{
  "id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-466953",
  "citation": "Res. 00416-2010 Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
  "section": "nexus_decisions",
  "doc_type": "court_decision",
  "title_es": "Confirmación de denegatoria de disponibilidad de agua a proyecto urbanístico San Vicente",
  "title_en": "Confirmation of denial of water availability for San Vicente urban development project",
  "summary_es": "El Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III confirmó el acuerdo del Concejo de la Municipalidad de Belén que denegó la disponibilidad de agua al proyecto Condominios San Vicente, tanto por medio del acueducto municipal como del AyA. El tribunal consideró que la Municipalidad ejerció su competencia exclusiva de control urbanístico y poder de policía, en resguardo del interés local y de los derechos fundamentales de los futuros habitantes. Señaló múltiples irregularidades en el permiso de construcción 7604-2008 —entre ellas, la ocupación del área de protección del pozo AB-1571 y la falta de garantía de suministro hídrico— que impedían dotar de agua al proyecto. Rechazó el argumento de que el acceso al agua es un derecho humano del desarrollador, pues los titulares son los usuarios finales. Además, ordenó a la Municipalidad iniciar de inmediato la anulación del permiso de construcción, dada su posible nulidad absoluta, pero sin declararla directamente, instando a seguir los procedimientos legales correspondientes.",
  "summary_en": "The Third Section of the Administrative Court upheld the Belén Municipal Council's decision to deny water availability for the San Vicente Condominiums project, both from the municipal aqueduct and the AyA. The court found that the Municipality acted within its exclusive competence to exercise urban control and police power, safeguarding local interests and the fundamental rights of future residents. It pointed to numerous irregularities in the construction permit 7604-2008—including the encroachment on the protection zone of well AB-1571 and the lack of guaranteed water supply—which prevented granting water to the project. It rejected the developer's argument that access to water is a human right of the developer, as rights holders are the end users. Additionally, it ordered the Municipality to immediately initiate annulment of the construction permit given its potential absolute nullity, though without declaring it itself, urging that proper legal procedures be followed.",
  "court_or_agency": "Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
  "date": "08/02/2010",
  "year": "2010",
  "topic_ids": [
    "water-law"
  ],
  "primary_topic_id": "water-law",
  "es_concept_hints": [
    "disponibilidad de agua",
    "competencia municipal",
    "poder de policía",
    "plan regulador",
    "autonomía municipal",
    "principio precautorio",
    "nulidad absoluta",
    "medida precautoria"
  ],
  "article_citations": [],
  "keywords_es": [
    "disponibilidad de agua",
    "permiso de construcción",
    "competencia municipal",
    "autonomía municipal",
    "poder de policía",
    "control urbanístico",
    "protección del pozo",
    "acueducto municipal",
    "principio precautorio",
    "derecho al agua",
    "nulidad absoluta",
    "medida precautoria",
    "Interés local",
    "plan regulador",
    "urbanización",
    "pozo AB-1571"
  ],
  "keywords_en": [
    "water availability",
    "construction permit",
    "municipal competence",
    "municipal autonomy",
    "police power",
    "urban control",
    "well protection",
    "municipal aqueduct",
    "precautionary principle",
    "right to water",
    "absolute nullity",
    "precautionary measure",
    "local interest",
    "regulatory plan",
    "urbanization",
    "well AB-1571"
  ],
  "excerpt_es": "Estima este Tribunal que el acuerdo municipal impugnado -artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos mil nueve de la Municipalidad de Belén- resulta conforme con el ordenamiento jurídico. A tal efecto, deben hacerse las siguientes reflexiones.\n\nPrimero: Fue dictado precisamente en ejercicio de las funciones que el ordenamiento -constitucional y legal- le ha delegado a los gobiernos municipales, en lo que atañe, no sólo a la ordenación urbano-local, sino en particular de control (poder de policía) en ese ámbito. Y es dictado con ocasión de una gestión de disponibilidad de agua potable para un proyecto urbanístico, previamente aprobado. Según se indicó anteriormente, la potestad urbanística que ejercen las municipalidades no se restringe al dictado de la normativa de la materia de su cantón, sino en la verificación, caso por caso, según las propias solicitudes y gestiones de los munícipes y empresarios, del cumplimiento de esa normativa; ámbito en el cual, obviamente resulta comprendido el tema de la disponibilidad de agua; que es de resorte exclusivo del gobierno local el determinarla...",
  "excerpt_en": "This Court finds that the challenged municipal agreement—Article 29 of ordinary session 53-2009, of September 8, 2009, of the Municipality of Belén—complies with the legal system. To this end, the following reflections must be made.\n\nFirst: It was issued precisely in exercise of the functions delegated by the constitutional and legal system to municipal governments, regarding not only local-urban planning, but particularly control (police power) in that area. And it was issued on the occasion of a request for potable water availability for a previously approved urban development project. As noted above, the urban planning power exercised by municipalities is not limited to the issuance of regulations for their canton, but also the case-by-case verification, based on the requests and procedures of residents and businesses, of compliance with such regulations; an area that obviously includes water availability, which is the exclusive purview of the local government to determine...",
  "outcome": {
    "label_en": "Denied",
    "label_es": "Sin lugar",
    "summary_en": "The Court confirmed the municipal agreement denying water availability to the San Vicente project and ordered the Municipality to initiate proceedings to annul the construction permit 7604-2008.",
    "summary_es": "El Tribunal confirmó el acuerdo municipal que denegó la disponibilidad de agua al proyecto San Vicente y ordenó a la Municipalidad iniciar el procedimiento de anulación del permiso de construcción 7604-2008."
  },
  "pull_quotes": [
    {
      "context": "Considerando VIII, citando sentencia de la Sala Constitucional",
      "quote_en": "Urban planning, that is, the elaboration and implementation of regulatory plans, is a function inherent to municipalities to the exclusion of any other public entity...",
      "quote_es": "La planificación urbana, sea la elaboración y puesta en marcha de los planes reguladores, es una función inherente a las municipalidades con exclusión de todo otro ente público..."
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando VIII, citando Política de regulación anual del crecimiento urbano",
      "quote_en": "Control of urban growth and authorizations for new housing developments shall be established through the authorization of water availability payments for each project or stage thereof...",
      "quote_es": "El control de crecimiento urbano y las autorizaciones para nuevos desarrollos habitacionales, se establecerá mediante la autorización de disponibilidad de pagas de agua para cada proyecto o etapa de estos..."
