tal y como lo exige el ordenamiento jurídico. [...] Recordemos que la Administración tiene como límite a sus actuaciones, la correcta aplicación de las reglas unívocas de la ciencia o de la técnica, de conformidad con el artículos 15 y 16 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, no pudiendo en ningún momento adoptar actos que violenten o desconozcan tales reglas, so pena de resultar absolutamente nulos, por tener un vicio grave en el motivo del acto. En este caso ello es lo que ha ocurrido, y por tanto, constituye razón más que suficiente para anular el acuerdo venido en alzada, por carecer de sustento técnico que permitiera adoptar la decisión impugnada.”",
  "excerpt_en": "“Thus, based on this technical report from AyA, there is no doubt that the Municipal Council's decision to approve the water supply for the Las Terrazas urban development was extremely premature and was never supported by the approval of the preliminary project plans by the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, in its capacity as a specialized technical entity, as required by the legal system. [...] Let us remember that the Administration’s actions are limited by the correct application of the unequivocal rules of science or technique, in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 of the General Public Administration Law, and it may never adopt acts that violate or disregard such rules, under penalty of being absolutely null due to a serious defect in the act’s rationale. In this case, that is what has occurred, and therefore it constitutes more than sufficient reason to annul the appealed agreement, for lacking the technical foundation needed to adopt the contested decision.”",
  "outcome": {
    "label_en": "Granted",
    "label_es": "Con lugar",
    "summary_en": "The Court annulled the Paraíso Municipal Council's agreement approving water supply for the Las Terrazas project due to a lack of the mandatory AyA technical ruling, declaring the act absolutely null for a defect in its reasoning.",
    "summary_es": "El Tribunal anula el acuerdo del Concejo Municipal de Paraíso que aprobó la dotación de agua potable para el proyecto Las Terrazas por carecer del dictamen técnico obligatorio del AyA, declarando la nulidad absoluta del acto por vicio en el motivo."
  },
  "pull_quotes": [
    {
      "context": "Considerando V",
      "quote_en": "Verification of this project component is essential, as it is a service directly linked to the fundamental right to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (Article 50 of the Political Constitution).",
      "quote_es": "La verificación de este componente del proyecto resulta imprescindible, por tratarse de un servicio que está directamente vinculado con el derecho fundamental a la salud y a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado (artículo 50 de la Constitución Política)."
    },
    {
      "context": "Artículo 21 Ley 2726 citado en Considerando VI",
      "quote_en": "Such prior approval shall be mandatory in all cases of construction of subdivisions, urbanizations, or lotifications anywhere in the country, and no other state agency shall grant construction permits or approvals without such approval from the Institute.",
      "quote_es": "Dicha aprobación previa será obligatoria en todos los casos de construcción de fraccionamientos, urbanizaciones o lotificaciones en cualquier parte del país y ningún otro organismo estatal otorgará permisos o aprobaciones de construcción sin tal aprobación por parte del Instituto."
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando VII",
      "quote_en": "The Administration's actions are limited by the correct application of the unequivocal rules of science or technique, in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 of the General Public Administration Law, and it may never adopt acts that violate or disregard such rules, under penalty of being absolutely null due to a serious defect in the act’s rationale.",
      "quote_es": "La Administración tiene como límite a sus actuaciones, la correcta aplicación de las reglas unívocas de la ciencia o de la técnica, de conformidad con el artículos 15 y 16 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, no pudiendo en ningún momento adoptar actos que violenten o desconozcan tales reglas, so pena de resultar absolutamente nulos, por tener un vicio grave en el motivo del acto."
    }
  ],
  "cites": [],
  "cited_by": [],
  "references": {
    "internal": [
      {
        "target_id": "norm-37097",
        "kind": "concept_anchor",
        "label": "Ley 2726  Art. 2"
      },
      {
        "target_id": "norm-35669",
        "kind": "concept_anchor",
        "label": "Ley 4240  Art. 38"
      },
      {
        "target_id": "norm-13231",
        "kind": "concept_anchor",
        "label": "Ley 6227  Art. 15"
      }
    ],
    "external": []
  },
  "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/ext-1-0034-139474",
  "tier": 2,
  "_editorial_citation_count": 0,
  "regulations_by_article": null,
  "amendments_by_article": null,
  "dictamen_by_article": null,
  "concordancias_by_article": null,
  "afectaciones_by_article": null,
  "resoluciones_by_article": null,
  "cited_by_votos": [],
  "cited_norms": [],
  "cited_norms_inverted": [
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-27738",
      "norm_num": "7554",
      "norm_name": "Ley Orgánica del Ambiente",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "04/10/1995"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-35669",
      "norm_num": "4240",
      "norm_name": "Ley de Planificación Urbana",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "15/11/1968"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-36307",
      "norm_num": "833",
      "norm_name": "Ley de Construcciones",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "02/11/1949"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-37097",
      "norm_num": "2726",
      "norm_name": "Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "14/04/1961"
    }
  ],
  "sentencias_relacionadas": [],
  "temas_y_subtemas": [],
  "cascade_only": false,
  "amendment_count": 0,
  "body_es_text": "“V.-\r\nEn cuanto al fondo.- El acuerdo impugnado debe ser anulado.- La\r\nmaterialización de un Proyecto Urbanístico requiere, conforme nuestro\r\nordenamiento jurídico, del cumplimiento de una\r\nserie de requisitos previos que deben ser plenamente satisfechos, en aras de\r\nobtener finalmente el otorgamiento del\r\npermiso municipal para urbanizar. Entre esos muchos requerimientos, el\r\ndesarrollador debe demostrar que en todos los lotes donde conceptualmente se\r\nprevé la construcción de viviendas y locales, es técnicamente factible el\r\nacceso a un servicio de abastecimiento de agua potable\r\nseguro y eficiente. La verificación de este componente del proyecto resulta\r\nimprescindible, por tratarse de un servicio que está directamente vinculado con\r\nel derecho fundamental a la salud y a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente\r\nequilibrado (artículo 50 de la Constitución Política). Precisamente, la tutela\r\nde este derecho y su armonización con el ordenamiento territorial de las\r\npoblaciones a nivel local, corresponde a las municipalidades, en tanto les\r\ncompete a éstas, por mandato constitucional y legal, la planificación y el\r\ncontrol del desarrollo urbano de su respectivo cantón, tarea dentro de la cual\r\ntienen el deber legal de velar por la protección de los intereses de la\r\nsalud, seguridad, comodidad y bienestar de la comunidad (artículo 169\r\nconstitucional, 28 de la\r\n Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, 15 y 19 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana y\r\n1 de la Ley de\r\nConstrucciones).\n\r\n\r\n\n VI.-\r\nAhora, en lo que atañe a la determinación de la factibilidad de un adecuado\r\nservicio de abastecimiento de agua potable para un proyecto habitacional,\r\ndebemos tener claro que por tratarse de un tema eminentemente técnico, la\r\ncompetencia legal para emitir un pronunciamiento sobre ese particular le ha\r\nsido conferida al Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, tal\r\ny como se deriva de su Ley Constitutiva (N°2726 del 14 de abril de 1961), cuyos\r\nartículos 2 y 21 establecen por su orden lo siguiente:\n\r\n\r\n\n\"Artículo 2. Corresponde al Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y\r\nAlcantarillados:\n\r\n\r\n\na)\r\nDirigir y vigilar todo lo\r\nconcerniente para proveer a los habitantes de la república de un servicio de agua potable, recolección y evacuación de\r\naguas negras y residuos industriales líquidos y de aguas pluviales en las\r\náreas urbanas; \n\r\n\r\n\nb) Determinar\r\nla prioridad, conveniencia y viabilidad de los diferentes proyectos que se\r\npropongan para construir, reformar, ampliar, modificar obras de acueductos y\r\nalcantarillados; las cuales no se podrán ejecutar sin su aprobación;\n\r\n\r\n\n...\n\r\n\r\n\nd)\r\nAsesorar a los demás organismos del Estado y coordinar las actividades públicas y privadas en todos\r\nlos asuntos relativos al establecimiento de acueductos y alcantarillados y\r\ncontrol de la contaminación de los recursos de agua, siendo obligatoria,\r\nen todo caso, su consulta, e inexcusable el cumplimiento de sus recomendaciones;\r\n(...)\"\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n\"Artículo 21. Todo proyecto de construcción, ampliación o\r\nmodificación de sistemas de abastecimiento de agua potable y\r\ndisposición de aguas servidas y pluviales, público o privado, deberá ser\r\naprobado previamente por el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y\r\nAlcantarillados, el que podrá realizar la inspección que estime conveniente\r\npara comprobar que las obras se realizan de acuerdo con los planes aprobados. Dicha\r\naprobación previa será obligatoria en todos los casos de\r\nconstrucción de fraccionamientos, urbanizaciones o lotificaciones en\r\ncualquier parte del\r\npaís y ningún otro organismo estatal otorgará permisos o aprobaciones de\r\nconstrucción sin tal aprobación por parte del Instituto. La infracción de\r\neste mandato ocasionará la nulidad de cualquier permiso de construcción otorgado\r\nen contravención de esta prohibición teniéndose por legalmente inexistente la\r\nparcelación o el proyecto en su caso, con las consecuencias, en cuanto a\r\nterceros, que prevé el artículo 35 de la\r\n Ley de Planificación Urbana, Nº 4240 de 15 de noviembre de\r\n1968.\"\n\r\n\r\n\nComo vemos, la Ley es clara\r\nen conferir a este ente autónomo la competencia consultiva de carácter técnico\r\nen materia de viabilidad, control y aprobación de los sistemas de disposición\r\nde aguas de los proyectos urbanísticos. Lo anterior queda plenamente confirmado\r\ncuando la Ley de\r\nPlanificación Urbana (N°4240 del15 de noviembre de 1968) establece en su\r\nartículo 38 inciso a), que no se dará permiso para urbanizar terrenos: \"Cuando\r\nno se se satisfaga las normas mínimas reglamentarias, o los interesados no\r\nhayan cumplido los trámites pertinentes, entre los que está la aprobación\r\nindispensable de los planos por la\r\n Dirección de Urbanismo y el Servicio\r\nNacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillado\".\r\nEn el mismo sentido, el Reglamento para el Control Nacional de\r\nFraccionamientos y Urbanizaciones dispone claramente que \"el abastecimiento\r\nde agua potable y la evacuación de aguas pluviales se ajustarán a las normas del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y\r\nAlcantarillados\" (artículo III.3.11). \n\r\n\r\n\n VII.- Pues bien, teniendo claro lo anterior, este Tribunal\r\nestima que en el caso concreto lleva razón la apelante al argumentar que el\r\nacuerdo impugnado, mediante el cual se aprobó la solicitud de dotación de agua\r\npotable para el Proyecto Las Terrazas, es ayuno de sustento técnico. Esto por\r\ncuanto según se aprecia de los autos, no consta que el Instituto Costarricense\r\nde Acueductos y Alcantarillados haya otorgado su aprobación al proyecto en\r\ncuestión, certificando la factibilidad del abastecimiento de agua potable para\r\neste desarrollo urbanístico. En este sentido debemos recordar que es obligación\r\ndel desarrollador presentar los planos del anteproyecto, con el fin de que el\r\nente técnico valore el diseño constructivo en su integralidad -dimensión,\r\ncantidad de lotes, ubicación del terreno, sistemas de manejo de agua, entre\r\notros-, y a partir de esa revisión dictamine, técnicamente, si resulta\r\nviable que los futuros habitantes del terreno a urbanizar puedan gozar del\r\nsuministro del vital líquido, sino además determinar si tal provisión no\r\ngenerará un impacto negativo en el servicio de agua potable que reciben los\r\ndemás ciudadanos que residen en la zona. Aquí es importante aclarar que el\r\ninforme que consta en autos, denominado: \"Estudio de Optimización\r\nAcueducto Municipal de Paraíso de Cartago\", elaborado en setiembre del\r\n2007 por el Departamento de Desarrollo Físico del AyA (folios 47 a 77), no constituye -ni\r\npodría constituir- el criterio técnico que se echa de menos para el caso del\r\nproyecto urbanístico Las Terrazas, en los términos antes expuestos, dado que,\r\ncon claridad, el mencionado documento indica que su objetivo general es el\r\nsiguiente: \"Realizar una propuesta técnica, mediante la cual se\r\ngarantice un abastecimiento eficiente de agua para toda la población cubierta\r\npor el Acueducto Municipal de Paraíso de Cartago durante el período de diseño\r\n(2002-2022); es decir, este estudio no se realizó como consecuencia de la\r\npresentación de la propuesta del desarrollo