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando V, razonamiento del Concejo Municipal",
      "quote_en": "Under no circumstances may water supply from the municipal aqueduct be authorized, as a primary or subsidiary source, minimizing or sacrificing the supply to the rest of the neighboring population.",
      "quote_es": "En ningún supuesto puede autorizarse suministro de agua del acueducto municipal, como fuente principal o subsidiaria, minimizando o sacrificando el abastecimiento del resto de la población aledaña."
    }
  ],
  "cites": [
    {
      "id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-557128",
      "citation": "Res. 00265-2011 Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
      "title_en": "INVU approval does not constitute an official map; only municipal acceptance of works incorporates areas into public domain",
      "title_es": "El visado del INVU no constituye mapa oficial; solo la recepción municipal de obras incorpora áreas al dominio público",
      "doc_type": "court_decision",
      "date": "21/07/2011",
      "year": "2011"
    },
    {
      "id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-603472",
      "citation": "Res. 00159-2012 Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
      "title_en": "Land use certificate does not create rights and is governed by the current regulatory plan",
      "title_es": "Certificado de uso de suelo no genera derechos y se rige por plan regulador vigente",
      "doc_type": "court_decision",
      "date": "11/05/2012",
      "year": "2012"
    },
    {
      "id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-603578",
      "citation": "Res. 00028-2012 Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección III",
      "title_en": "Land Use Certificate Does Not Create Subjective Rights",
      "title_es": "Certificado de uso de suelo no genera derechos subjetivos",
      "doc_type": "court_decision",
      "date": "03/02/2012",
      "year": "2012"
    },
    {
      "id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-704791",
      "citation": "Res. 00037-2017 Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Sección VI",
      "title_en": "State liability for annulled zoning in the Cerros de Escazú Protective Zone",
      "title_es": "Responsabilidad del Estado por anulación de zonificación en Zona Protectora Cerros de Escazú",
      "doc_type": "court_decision",
      "date": "22/03/2017",
      "year": "2017"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-35669",
      "citation": "Ley 4240",
      "title_en": "Urban Planning Law",
      "title_es": "Ley de Planificación Urbana",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "15/11/1968",
      "year": "1968"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-36307",
      "citation": "Ley 833",
      "title_en": "Construction Law",
      "title_es": "Ley de Construcciones",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "02/11/1949",
      "year": "1949"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-37097",
      "citation": "Ley 2726",
      "title_en": "Organic Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers",
      "title_es": "Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "14/04/1961",
      "year": "1961"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-6825",
      "citation": "Ley 1634",
      "title_en": "General Drinking Water Law",
      "title_es": "Ley General de Agua Potable",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "18/09/1953",
      "year": "1953"
    }
  ],
  "cited_by": [
    {
      "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-158355",
      "citation": "Res. 05445-1999 Sala Constitucional",
      "title_en": "Reaffirmation of municipal autonomy and its limits regarding legality control",
      "title_es": "Reiteración de autonomía municipal y sus límites frente al control de legalidad",
      "doc_type": "constitutional_decision",
      "date": "14/07/1999",
      "year": "1999"
    },
    {
      "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-82085",
      "citation": "Res. 04205-1996 Sala Constitucional",
      "title_en": "Duty to cede green areas in subdivisions and municipal autonomy",
      "title_es": "Obligación de ceder áreas verdes en fraccionamientos y autonomía municipal",
      "doc_type": "constitutional_decision",
      "date": "20/08/1996",
      "year": "1996"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-35669",
      "citation": "Ley 4240",
      "title_en": "Urban Planning Law",
      "title_es": "Ley de Planificación Urbana",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "15/11/1968",
      "year": "1968"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-36307",
      "citation": "Ley 833",
      "title_en": "Construction Law",
      "title_es": "Ley de Construcciones",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "02/11/1949",
      "year": "1949"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-37097",
      "citation": "Ley 2726",
      "title_en": "Organic Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers",
      "title_es": "Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "14/04/1961",
      "year": "1961"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-6825",
      "citation": "Ley 1634",
      "title_en": "General Drinking Water Law",
      "title_es": "Ley General de Agua Potable",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "18/09/1953",
      "year": "1953"
    }
  ],
  "references": {
    "internal": [
      {
        "target_id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-557128",
        "kind": "related_voto",
        "label": ""
      },
      {
        "target_id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-603472",
        "kind": "related_voto",
        "label": ""
      },
      {
        "target_id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-603578",
        "kind": "related_voto",
        "label": ""
      },
      {
        "target_id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-704791",
        "kind": "related_voto",
        "label": ""
      }
    ],
    "external": []
  },
  "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0034-466953",
  "tier": 2,
  "is_environmental": true,
  "_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-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"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-6825",
      "norm_num": "1634",
      "norm_name": "Ley General de Agua Potable",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "18/09/1953"
    }
  ],
  "sentencias_relacionadas": [
    "sen-1-0034-557128",
    "sen-1-0034-603472",
    "sen-1-0034-603578",
    "sen-1-0034-704791"
  ],
  "temas_y_subtemas": [],
  "cascade_only": false,
  "amendment_count": 0,
  "body_es_text": "Exp. No. 09-002856-1027-CA\n\nNo. 416-2010\n\nSECCIÓN TERCERA DEL TRIBUNAL CONTENCIOSO ADMINISTRATIVO. Segundo Circuito Judicial de San José II CIRCUITO JUDICIAL DE SAN JOSÉ. ANEXO A. Goicoechea, a las once horas veinticinco minutos del ocho de febrero del dos mil diez.-\n\nRecuso de apelación interpuesto por Nombre101959 . , mayor, soltero, empresario, de único apellido en razón de su nacionalidad estadounidense, con cédula de residencia número CED77875, vecino de San Rafael de Escazú, en su condición de apoderado generalísimo sin límite de suma de CONDOMINIO LA RIBERA BELEMITA CINCUENTA, SOCIEDAD Nombre101960, contra el acuerdo adoptado por el Concejo de la Municipalidad de Belén en el Artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos nueve.\n\nRedacta la Juez Fernández Brenes.\n\nCONSIDERANDO:\n\nI.- DE LOS HECHOS TENIDOS POR PROBADOS.- De importancia para la resolución de este asunto, se tiene por acreditado el siguiente elenco de hechos probados: 1.) Que en sesión 73-96, del diecisiete de diciembre de mil novecientos noventa y seis, el Concejo de la Municipalidad de Belén aprobó el Reglamento del Plan Regulador de su cantón (publicación en La Gaceta número 19 del veintiocho de enero de mil novecientos noventa y siete, hecho no controvertido); 2.) Que en Acuerdo dado en el Artículo 7 del Capítulo IV de la sesión ordinaria 01-2006, del tres de enero del dos mil seis, el Concejo avaló la recomendación dada en oficio AC-306-2005, de la encargada del proceso de acueducto de la municipalidad, respecto del trámite número 3394, de solicitud de disponibilidad de agua del Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, por lo que rechazar la gestión, por no ajustarse a los requerimientos mínimos para la evaluación de disponibilidad de agua para el desarrollo cuya demanda exceda más de cuarenta unidades de vivienda, publicado en La Gaceta número 147 del veintiocho de julio del dos mil cuatro (folios 2 vuelto y 16 vuelto); 3.) Que con el visto bueno del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (en sesión ordinaria de Junta Directiva número 23-2006, del veinticinco de abril del dos mil seis, en que conoció del oficio 1535 del Director de Urbanismo) y de la Sala Constitucional (en sentencias número 2005-8915 y 2005-6399), en el Artículo 5º de la sesión ordinaria número 16-2007 celebrada el trece de marzo del dos mil siete, el Concejo de la Municipalidad de Belén, aprobó la modificación de su plan regulador, para incluir un artículo Transitorio para que se \"... suspenda inmediatamente, en general, el otorgamiento de disponibilidad de agua y de permisos de construcción, a los proyectos de desarrollo habitacional, comercial e industrial, en condominios o urbanización, por el tiempo necesario para actualizar y poner en ejecución el nuevo Plan Regulador para el Cantón de Belén, a la luz de los nuevos elementos conocidos. ...\"; aclarándose que \"... el Transitorio no es de aplicación retroactiva, por el contrario se deben respetar los trámites de permiso de construcción que ingresen a la Municipalidad de Belén con fecha anterior a la publicación en el Diario Oficial La Gaceta, del acuerdo en que se aprueba la implementación del Transitorio. No obstante el Desarrollador deberá ajustarse a posibles recomendaciones que se emitan, según lo determine el avance de los estudios -técnicos del Plan Regulador.\" Para la implementación de este acuerdo en ese mismo acto dispuso \"aprobar el Presupuesto para la realización de los estudios de ejecución de: Plan Maestro de Alcantarillado Pluvial, Plan Maestro de Alcantarillado Sanitario, Plan Vial Maestro para la complementación de la Infraestructura Pública; específicamente la compra de terrenos para la ampliación de las escuelas, edificio municipal y centros de salud\" (publicación en La Gaceta número 59 del veintitrés de marzo del dos mil siete, hecho no controvertido); 4.) Que en oficio UA-64.2007, del veintinueve de marzo del dos mil siete, la Unidad Ambiental de la Municipalidad de Belén denegó el visto bueno del proyecto Condominio San Vicente, por carecer de plan de arborización, de permiso de concesión de aprovechamiento del pozo AB-1571, por encontrarse dentro de la zona de protección del pozo los edificios 3 y 6, calles y parqueos, por no tener autorización del Ministerio de Salud de abastecimiento de agua potable, ni del MINAE de vertidos de la planta de tratamiento en un cuerpo de agua receptor; por no tener permiso de ubicación de la planta de tratamiento; por una incongruencia entre la viabilidad ambiental y la petición del permiso de construcción sobre la cantidad de edificios y el área a construir, y dudas sobre el desfogue y el delantal de piedra con mortero (folio 6 frente, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional); 5.) Que por resolución número R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAE, de las diez horas del siete de junio del dos mil siete, el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía otorgó concesión de aprovechamiento del pozo AB-1571 a La Rivera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, para uso doméstico de apartamentos, con un caudal de 1,20 litros por segundo, en atención a que según el informe técnico de recomendación AT-0122-2007, para dotar de agua a cuatrocientas personas se requiere ese caudal, siendo el caudal disponible de ese pozo 3,15 litros por segundo, por lo que no hay inconveniente para abastecer dicho proyecto (folio 3 vuelto, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional); 6.) Que por oficio ASUB 452-07, del doce de octubre del dos mil siete, el Geólogo del Área de Aguas Subterráneas de Nombre2449 –Roberto Ramírez Chavarría-, emitió criterio sobre la zona de protección del pozo AB-1571 en San Antonio de Belén, indicando que como todo pozo, debe tener una zona de protección absoluta e inmediata, basado en el principio de prevención de posibles contaminaciones, no solo bacteriológica, sino también por compuestos orgánicos como hidrocarburos y solventes, extremadamente tóxicos en bajas concentraciones, conforme al artículo 8 de la Ley de Aguas, que establece una distancia de cuarenta metros. Este criterio fue acogido y reiterado en oficio SL-232-2007, del diecinueve de diciembre del dos mil siete, de la Asesoría Legal del SENARA.