urbanístico que aquí se discute,\r\nsiendo notorio que se trata, por el contrario, de un informe que pretende\r\natender un problema de carácter mucho más general y regional, cual es la\r\nnecesidad de evitar una situación de futuro desabastecimiento en el acueducto\r\nde Paraíso, tema en el cual el AyA emitió una serie de medidas a implementar\r\npor parte de la\r\n Municipalidad de Paraíso. Es preciso indicar que este documento, a juicio del Tribunal, hace más evidente aún\r\nla carencia de motivos técnicos que habilitaran al Concejo a tomar el acuerdo\r\nque aquí se impugna. Véase que en su contenido, el estudio de optimización hace\r\nver que en la región de Paraíso existe una situación muy crítica en lo que\r\nrespecta al abastecimiento futuro por crecimiento de la población, señalándose\r\nen ese estudio que el sistema de agua potable de Paraíso se encuentra\r\nactualmente en su punto de equilibrio, ya que es ligeramente deficitario durante\r\nla estación seca, y en algunas zonas las presiones funcionan por debajo de la\r\nnorma. Asimismo, en el informe expresamente se le hace ver a la Municipalidad que\r\ndebe definir un plan de implementación y mantenimiento durante el período\r\n2002-2022, y se le indica que debe ejecutar una serie de medidas de gran\r\nmagnitud, entre las cuales destaca la construcción de un tanque en el sector de\r\nPáez; no obstante, ninguna de tales acciones de carácter técnico se ha\r\ndemostrado aquí que hayan sido cumplidas por la Municipalidad\r\nrecurrida, o al menos que el desarrollador interesado las haya suplido. En este\r\nsentido, tal y como consta en el hecho probado número dos de esta resolución,\r\nentre otras muchas cosas, el análisis del AyA advierte lo siguiente: \"Según\r\nel estudio de Optimización ( 1° parte), el distrito\r\nde Paraíso muestra una tendencia principal de crecimiento hacia el oeste y\r\nnoroeste (zonas 1 y 5: Llanos de Santa Ana, Lucía, Estadio y alrededores).\r\nLa topografía de este sector, y su conveniente\r\nubicación han permitido el crecimiento urbano sostenido. Por lo tanto es de\r\nesperar que la expansión del distrito continué en el resto\r\nde los terrenos más planos de esta zona. Sin embargo, en este\r\nsector de potencial crecimiento futuro se presentan problemas de abastecimiento\r\ndurante gran parte del\r\ndía. Estos se deben principalmente a que el tanque MUCAP \r\n(1365 m.s.n.m.)\r\nque lo abastece, se encuentra a una altura inadecuada para entregar agua a\r\npresiones admisibles. La mayor parte de los Llanos de Santa Lucía se encuentra\r\nentre las elevaciones 1340 y 1360\r\n m.s.n.m. Por esta razón, se requiere de la construcción\r\nde un tanque por encima de la cota 1400 m.s.n.m. para cubrir la zona oeste del\r\nAcueducto de Paraíso. Se propone la ubicación de este\r\nnuevo tanque en el sector de Páez, al norte de Paraíso ... 5.2.1 Escenario\r\nFuturo: Año 2022. ... Notése que la mayoría de las\r\nmejoras para el escenario actual (2007) se repiten para el escenario futuro\r\n(2022), pero con diámetros mayores. Estas últimas (2022) son las mejoras\r\ndefinitivas para garantizar la calidad del servicio de la red durante\r\ntodo el período de diseño. No obstante, se ha presentado ambas propuestas,\r\npues la Municipalidad\r\nde Paraíso deberá definir un plan de implementación y\r\nmantenimiento acorde a su flujo de caja proyectado durante el período de diseño\r\n(2002-2022) ...\" Entre sus muchas recomendaciones, sin que esto\r\nimplique que las restantes no son de interés, se citan las siguientes: \"(...)\r\n7. Se recomienda que la\r\n Municipalidad de Paraíso limite los permisos de construcción\r\na las áreas de influencia de los tanques (antes señalados). Ya que el\r\ncrecimiento principal de la ciudad se da hacia el oeste, es importante no\r\npermitir el desarrollo urbanístico fuera de la zona de influencia del\r\nTanque Páez (ver figura 2.3). 8. El orden de prioridades de las obras a\r\nconstruir a corto plazo es el siguiente: a. Construcción Tanque Paez. b. Interconexión Fuentes Boquerón y Paso Ancho-Tanque Páez.\r\nc. Conexión directa Tanque Páez-Zonas 1 y 5 (distribución). d. Conexión directa\r\nTanque MUCAP-Zonas 2 y 3. e. Instalación de válvulas reductoras de presión. d. Cambios de diámetros indicados, y cierre de anillos en\r\nred de casco central. (...) 12.\r\n A partir del año 2010, la\r\ndemanda será mayor a la capacidad de producción del sistema, para lo cual será\r\nnecesaria la captación de 86.6 L/s del\r\nRío Naranjo. Esto cubriría la demanda hasta el final del período de\r\ndiseño (2022). Deberán realizarse los análisis hidráulico y económico\r\nrespectivos, para estimar los costos de esta obra. 13. Ha de garantizarse la\r\nsostenibilidad de la producción hídrica actual. Para esto, la Municipalidad de\r\nParaíso deberá poner en marcha un programa de\r\nmonitoreo y protección de los acuíferos captados y sus zonas de recarga, así como de los sitios de\r\ntoma. Es de vital importancia que se protejan las zonas\r\nboscosas que circundan la tomas y cubren los acuíferos explotados.\"\r\nPues bien, a partir de este informe técnico del AyA, no queda duda de\r\nque la decisión del Concejo Municipal de aprobar la dotación de agua potable\r\npara el proyecto urbanístico Las Terrazas, resultó sumamente prematura y en\r\nningún momento estuvo amparada en la aprobación por parte del Instituto de\r\nAcueductos y Alcantarillados de los planos del anteproyecto, en su carácter de\r\nente técnico especializado en la materia, tal y\r\ncomo lo exige el ordenamiento jurídico. Lejos de ello, del propio acuerdo\r\nvenido en alzada se desprende que el Concejo reconoce la necesidad de\r\nimplementar las medidas propuestas por el AyA, en su estudio de optimización\r\ndel año 2007, especialmente la construcción del Tanque Páez, sin embargo, con\r\nun discurso bastante hipotético, termina indicando que esas acciones habrán de\r\nser ejecutadas por el gobierno local mientras se realiza el proyecto de la Urbanización,\r\nargumento que no solo carece de toda lógica posible, sino que además revela el\r\nirrespeto del Concejo Municipal por las advertencias de naturaleza técnica que\r\nen su momento emitió el ente competente en la materia, concretamente relación\r\ncon el problema de abastecimiento de agua potable en el distrito de Paraíso.\r\nRecordemos que la\r\n Administración tiene como límite a sus actuaciones, la\r\ncorrecta aplicación de las reglas unívocas de la ciencia o de la técnica, de\r\nconformidad con el artículos 15 y 16 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública,\r\nno pudiendo en ningún momento adoptar actos que violenten o desconozcan tales\r\nreglas, so pena de resultar absolutamente nulos, por tener un vicio grave en el\r\nmotivo del acto. En este caso ello es lo que ha\r\nocurrido, y por tanto, constituye razón más que suficiente para anular el\r\nacuerdo venido en alzada, por carecer de sustento técnico que permitiera\r\nadoptar la decisión impugnada. \n\r\n\r\n\n VIII.- Así las cosas, procede acoger el recurso de\r\napelación interpuesto y anular el acuerdo impugnado, dándose por agotada la vía\r\nadministrativa.-”",