(folios 6 vuelto y 7 frente, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional y 12, por referencia en oficio DIGJ-145-145-2009 de la indicada institución); 7.) Que en memorándum ASP-327-2007, del cinco de noviembre del dos mil siete, el Director del Área de Servicios Públicos de la Municipalidad de Belén aceptó la dotación de 1.2 litros por segundo en el pozo AB-1571 para el proyecto de la Rivera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, por tratarse de un proyecto de autoabastecimiento, pero aclaró que lo considera insuficiente para la población final del mismo, en atención a que que conforme a la concesión otorgada por el MINAE y la estructura prevista de almacenamiento (tanque subterráneo) y el caudal asignado, no puede ser llenado durante las dieciocho horas de bombeo autorizado; lo que hace evidente, que exista un faltante en la dotación de agua (faltante de agua) (folios 6 vuelto, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional y 85 vuelto y 86 vuelto, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 8.) Que por oficio GE-049-08, del veintiocho de enero del dos mil ocho, el Gerente General del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) dejó sin efecto el oficio GE-738-07, del veinte de diciembre del dos mil siete, remitiendo a su vez, el criterio legal SL-232-2007, del diecinueve de diciembre de ese año, y manifestó la anuencia de colaborar con el ente local con el fin de establecer la inocuidad del proyecto sobre el bien demanial. Dicho informe fue conocido por el Concejo del cantón de Belén en sesión ordinaria del veintinueve de enero del dos mil ocho (folios 3 vuelto y 4 frente, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional, folios 117 frente y vuelto, por referencia en acuerdo del Capítulo V, Artículo 4 de la sesión ordinaria 61-2009, del quince de octubre del dos mil nueve); 9.) Que la solicitud de permiso de construcción que presentó el personero de la empresa Condominio La Ribera Belemita, Sociedad Nombre101960 ante la Municipalidad de Belén, fue denegado por el Concejo en revisión presentada en sesión ordinaria número del 08-2008, del cinco de febrero del dos mil ocho, con fundamento en el oficio GE-049-08 del Nombre2449, ya que el proyecto constructivo no respetaba el radio de protección del pozo AB-1571; bajo la consideración de que \"y siendo así, no solo no se completan los requisitos exigidos para la aprobación, sino que además se violentan directamente disposiciones de orden público relacionadas con el radio de protección de un pozo de extracción de agua destinado a consumo humano y se afectan derechos fundamentales y disposiciones ambientales consagradas en el Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política\"; motivo por el que se requirió al Alcalde girar las instrucciones necesarias para que realizase los estudios y aclaraciones pertinentes por parte de las Unidades de Ambiente y Servicios Públicos, y en caso de no hacerse así, sentarían las responsabilidades correspondientes. Adicionalmente, denegó la gestión de silencio positivo planteada por el interesado (folios 84 vuelto, 85 frente y 89 vuelto, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 10.) Que al devolverse el expediente, los funcionarios administrativos municipales asumieron la responsabilidad del asunto y siguieron con el trámite de la solicitud de permiso de construcción número 114-2007 de la empresa Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 (folios 7, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional y 85 frente, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 11.) Que por oficio DU-019-2008, del diecisiete de marzo del dos mil ocho de la Unidad de Desarrollo, con el aval por memorándum AM-A-134-2008 del mismo día, emitido por el bachiller Esteban Ávila Fuentes de la Unidad Ambiental de esa corporación y del Área Técnica Operativa y de Desarrollo Urbano, fue concedido permiso de construcción a favor de Nombre16224, por estar la propiedad en fideicomiso inmobiliario, para la construcción de once torres, comprensivas de ciento veintiún apartamentos, al amparo de la existencia y explotación de concesión de pozo AB-1571, como única fuente de abastecimiento del agua potable. Dicho permiso corresponde al número 7604-2008 (folios 7, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional y 85 frente, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 12.) Que de lo anterior tuvo conocimiento el Concejo en sesión ordinaria 19-2008, del 25 de marzo del 2009, por oficio AM-A-141-2008 del Alcalde (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), según le fue comunicado a él, por memorando DU-019-2008 (folio 85 frente, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 13.) Que por oficio DU-019-2008, del diecisiete de marzo del dos mil ocho de la Unidad de Desarrollo, con el aval por memorandun AM-A-134-2008 del mismo día, emitido por el bachiller Esteban Ávila Fuentes de la Unidad Ambiental de esa corporación y del Área Técnica Operativa y de Desarrollo Urbano, fue concedido permiso de construcción a favor de Nombre16224, por estar la propiedad en fideicomiso inmobiliario, para la construcción de once torres, comprensivas de ciento veintiún apartamentos, al amparo de la existencia y explotación de concesión de pozo AB-1571, como única fuente de abastecimiento del agua potable. Dicho permiso corresponde al número 7604-2008 (folios 7, por referencia de sentencia de amparo número 2008-1557, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, de la Sala Constitucional y 85 frente, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 14.) Que de lo anterior tuvo conocimiento el Concejo en sesión ordinaria 19-2008, del 25 de marzo del 2009, por oficio AM-A-141-2008 del Alcalde (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), según le fue comunicado a él, por memorando DU-019-2008 (folio 85 frente, por referencia del Acuerdo dado en artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-3009, hecho no controvertido); 15.) Que el recurso de amparo que interpuso Nombre101961 contra el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía y la Municipalidad de Belén por la no aplicación del criterio del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento esgrimido en oficio GE-049-08 en lo atinente al respeto del área de protección del pozo AB-1571, permitiendo el desarrollo del proyecto de Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960, fue acogido por la Sala Constitucional en sentencia número 2008-015657, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, aclarado por sentencia número 2008-18934, de las catorce horas veinticuatro minutos del diecinueve de diciembre de dos mil ocho, Tribunal que ordenó al Ministro de Ambiente y Energía, al Alcalde de la Municipalidad de Belén y al Presidente del Concejo, disponer lo necesario para que se respete la distancia de protección entre el pozo AB-1571 y el proyecto constructivo, según oficios GE-049-08, SL-232-2007 y ASUB-452-07, todos del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (folios 3 a 11 vuelto y sistema de gestión del Poder Judicial); 16.) Que ante la solicitud de disponibilidad de agua que planteó el personero del proyecto Condominio San Vicente el veintinueve de octubre del dos mil ocho ante la Unidad Unidad de Nuevos Servicios y Desarrollos del Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, esa unidad le responde por nota del dos diciembre siguiente, indicándole que conforme a la actualización del oficio UNSD-GAM-1755-2008-01628, \"Sí se le puede brindar el servicio de agua potable según en el Informe Técnico DAM-2008-659 y Oficio SB-2008-1272 de la Subgerencia General, los cuales se adjuntan. Todo lo anterior siempre y cuando la municipalidad acepte que Nombre5630 preste el servicio. Por lo anterior SI EXISTE factibilidad de agua potable y NO EXISTE servicio de aguas residuales en esta zona. Para el disfrute de los servicios al frente de su propiedad, usted deberá asumir el costo (sin cargo alguno para Nombre5630) y ejecución de las obras que se indican: ...\" (Resaltado es del original). Advierte que ese documento no implica obligatoriedad de la Municipalidad respectiva de aprobar el proyecto (folio174); 17.) Que por memorial del nueve de diciembre del dos mil ocho, el representante legal del proyecto desarrollador, informa a la municipalidad de Belén que decidieron clausurar el pozo AB-1571 en forma preventiva y temporal, para realizar estudios en ejecución de la sentencia de amparo 2008-015657, lo cual se puso en conocimiento del Ministerio respectivo en nota del tres de diciembre anterior. Asimismo indica que ante rechazo de disponibilidad de agua de parte de la corporación de Belén, solicitaron y les fue concedida disponibilidad de agua al Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (folios 172 y 173); 18.) Que el quince de diciembre del dos mil ocho, el representante legal del proyecto San Vicente, informa a la municipalidad de Belén, que el diecisiete siguiente, a las diez horas se procederá a la clausura del pozo AB-1571, para que se hagan presentes; lo que en efecto se llevó a cabo en la fecha, con la presencia de funcionarios municipales (folio 118 vuelto, por referencia en acuerdo 61-2009); 19.) Que en Memorando ASP-045-09, del cuatro de enero del dos mil nueve, la Directora a.i. del Área de Servicios Públicos de la Municipalidad de Belén amplia el criterio técnico para el caso del proyecto de Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, en los siguientes términos: \"Sistema: San Antonio. Fuente de Abastecimiento: Naciente Zamora. Caudal de extracción: Belén I 34.631/seg. y Belén II 19.9 l/seg. Condiciones de red de conducción: la red de conducción inicia a la salida de la naciente hasta el tanque de bombeo, del cual se extra (sic) el agua por dos bombas centrífugas de 50 HP. El agua trasegada por las bombas, se lleva por tubería de polietileno de alta densidad en un diámetro de 640 mm (25\"), hasta el tanque asentado. Y este tanque a la red de distribución el diámetro es de 797 mm (31\"). Capacidad de almacenamiento: 1.000 m3. Condiciones de red de distribución frente a la propiedad: tubería de PVC, SDR-26, se encuentra cementada y de empaque. Se ha observado tramos donde la capacidad de trasiego de la tubería es menor que la demanda. Profundidad y ubicación de acorde a normativa actual en algunos tramos. Pérdida significativa por disminución de diámetros. Población abastecida: comprende desde el proyecto hasta final de Dirección2022 en San Rafael de Alajuela. Conclusiones: 1. El sector donde se sitúa el proyecto es considerada la parte baja del sistema San Antonio (esta afirmación es por aspectos topográficos y por la forma de abastecimiento). Por lo anterior los efectos que se provocan en esta zona repercuten en todo el sistema hasta el tanque de abastecimiento. 2. Las tuberías instaladas en la actualidad no son del diámetro idóneo, para poder abastecer las necesidades del proyecto y a la población colindante; se aclara que existen tramos importantes que pueden mejorarse para aumentar la capacidad de abastecimiento. 3. La Municipalidad (sic) aplicación de la la ley de Planificación Urbana, puede recibir obras de mejoramiento del sistema para poder otorgar el servicio de agua potable en esta zona, las mejoras son propuesta del desarrollador y deben contar con visto bueno del Proceso del Acueducto. Para el caso en particular se debe de mejorar las tuberías de distribución en varios sectores, se debe de maximizar la fuente de producción de agua de este distrito, se debe de mejorar las presiones en algunos puntos del sistema para no desabastecer los vecinos del proyecto. 4. La política de desarrollo Urbano de la Municipalidad de Belén determina que la \"Propuesta de suministros de agua para los usuarios actuales y futuros del sector, planteada para un período de 10 años, previa consulta al Plan maestro del Acueducto del cantón y del área de servicios Públicos sobre las condiciones de operación del sistema de acueducto municipal\". Por lo que la Dirección de Servicios que se encuentra con toda la disponibilidad para realizar la revisión de la(s) propuesta(s) para poder otorgar la disponibilidad de agua del proyecto. 5. El recurso hídrico para abastecer de agua potable al Proyecto, objeto del presente documento, existe en potencia, sin embargo, no existe la infraestructura necesaria para suplir las necesidades de este, ya que los diámetros existentes son insuficientes para alcanzar las presiones mínimas requeridas para lograr brindar un servicio adecuado. 6. Es criterio de esta Dirección, que se debe mantener la autonomía en la administración del agua potable dentro del cantón de Belén. Lo anterior considerando que la calidad y cantidad de agua existente en el sistema, reúne las condiciones necesarias para el consumo humano, de toda la población belemita y algunos sectores aledaños, inclusive. Y que lo se requiere es efectuar mejoras en el sistema\" (el resaltado es del original) (folios 177 a 179); 20.) Que en resolución IMN-DA-0077-2009, de las nueve horas del nueve de enero del dos mil nueve, el Jefe del Departamento de Aguas del MINAE, dispuso mantener cerrado el pozo, al tenor del numeral 26 de la Ley de Aguas (folios 118 vuelto a 119 frente, por referencia en acuerdo 61-2009); 21.) Que por oficio DU-01-2009, del seis de enero del dos mil nueve, la Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano, en aplicación de fallo constitucional y el artículo 26 de la Ley de Aguas, y por la aprobación del MINAE del cierre temporal del pozo AB-1571, requirió al desarrollador que determinara la institución que se haría responsable del suministro de agua del proyecto (folio 118 vuelto, por referencia en acuerdo 61-2009); 22.) Que el once de febrero del dos mil nueve, el personero de Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 presentó gestión ante el Concejo para que se le aprobara disponibilidad de agua, con conexión al Nombre5630 o de parte del acueducto municipal; gestión que es reiterada el nueve de agosto del mismo año (folio 175 la primera y 28 frente y vuelto la segunda); 23.) Que en sesión ordinaria 11-2009, del diecisiete de febrero del dos mil nueve, el Concejo conoció del trámite 579-2009, presentado por representante de la desarrolladora, de solicitud de disponibilidad de agua para el proyecto Condominios San Vicente, con dos propuestas: a.- visto bueno de disponibilidad de agua para que el servicio lo brindara el Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, en atención a que frente de la propiedad pasa una tubería de agua potable de esa institución, existiendo disponibilidad del servicio según oficio de la Unidad de Servicios Nuevos y Desarrollos de esa institución, siendo los costos a su cargo de las mejoras necesarias para ello; y b.