  "body_en_text": "V.-\nOn the merits.- The challenged agreement must be annulled.- The materialization of an Urban Development Project requires, pursuant to our legal system, compliance with a series of prior requirements that must be fully satisfied, in order to ultimately obtain the granting of the municipal permit for development (urbanizar). Among those many requirements, the developer must demonstrate that on all the lots where the construction of homes and premises is conceptually planned, access to a safe and efficient potable water supply service is technically feasible. Verification of this project component is essential, as it concerns a service that is directly linked to the fundamental right to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (Article 50 of the Constitución Política). Precisely, the protection of this right and its harmonization with the local-level territorial planning of populations corresponds to the municipalities, insofar as they are responsible, by constitutional and legal mandate, for the planning and control of the urban development of their respective canton, a task within which they have the legal duty to ensure the protection of the interests of the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the community (Articles 169 of the Constitution, 28 of the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, 15 and 19 of the Ley de Planificación Urbana, and 1 of the Ley de Construcciones).\n\nVI.-\nNow, regarding the determination of the feasibility of an adequate potable water supply service for a housing project, we must be clear that, since this is an eminently technical matter, the legal competence to issue a pronouncement on this particular has been conferred upon the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, as derived from its Constitutive Law (N°2726 of April 14, 1961), whose Articles 2 and 21 establish, in order, the following:\n\n\"Article 2. The Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is responsible for:\n\na) Directing and overseeing everything concerning the provision to the inhabitants of the republic of a potable water service, the collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste, and stormwater in urban areas;\n\nb) Determining the priority, advisability, and viability of the different projects proposed to build, reform, expand, or modify aqueduct and sewer works; which may not be executed without its approval;\n\n...\n\nd) Advising other State bodies and coordinating public and private activities in all matters relating to the establishment of aqueducts and sewers and the control of water resource contamination, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations being inexcusable; (...)\"\n\n\"Article 21. Any project for the construction, expansion, or modification of potable water supply systems and the disposal of sewage and stormwater, whether public or private, must be previously approved by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, which may carry out the inspection it deems appropriate to verify that the works are carried out in accordance with the approved plans. Said prior approval shall be mandatory in all cases of construction of subdivisions (fraccionamientos), developments (urbanizaciones), or land divisions (lotificaciones) in any part of the country, and no other state body shall grant construction permits or approvals without such approval from the Institute. The violation of this mandate shall cause the nullity of any construction permit granted in contravention of this prohibition, the land division (parcelación) or the project, as the case may be, being considered legally non-existent, with the consequences, regarding third parties, provided for in Article 35 of the Ley de Planificación Urbana, No. 4240 of November 15, 1968.\"\n\nAs we see, the Law is clear in conferring upon this autonomous entity the technical advisory competence regarding the feasibility, control, and approval of water disposal systems for urban development projects. The foregoing is fully confirmed when the Ley de Planificación Urbana (No. 4240 of November 15, 1968) establishes in its Article 38, subsection a), that a permit to develop (urbanizar) land shall not be granted: \"When the minimum regulatory standards are not satisfied, or the interested parties have not completed the relevant procedures, among which is the indispensable approval of the plans by the Dirección de Urbanismo and the Servicio Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillado.\" In the same vein, the Reglamento para el Control Nacional de Fraccionamientos y Urbanizaciones clearly provides that \"the potable water supply and stormwater evacuation shall conform to the standards of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados\" (Article III.3.11).\n\nVII.- Well then, with the foregoing clear, this Court finds that the appellant is correct in arguing that the challenged agreement, by which the request for potable water allocation for the Las Terrazas Project was approved, lacks technical support. This is because, as seen from the court record, there is no evidence that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados granted its approval to the project in question, certifying the feasibility of the potable water supply for this urban development. In this regard, we must remember that it is the developer's obligation to present the preliminary project plans, so that the technical entity can evaluate the construction design in its entirety - dimension, number of lots, site location, water management systems, among others - and, based on that review, issue a technical determination on whether it is feasible for the future inhabitants of the land to be developed to enjoy the supply of the vital liquid, but also determine whether such provision will generate a negative impact on the potable water service received by other citizens residing in the area. Here it is important to clarify that the report in the record, called: \"Estudio de Optimización Acueducto Municipal de Paraíso de Cartago\", prepared in September 2007 by the Department of Physical Development of AyA (pages 47 to 77), does not constitute - nor could it constitute - the technical opinion that is found lacking for the case of the Las Terrazas urban development project, under the terms described above, given that the aforementioned document clearly indicates that its general objective is the following: \"To prepare a technical proposal, through which an efficient water supply is guaranteed