- prestación del servicio a con conexión al acueducto municipal, con con costo a su cargo de las mejoras necesarias para ello. En respuesta a dicho requerimiento, el Concejo acordó: 1.- solicitar al Área de Servicio Público, dictamen sobre las condiciones técnicas actuales del acueducto municipal para poder dar respuesta a la gestión, dando respuesta a los siguientes puntos: \"a) Si es posible que el acueducto municipal brinde el servicio de disponibilidad de agua requerido en el trámite número 579-2009. b) De no ser posible, que se indiquen expresa y detalladamente las razones y consideraciones técnicas. c) De ser posible otorgar la disponibilidad, se indique y aclare si existe infraestructura de acueducto capaz de abastecer la disponibilidad requerida; d) si existe abastecimiento de agua en cantidad suficiente para brindar el servicio y e) si con el otorgamiento de esta disponibilidad no se afecta a los actuales usuarios del acueducto municipal. f) En caso de que se requieran hacer mejoras o inversiones para mejorar la infraestructura, la cantidad de líquido, o para garantizar que no se afectará a los actuales usuarios, que expresamente se aclare: f.1) Específicamente en qué consisten esas mejoras. f.2) Cuál es el costo proyectado de las mismas (preferiblemente en valores indexables como sería realizar la estimación en dólares). f.3) El tiempo que podría durar realizar las mejoras. f.4) Y una propuesta de supervisión de parte de los funcionarios municipales responsables de la administración y mantenimiento del acueducto, de manera que exista una contraparte municipal que a nivel técnico supervise, garantice y reciba a satisfacción, las mejoras realizadas\" (folios 180 a 183); 24.) Que en respuesta del requerimiento anterior del Concejo, el Director del Área de Servicios Públicos, Ingeniero Luis Carlos Cháves rinde Informe ASP-064-2009, del veinte de febrero del dos mil nueve, en el que indica: “* Características del Sistema San Antonio: Fuente de abastecimiento: Naciente Zamora con una capacidad de almacenamiento de 1.000 m3 y con un caudal de extracción en Belén I de 34.63 l/seg. Y Belén II de 19.9 l/seg., con una red de conducción que inicia a la salida hasta el tanque de bombeo, del cual se extrae el agua por medio de dos bombas centrífugas de 50 HP. El agua trasegada por las bombas, se lleva por tubería de polietileno de alta densidad en un diámetro de 640 mm (25”), hasta el tanque asentado y de este tanque a la red de distribución en diámetro de 797 mm (31”). * Que las condiciones de la red de distribución frente a la propiedad solicitante, son tubería de PVC, SDR-26, diámetros variados, que se encuentran encementada y de empaque, con tramos donde la capacidad de trasiego de la tubería es menor que la demanda, con profundidad y ubicación que es acorde a la normativa actual, en algunos tramos y pérdida significativa por disminuciones de diámetros, para una población abastecida por el sistema que comprende: las viviendas ubicadas en distrito San Antonio, incluidas Dirección11462 , Potrerillos y Antiguas Bodegas de Abonos Agro. * Que ante la consulta de la posibilidad de que el acueducto municipal brinde el servicio de disponibilidad de agua requerido en el trámite número 579-2009, señalan que es posible siempre y cuando se realicen obras de mejoramiento en la red de distribución, en vista de que en la actualidad no se encuentra considerado el presupuesto para realizar las mejoras del sistema, que aumenten la capacidad de trasiego y distribución de agua en la zona y los diámetros de algunas de las tuberías que abastecen los alrededores y la zona misma no son suficientes para dotar el caudal necesario para cuando se concluya el proyecto. * Que la infraestructura en la fuente de producción cubre las necesidades del proyecto, pero, aclara que la infraestructura instalada en la zona en cuestión se debe mejorar en como se lleva el agua a la zona, el diámetro de las tuberías, se debe de mantener un control de consumo y utilización del agua en el proyecto una vez concluido esto para evitar desperdicios de agua. * Que en el sector donde se sitúa el proyecto es considerada como la parte baja del sistema de San Antonio, esta afirmación se sustenta por los aspectos topográficos, ubicación de la naciente y la forma de abastecimiento por gravedad, por lo que los efectos que se provoquen en la zona, repercutirán en todo el sistema, hasta el tanque de almacenamiento. * Que luego de revisar el plan maestro actual y estudios realizados por otros interesados en desarrollar en el sitio, consideran que se debe de crear una zona de presión que permita abastecer con presiones estandarizadas el agua en la zona, acción que se debe de realizar con válvulas hidráulicas que regulen la presión de aguas hacia abajo y sostenga la presión aguas arriba, por lo que se debe de mejorar los diámetros de las tuberías en sectores donde la demanda es casi igual a la oferta y recalcan que la política de desarrollo Urbano de la Municipalidad de Belén determina que la “Propuesta de suministros de agua para los usuarios actuales y futuros del sector, planteado para un período de 10 años, previa consulta al plan maestro del Acueducto del cantón y el Área de Servicios Públicos sobre las condiciones de operación del sistema de acueducto municipal”; por lo que encuentran con toda la disposición técnica para realizar la revisión de la(s) propuesta(s) para otorgar la disponibilidad de agua del proyecto. * Que el costo de las obras se debe ajustar a la propuesta que debe plantear el desarrollador y que la inversión ronda aproximadamente los $ 200.000.00 dólares, sin que esto signifique que el monto pudiera aumentar luego del estudio que debe realizar el desarrollador. A lo que se debe agregar, que en la actualidad no existen en la Municipalidad de Belén planes y presupuesto para la ejecución de obras en el sector por cuanto, como ya se indicó, se atienden las prioridades establecidas en el Plan Maestro actual y se encuentra en negociación por parte de la Alcaldía Municipal, la confección de un nuevo Plan Maestro para el acueducto de Belén” (folios 86 vuelto y 87 frente, por referencia en Acuerdo Art. 29 de la sesión ordinaria 53-2009); 25.) Que al conocer el Concejo el trámite número 579-2009, relativo a la solicitud de disponibilidad de agua de Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 para el proyecto Condominios o Apartamentos San Vicente, en sesión ordinaria número 18-2009, del veinticuatro de marzo del dos mil nueve, en el artículo 19 del Capítulo IV, bajo la consideración de que ese órgano deliberativo no intervino en el trámite de aprobación del permiso de construcción y sobre el proceso de control constructivo de la obra, y en aplicación del principio precautorio que rige la materia ambiental, dispuso \"... no resolver la gestión interesada ..., hasta tanto la Sala Constitucional no se pronuncie sobre el fondo del cumplimiento o no del voto 