for the entire population covered by the Acueducto Municipal de Paraíso de Cartago during the design period (2002-2022); that is, this study was not carried out as a consequence of the presentation of the urban development proposal discussed here, it being evident that it is, on the contrary, a report intended to address a much more general and regional problem, which is the need to avoid a future shortage situation in the Paraíso aqueduct, a topic on which AyA issued a series of measures to be implemented by the Municipalidad de Paraíso. It is necessary to point out that this document, in the Court's opinion, makes even more evident the lack of technical grounds that would have authorized the Council to adopt the agreement being challenged here. Note that in its content, the optimization study reveals that in the Paraíso region there is a very critical situation regarding future supply due to population growth, stating in that study that the Paraíso potable water system is currently at its equilibrium point, as it is slightly deficient during the dry season, and in some areas, pressures operate below the standard. Likewise, the report expressly advises the Municipality that it must define an implementation and maintenance plan during the 2002-2022 period, and indicates that it must execute a series of large-scale measures, among which the construction of a tank in the Páez sector stands out; however, none of such technical actions have been demonstrated here to have been fulfilled by the respondent Municipality, or at least that the interested developer has supplied them. In this sense, as stated in proven fact number two of this ruling, among many other things, the AyA's analysis warns of the following: \"According to the Optimization Study (1st part), the district of Paraíso shows a main growth trend towards the west and northwest (zones 1 and 5: Llanos de Santa Ana, Lucía, Estadio and surroundings). The topography of this sector, and its convenient location have allowed sustained urban growth. Therefore, it is expected that the district's expansion will continue in the rest of the flatter lands in this zone. However, in this sector of potential future growth, there are supply problems during much of the day. These are mainly due to the fact that the MUCAP tank (1365 m.a.s.l.) that supplies it is at an inadequate height to deliver water at admissible pressures. Most of Llanos de Santa Lucía is located between elevations 1340 and 1360 m.a.s.l. For this reason, the construction of a tank above the 1400 m.a.s.l. contour line is required to cover the western zone of the Paraíso Aqueduct. The location of this new tank is proposed in the Páez sector, north of Paraíso ... 5.2.1 Future Scenario: Year 2022. ... Note that most of the improvements for the current scenario (2007) are repeated for the future scenario (2022), but with larger diameters. These latter (2022) are the definitive improvements to guarantee the network's service quality during the entire design period. However, both proposals have been presented, as the Municipalidad de Paraíso must define an implementation and maintenance plan according to its projected cash flow during the design period (2002-2022) ...\" Among its many recommendations, without this implying that the remaining ones are not of interest, the following are cited: \"(...) 7. It is recommended that the Municipalidad de Paraíso limit construction permits to the areas of influence of the tanks (previously indicated). Since the main growth of the city is towards the west, it is important not to allow urban development outside the area of influence of the Páez Tank (see figure 2.3). 8. The order of priorities for works to be constructed in the short term is as follows: a. Construction of the Páez Tank. b. Interconnection of Boquerón and Paso Ancho Sources-Páez Tank. c. Direct connection Páez Tank-Zones 1 and 5 (distribution). d. Direct connection MUCAP Tank-Zones 2 and 3. e. Installation of pressure-reducing valves. d. Changes of indicated diameters, and closing of rings in the central core network. (...) 12. As of the year 2010, demand will be greater than the system's production capacity, for which the intake of 86.6 L/s from the Río Naranjo will be necessary. This would cover demand until the end of the design period (2022). The respective hydraulic and economic analyses must be carried out to estimate the costs of this work. 13. The sustainability of current water production must be guaranteed. For this, the Municipalidad de Paraíso must launch a monitoring and protection program for the captured aquifers and their recharge zones, as well as the intake sites. It is of vital importance to protect the forested areas (zonas boscosas) surrounding the intakes and covering the exploited aquifers.\" Well then, from this technical report by AyA, there is no doubt that the decision of the Municipal Council to approve the potable water allocation for the Las Terrazas urban development project was extremely premature and was at no time supported by the approval by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados of the preliminary project plans, in its capacity as the specialized technical entity in the matter, as required by the legal system. Far from it, the appealed agreement itself reveals that the Council acknowledges the need to implement the measures proposed by AyA in its 2007 optimization study, especially the construction of the Páez Tank; however, with a rather hypothetical discourse, it ends up indicating that those actions are to be executed by the local government while the Development (Urbanización) project is underway, an argument that not only lacks any possible logic but also reveals the Municipal Council's disregard for the technical warnings issued at the time by the competent entity in the matter, specifically regarding the potable water supply problem in the district of Paraíso. Let us recall that the Administration's actions are limited by the correct application of the unequivocal rules of science or technology, in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, and it cannot at any time adopt acts that violate or disregard such rules, under penalty of being absolutely null, due to a serious defect in the grounds (motivo) of the act. In this case, that is what has occurred, and therefore, it constitutes more than sufficient reason to annul the appealed agreement, for lacking the technical support that would have allowed the challenged decision to be adopted.\n\nVIII.- That being the case, it is appropriate to grant the appeal (recurso de apelación) filed and annul the challenged agreement, the administrative channel being deemed exhausted.-”\n\nIn this regard, we must remember that it is the developer's obligation to submit the preliminary project (anteproyecto) plans, so that the technical entity can evaluate the construction design in its entirety <i>-dimension, number of lots, land location, water management systems, among others-,</i> and based on that review, issue a technical determination as to whether it is viable for the future inhabitants of the land to be urbanized to enjoy the supply of the vital liquid, and also determine whether such provision will not generate a negative impact on the potable water service received by other citizens residing in the area. Here it is important to clarify that the report contained in the case file, called: \"Optimization Study of the Municipal Aqueduct of Paraíso de Cartago\" (\"Estudio de Optimización Acueducto Municipal de Paraíso de Cartago\"), prepared in September 2007 by the Physical Development Department of AyA (folios 47 to 77), does not constitute -nor could it constitute- the technical criterion that is missing for the case of the Las Terrazas urban development project, in the terms previously stated, given that, clearly, the mentioned document indicates that its general objective is the following: <i>\"To make a technical proposal, through which an efficient water supply is guaranteed for the entire population covered by the Municipal Aqueduct of Paraíso de Cartago during the design period (2002-2022); </i>that is to say, this study was not carried out as a consequence of the presentation of the urban development proposal discussed here, it being notorious that it is, on the contrary, a report intended to address a much more general and regional problem, which is the need to avoid a future shortage situation in the Paraíso aqueduct, an issue on which AyA issued a series of measures to be implemented by the Municipality of Paraíso. It is necessary to indicate that this document, in the Court's judgment, makes the lack of technical grounds that would have enabled the Council to adopt the agreement challenged here even more evident. Note that in its content, the optimization study reveals that in the Paraíso region there is a very critical situation regarding future supply due to population growth, with that study pointing out that the Paraíso potable water system is currently at its equilibrium point, as it is slightly deficient during the dry season, and in some areas the pressures operate below the standard. Likewise, the report expressly makes the Municipality aware that it must define an implementation and maintenance plan during the 2002-2022 period, and indicates that it must execute a series of major measures, among which the construction of a tank in the Páez sector stands out; however, none of such technical actions have been demonstrated here to have been fulfilled by the appellant Municipality, or at least that the interested developer has supplied them. In this sense, as stated in proven fact number two of this resolution, among many other things, the AyA analysis warns of the following: <i>\"According to the Optimization study (1st part), <b>the district of Paraíso shows a main growth trend towards the west and northwest (zones 1 and 5: Llanos de Santa Ana, Lucía, Estadio and surroundings)</b>. The topography of this sector, and its convenient location have allowed sustained urban growth. <b>Therefore, it is to be expected that the expansion of the district will continue in the rest of the flatter lands of this area. However, in this sector of potential future growth, supply problems occur during a large part of the day.</b> These are mainly due to the fact that the MUCAP tank (1365 m.a.s.l.) that supplies it is at an inadequate height to deliver water at admissible pressures. Most of the Llanos de Santa Lucía is between the elevations 1340 and 1360 m.a.s.l. For this reason, the construction of a tank above the 1400 m.a.s.l. level is required to cover the west zone of the Paraíso Aqueduct. The location of this new tank is proposed in the Páez sector, north of Paraíso ... <b>5.2.1 Future Scenario: Year 2022. </b>... Note that most of the improvements for the current scenario (2007) are repeated for the future scenario (2022), but with larger diameters. These latter (2022) are the definitive improvements to guarantee the quality of the network service throughout the entire design period. <b>However, both proposals have been presented, as the Municipality of Paraíso must define an implementation and maintenance plan according to its projected cash flow during the design period (2002-2022) ...\" </b></i>Among its many recommendations, without this implying that the rest are not of interest, the following are cited: <i>\"(...) <b>7. It is recommended that the Municipality of Paraíso limit construction permits to the areas of influence of the tanks (indicated above). Because the main growth of the city is westward, it is important not to allow urban development outside the zone of influence of the Páez Tank (see figure 2.3). 8. The order of priorities for works to be built in the short term is as follows: a. Construction of the Páez Tank. b. Interconnection of the Boquerón and Paso Ancho Sources-Páez Tank. c. Direct connection Páez Tank-Zones 1 and 5 (distribution). d. Direct connection MUCAP Tank-Zones 2 and 3. e. Installation of pressure-reducing valves. d. Changes of indicated diameters, and closure of loops in the central core network. (...) 12. As of the year 2010, the demand will be greater than the production capacity of the system, for which the capture of 86.6 L/s from the Naranjo River will be necessary. This would cover the demand until the end of the design period (2022). The respective hydraulic and economic analyses must be conducted to estimate the costs of this work. 13. The sustainability of the current water production must be guaranteed. For this, the Municipality of Paraíso must implement a monitoring and protection program for the captured aquifers and their recharge areas, as well as the intake sites. It is of vital importance to protect the forested areas (zonas boscosas) surrounding the intakes and covering the exploited aquifers.