2008-15657, ya que de determinarse por ese Tribunal que no se ha cumplido con dicha resolución podría existir responsabilidad en relación con el permiso de construcción, e incluso su continuidad sobre el área de protección, sobre todo considerando que el tema relacionado con este voto, es precisamente un asunto relacionado con el tema de derechos fundamentales a la salud y a gozar de un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado por parte de los usuarios y habitantes del proyecto en cuestión\" (folios 184 a a 203); 26.) Que por oficio IMN-DA-0674-009, del Departamento de Aguas del MINAET, se advirtió que mientras el pozo AB-1571 esté cerrado, no puede aprovecharse el recurso hídrico; así como también que hasta tanto no se aprueben los estudios pertinentes, no se pueda abrir ni aprovechar el recurso hídrico de esa fuente (folio 12 vuelto, por referencia en oficio DIGJ-145-145-2009- SENARA); 27.) Que por oficio GE-276-09, del diecisiete de abril del dos mil nueve, el Gerente General de Nombre2449 indicó: \"... Avala y aprueba el perímetro de protección de 15 metros entre el pozo AB-1571 y el proyecto constructivo. Consecuentemente, esta Gerencia ha corroborado que no existe ni ha existido riesgo alguno de contaminación del pozo AB-1571 ni las aguas subterráneas, sea por contaminación bacteriológica, compuestos orgánicos ni ningún otro tipo de agente contaminante. /Por lo tanto, esta Gerencia General considera que los estudios e informes efectuados han sido realizado conforme a las reglas unívocas y la aplicación exacta de la ciencia y de la técnica, por lo que se permite arribar a un estado de certeza científica absoluta acerca de la inocuidad ambiental del proyecto\" (folios 16 frente y 17 frente y vuelto); 28.) Que por oficio IMN-DA-1347-2009, del cuatro de mayo del dos mil nueve, el Jefe del Departamento de Aguas del MINAET –José Miguel Zeledón Calderón-, conforme al Estudio Hidrogeológico para delimitar la zona de captura y protección del pozo AB-1571, ante la amenaza de su contaminación, el Mapa de Vulnerabilidad Hidrogeológica de una parte del Valle Central de Costa Rica, y los oficios GR-276-09 del Gerente General de Nombre2449 y oficio DIGH-145-2009 de la Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica del Nombre2449 que avala y aprueba el perímetro de protección de quince metros entre el pozo AB-1571 y el proyecto constructivo, siendo concluyentes de que no existe riesgo de contaminación de la fuente ni de las aguas subterráneas, ni por contaminación bacteriológica ni compuestos orgánicos ni ningún otro tipo de agente contaminantes, considera que el indicado pozo puede abrirse y ser aprovechado, de conformidad con la resolución R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET, pero sujeto a las siguientes condiciones previas: “Delimitar topográficamente en el campo la protección dispuesta según lo indica el Geólogo Roberto Ramírez de la Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica en su oficio DIGH-145-2009 y deberá colocar la malla geotextil impermeable en la calle interna y parqueos con el fin de impedir cualquier riesgo de derrame de sustancia contaminantes en la superficie de ruedo que pueda eventualmente desplazarse hacia el pozo e instalar una losa superior de concreto sobre el pozo y por encima del nivel del suelo para evitar el ingreso de agua por escorrentía, esto conforme la recomendación emitida en el Estudio Hidrogeológico conocido avalado por el Nombre2449 y el Departamento de Aguas del MINAET. Sobre esto se deberá informar al Departamento de Aguas con el fin de verificar su cumplimiento efectivo, de previo a la apertura” (El resaltado no es del original) (folios 13 vuelto a 15 vuelto); 29.) Que por nota del cinco de mayo del dos mil nueve, dirigida al Arquitecto Luis Bogantes Miranda, de la Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano de la Municipalidad de Belén, el personero de Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, comunica que conforme al oficio IMN-DA-1347-2009 del Departamento de Aguas del MINAET, invita al personal municipal a la reapertura del pozo AB-1571, a realizarse el ocho de mayo siguiente, lo cual se traduce, en el reinicio de obras, a partir del 11 del mismo mes (folios 206 y 207);\n\n30.) Que por oficios ODU-022-2009 y DU-013-2009, de la Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano de la Municipalidad de Belén del once y trece de mayo, respectivamente, en aplicación de los principios precautorio, la sentencia número 2008-15657 de la Sala Constitucional y el cierre temporal y preventivo del pozo AB-1571, se solicitó la paralización de las obras al personero de Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, al no existir certeza sobre el abastecimiento de agua del proyecto que albergaría a familias en ese lugar (folios 208 y 209 la primera y 204 y 205 la segunda); 31.) Que por oficio IMN-DA-1425-2009, del 13 de mayo del 2009, los ingeniero Andrés Phillips Ureña y José Manuel Zeledón Calderón del Departamento de Aguas del MINAET comunican al desarrollador que realizaron visita técnica al sitio donde se hizo delimitación y protección alrededor del pozo AB-1571, labor que cumplió con lo ordenado con estudio de ingeniero topógrafo Alexander Arce Alfaro -ya que se colocaron tres capas de membrana geotextil para impermeabilizar la zona- y en consecuencia, también con el oficio IMN-DA-1347-2009, del cuatro de mayo del dos mil nueve (folio 18 frente); 32.) Que en oficio UAA-045-2009, del 15 de junio del 2009 Esteban Ávila Fuentes, de la Unidad Ambiental de la Municipalidad de Belén, comunicó al desarrollador que respeta criterios técnicos emitidos por Nombre2449 y Departamento de Aguas del MINAET en relación con la determinación del área protegida del pozo AB-1571; no encuentra aspectos que deban ser aclarados o adicionados; y tiene por presentado informe hidrogeológico que presentó hidrogeólogo Mauricio Vásquez Fernández, y acepta sus alcances, en tanto otras entidades lo respaldan (folios 18 vuelto a 19 vuelto); 33.) Que por resolución número 2946-2009 de la Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano, el arquitecto Luis Bogantes Miranda rechazó solicitud de permiso de construcción de una parte del área del proyecto Eco-residencial San Vicente, con sustento en artículo 14 del Reglamento para el otorgamiento de permisos de construcción del cantón de Belén, publicado en Gaceta número 133, del 11 de julio del 2006; el oficio ODU-013-2009; la aplicación del principio precautorio; y el faltante de fuente de abastecimiento de agua potable del proyecto (folios 23 a 27, por referencia del escrito de impugnación que interpuso el desarrollador contra este acuerdo); 34.) Que el dieciocho de agosto del dos mil nueve el personero de Condominio La Rivera Belemita, Sociedad Nombre101960 interpuso los recursos ordinarios (de revocatoria y apelación en subsidio contra la decisión anterior, y pide: a.) dejar sin efecto orden de suspensión total de las obras y ordenar de manera inmediata la reanudación de las obras; b.) aprobar disponibilidad de agua otorgada por el AYA, por ser la opción más sostenible desde la perspectiva ambiental, para satisfacer la demanda hídrica del proyecto habitacional. c.) ordenar conocer la solicitud de permiso de construcción número 2946-2009, relacionado con la construcción de una parte recreativa del proyecto Eco-residencial San Vicente (folios 23 a 27); 35.) Que en resolución 1711-09, de las quince horas cincuenta y ocho minutos del veinte de agosto del dos mil nueve, en proceso de medida cautelar anticipada, que interpuso Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, S.A. contra la Municipalidad de Belén, que se tramitó en expediente 09-1541-1027-CA, el Tribunal Procesal Contencioso Administrativo ordenó a la Municipalidad retirar el expediente administrativo, para que en cinco días hábiles lo pusiera en orden cronológico, con indicación de los elementos que lo componen; rechazó las medidas cautelares solicitadas (a.