\"</b> </i>Well, from this technical report by AyA, there is no doubt that the decision of the Municipal Council to approve the provision of potable water for the Las Terrazas urban development project was extremely premature and was never supported by the approval by the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers of the preliminary project (anteproyecto) plans, in its capacity as the specialized technical entity on the matter, as required by the legal system. Far from it, from the appealed agreement itself it is evident that the Council recognizes the need to implement the measures proposed by AyA in its 2007 optimization study, especially the construction of the Páez Tank; however, with a rather hypothetical reasoning, it ends up indicating that those actions will have to be executed by the local government while the Urbanization project is being carried out, an argument that not only lacks any possible logic, but also reveals the Municipal Council's disrespect for the technical warnings issued at the time by the competent entity on the matter, specifically in relation to the problem of potable water supply in the district of Paraíso. Let us remember that the Administration has as a limit to its actions, the correct application of the univocal rules of science or technique, in accordance with articles 15 and 16 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública), and may at no time adopt acts that violate or ignore such rules, under penalty of being absolutely null, for having a serious defect in the grounds of the act. In this case, that is what has occurred, and therefore, it constitutes more than sufficient reason to annul the appealed agreement, because it lacks technical support that would have allowed the challenged decision to be adopted.\n\nVIII.- Therefore, it is appropriate to uphold the appeal filed and annul the challenged agreement, exhausting the administrative remedy.-\"\n\nPrecisely, the protection of this right and its harmonization with the territorial planning of populations at the local level falls to the municipalities, insofar as they are responsible, by constitutional and legal mandate, for the planning and control of urban development in their respective canton, a task within which they have the legal duty to ensure the **protection of the interests of health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the community** (Article 169 of the Constitution, 28 of the Organic Law of the Environment, 15 and 19 of the Urban Planning Law, and 1 of the Construction Law).\n\n**VI.-** Now, regarding the determination of the feasibility of an adequate drinking water supply service for a housing project, we must be clear that, as it is an eminently technical matter, the legal competence to issue a pronouncement on this particular has been conferred upon the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), as derived from its Constitutive Law (No. 2726 of April 14, 1961), whose Articles 2 and 21 establish, respectively, the following:\n\n\"Article 2. The Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is responsible for:\n\n**a) Directing and supervising** everything concerning providing the inhabitants of the republic with a drinking water service, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste **and stormwater in urban areas**;\n\n**b) <u>Determining the priority, convenience, and viability</u> of the different projects proposed to construct, reform, expand, or modify aqueduct and sewer works; <u>which may not be executed without its approval</u>;**\n\n...\n\n**d) Advising the other State bodies** and coordinating public and private activities in all matters relating to the establishment of aqueducts and sewers and the control of water resource contamination, **<u>its consultation being mandatory, in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations being inexcusable</u>;** (...)\"\n\n\"Article 21. **Every project for the construction, expansion, or modification of <u>drinking water supply systems</u>** and disposal of sewage and stormwater, public or private, **must be previously approved by the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers,** which may carry out the inspection it deems appropriate to verify that the works are carried out in accordance with the approved plans. **Said prior approval shall be <u>mandatory</u>** in all cases of construction of subdivisions (fraccionamientos), **developments (urbanizaciones)** or lotifications in any part of the country and no other state body shall grant construction permits or approvals without such approval from the Institute. **The violation of this mandate shall cause the nullity of any construction permit** granted in contravention of this prohibition, the parceling or the project, as the case may be, being considered legally non-existent, with the consequences, regarding third parties, provided for in Article 35 of the Urban Planning Law, No. 4240 of November 15, 1968.\"\n\nAs we can see, the Law is clear in conferring upon this autonomous entity the technical advisory competence regarding the viability, control, and approval of water disposal systems for urban development projects. The foregoing is fully confirmed when the Urban Planning Law (No. 4240 of November 15, 1968) establishes in its Article 38, subsection a), that permission to urbanize land shall not be granted: \"*When the minimum regulatory standards are not satisfied, or the interested parties have not completed the pertinent procedures, among which is **the indispensable approval of the plans by the Directorate of Urbanism and the National Aqueduct and Sewer Service**.*\" In the same vein, the Regulation for the National Control of Subdivisions (Fraccionamientos) and Developments (Urbanizaciones) clearly provides that \"*the **drinking water supply** and stormwater evacuation **shall conform to the standards of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers***\" (Article III.3.11).\n\n**VII.-** Well, having made the foregoing clear, this Tribunal considers that in the specific case, the appellant is correct in arguing that the contested agreement, by which the request for drinking water provision for the Proyecto Las Terrazas was approved, lacks technical basis. This is because, as can be seen from the case file, there is no record that the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers granted its approval to the project in question, certifying the feasibility of the drinking water supply for this urban development. In this regard, we must remember that it is the developer's obligation to present the preliminary project plans, so that the technical entity may assess the constructive design in its entirety *-dimension, number of lots, land location, water management systems, among others-*, and based on that review, technically rule on whether it is viable for the future inhabitants of the land to be urbanized to enjoy the supply of the vital liquid, and also determine if such provision will not generate a negative impact on the drinking water service received by the other citizens residing in the area. It is important to clarify here that the report appearing in the file, called: \"Optimization Study, Municipal Aqueduct of Paraíso de Cartago,\" prepared in September 2007 by the Department of Physical Development of AyA (folios 47 to 77), does not constitute—nor could it constitute—the technical criterion that is lacking for the case of the Las Terrazas urban development project, in the terms previously stated, given that, clearly, the mentioned document indicates that its general objective is the following: \"*To carry out a technical proposal, by which an efficient water supply is guaranteed for the entire population covered by the Municipal Aqueduct of Paraíso de Cartago during the design period (2002-2022);*\" that is, this study was not carried out as a consequence of the presentation of the urban development proposal discussed here, it being evident that it is, on the contrary, a report that seeks to address a much more general and regional problem, which is the need to avoid a situation of future shortage in the Paraíso aqueduct, a topic on which AyA issued a series of measures to be implemented by the Municipality of Paraíso. It is necessary to indicate that this document, in the Tribunal's judgment, makes even more evident the lack of technical grounds that enabled the Council to adopt the agreement contested here. Observe that in its content, the optimization study reveals that in the Paraíso region there is a very critical situation regarding future supply due to population growth, pointing out in that study that the Paraíso drinking water system is currently at its equilibrium point, since it is slightly deficient during the dry season, and in some areas the pressures operate below the norm. Likewise, the report expressly makes it clear to the Municipality that it must define an implementation and maintenance plan during the period 2002-2022, and it is indicated that a series of large-scale measures must be executed, among which the construction of a tank in the Páez sector stands out; nevertheless, none of such technical actions have been demonstrated here to have been fulfilled by the respondent Municipality, or at least that the interested developer has supplied them. In this sense, as recorded in proven fact number two of this resolution, among many other things, the AyA analysis warns the following: \"*According to the Optimization study (1st part), **the district of Paraíso shows a main growth trend towards the west and northwest (zones 1 and 5: Llanos de Santa Ana, Lucía, Estadio and surroundings)**. The topography of this sector, and its convenient location have allowed sustained urban growth. **Therefore, it is to be expected that the expansion of the district continues in the rest of the flatter lands of this area. However, in this sector of potential future growth, supply problems occur during much of the day.** These are mainly due to the fact that the MUCAP tank (1365 m.a.s.l.) that supplies it, is at an inadequate height to deliver water at admissible pressures. Most of Llanos de Santa Lucía is between the elevations 1340 and 1360 m.a.s.l. For this reason, the construction of a tank above the 1400 m.a.s.l. elevation is required to cover the west zone of the Paraíso Aqueduct. The location of this new tank is proposed in the Páez sector, north of Paraíso ... **5.2.1 Future Scenario: Year 2022.** ... Note that most of the improvements for the current scenario (2007) are repeated for the future scenario (2022), but with larger diameters. These latter (2022) are the definitive improvements to guarantee the quality of the network service during the entire design period. **However, both proposals have been presented, since the Municipality of Paraíso must define an implementation and maintenance plan according to its projected cash flow during the design period (2002-2022) ...** *\" Among its many recommendations, without this implying that the remaining ones are not of interest, the following are cited: \"* (...) **7. It is recommended that the Municipality of Paraíso limit construction permits to the areas of influence of the tanks (previously indicated). Since the main growth of the city is towards the west, it is important not to allow urban development outside the influence zone of the Páez Tank (see figure 2.3). 8. The order of priorities for works to be built in the short term is as follows: a. Construction Páez Tank. b. Interconnection Boquerón and Paso Ancho Sources-Páez Tank. c. Direct connection Páez Tank-Zones 1 and 5 (distribution). d. Direct connection MUCAP Tank-Zones 2 and 3. e. Installation of pressure reducing valves. d. Changes of indicated diameters, and loop closures in the central core network. (...) 12. As of the year 2010, the demand will be greater than the production capacity of the system, for which the intake of 86.6 L/s from the Río Naranjo will be necessary. This would cover the demand until the end of the design period (2022). The respective hydraulic and economic analyses must be carried out to estimate the costs of this work. 13. The sustainability of the current hydrological production must be guaranteed. For this, the Municipality of Paraíso must launch a program for monitoring and protecting the captured aquifers and their recharge zones, as well as the intake sites. It is vitally important that the forested areas surrounding the intakes and covering the exploited aquifers be protected.*\" **\" Well, based on this technical report from AyA, there is no doubt that the decision of the Municipal Council to approve the drinking water provision for the Las Terrazas urban development project was extremely premature and was never supported by the approval from the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers of the preliminary project plans, in its capacity as a specialized technical entity in the matter, as required by the legal system. Far from it, it can be inferred from the agreement itself on appeal that the Council recognizes the need to implement the measures proposed by AyA, in its 2007 optimization study, especially the construction of the Páez Tank; however, with a rather hypothetical discourse, it ends up indicating that those actions will be executed by the local government while the Development (Urbanización) project is carried out, an argument that not only lacks any possible logic, but also reveals the Municipal Council's disrespect for the technical warnings that the competent entity on the matter issued at the time, specifically regarding the drinking water supply problem in the Paraíso district. Let us remember that the Administration has as a limit to its actions, the correct application of the univocal rules of science or technique, in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 of the General Law of Public Administration, being unable at any time to adopt acts that violate or disregard such rules, under penalty of being absolutely null, due to having a serious defect in the reason for the act. In this case, this is what has occurred, and therefore, it constitutes more than sufficient reason to annul the agreement on appeal, for lacking the technical basis that allowed the contested decision to be adopted.\n\n**VIII.-** This being the case, it is appropriate to grant the appeal filed and annul the contested agreement, the administrative channel being thereby exhausted.-\""
}