- que se suspendieran los efectos de los oficios DU-013-2009, del trece de marzo del dos mil nueve, ODU-022-2009, del once de mayo del dos mil nueve, ODU-024-2009, del veinte de mayo del dos mil nueve todos de la Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano de la municipalidad de Belén, y se ordenara la inmediata reapertura del proyecto Eco-Residencial San Vicente; b.- la reanudación inmediata de las obras, contando con el pozo AB-1571 y su concesión como fuente de abastecimiento de agua potable de ese proyecto habitacional, c.- hacer valer su derecho al acceso al agua potable en cantidad, calidad y continuidad suficiente); rechazó la solicitud de agua y ordenó a la municipalidad resolver el trámite 579 en los quince días hábiles siguientes, en el entendido de que dicha decisión no se aplicaría a las torres 4 y 5 (minuta de la audiencia, a folios 170 y 171); 36.) Que en acuerdo Artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos mil nueve, dictado por el Concejo en cumplimiento de la resolución 1711-09, de las quince horas cincuenta y ocho minutos del veinte de agosto del dos mil nueve por el Tribunal Procesal Contencioso Administrativo, en proceso de medida cautelar anticipada, que se tramitó en expediente 09-1541-1027-CA, se resolvió el trámite número 579-2009, presentado por Nombre101962 , representante de Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, con el voto de tres regidores a favor y dos en contra en los siguientes términos: “PRIMERO: Aceptar la propuesta planteada por los Regidores Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez y Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso. SEGUNDO: No otorgar la disponibilidad de agua al Proyecto Urbanístico Apartamentos San Vicente por las razones técnicas y legales expuestas. TERCERO: No autorizar el abastecimiento de agua por parte del Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados por las razones técnicas y legales expuestas” Acuerdo que quedó firme en el mismo acto. (folios 80 a 97); 37.) Que dicha decisión fue notificada al personero de la empresa desarrolladora, el diez de setiembre del dos mil nueve (constancia de notificación, a folio 99); 38.) Que el veintiuno de de setiembre del dos mil nueve, la desarrolladora formuló recursos de revocatoria y apelación en subsidio, en memoriales dirigidos al Concejo; en el que pidió: 1.- que el Concejo apruebe inmediatamente que el Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados brinde el servicio de abastecimiento de agua potable para el proyecto habitacional que lleva a cabo; y, 2.- que se lleve a cabo procedimiento para determinar responsabilidad civil, administrativa y penal por abuso de autoridad y obstruccionismo de los concejales, que denegaron el derecho fundamental del agua potable (folios 101 a 105); 39.) Que por acuerdo del Capítulo IV, Artículo 3 de la sesión extraordinaria número 61-2009, del quince de octubre del dos mil nueve, el Concejo dispuso: \"... no habiéndose interpuesto Recurso de Revocatoria y de no existiendo razones para revocar el acuerdo impugnado, se admite el Recurso de Apelación\" (folios 126 a 130); 40.) Que por oficio PRE-J-CO-2009-4195, del siete de octubre del dos mil nueve, la Dirección Jurídica, Asesoría Legal Comercial del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados le indica a la empresa desarrolladora que \"... no es jurídicamente viable incluir en la redacción de la carta de disponibilidad UNSD-GAM-2262-2008-01628, el apartado que textualmente indica: \"Todo lo anterior siempre y cuando la municipalidad acepte que Nombre5630 preste el Servicio.\", dado que este Instituto, ... no está supeditado a la autorización de una Municipalidad para la prestación de un servicio, por el contrario tiene autoridad y potestad suficiente en materia de acueductos y alcantarillados para el otorgamiento del servicio público del agua\". Dicho criterio es compartido por la Dirección Jurídica de la misma institución en oficio PRE-J-2009-4628, del veintinueve de octubre del dos mil nueve (folios 144 y 146 a 150); y, 41.) Que en nota del cinco de noviembre del dos mil nueve, el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, con base en los oficios PRE-J-CO-2009-4195 y SUB-G-SGAM-2009-792 le responde al desarrollador los requerimiento de cambios a disponibilidad de agua, para eventual dotación de ciento veintiún fincas filiales, de la siguiente manera: \"Sí se le puede brindar el servicio de agua potable según lo indicado en el Informe Técnico DAM-2008-659 y Oficio SB-2008-1272 de la Subgerencia General. Técnicamente es factible el abastecimiento del desarrollo en asunto, para lo que se debe instalar un ramal de 200mm 0 (8\") cubriendo el frente de la propiedad, a conectar previstas actuales en caja de concreto, frente al desarrollo, de la tubería de impulsión de Finca San Antonio y Potrerillos hacia Puente de Mulas (frente al salón comunal de San Vicente de Belén). Se puede dar el abastecimiento de agua potable, mediante una única acometida de 100mm 0 (4\") y medidor de diámetro adecuado. Para esto, el desarrollador debe acondicionar la debida infraestructura de protección del medidor. El condominio debe contar con un sistema de tanque cisterna y bombeo interno, ya que la presión de servicio es limitada. Debe instalarse al menos un hidrante multi-valvular de 150 mm (6\") 0, al frente en calle pública.\" Además se advierte, que dicha nota no implica vinculatoriedad de la M. para aprobar este proyecto (folio 145).\n\nII.- HECHOS NO PROBADOS.- Por no existir respaldo en los autos ni derivarse de los mismos, se tiene por indemostrado los siguientes hechos: 1.) Que el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía haya ordenado la reapertura del pozo AB-1571, que permita la utilización del recurso de agua a la empresa Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima; 2.) Que la reforma introducida al plan regulador de la Municipalidad de Belén en el artículo 5 de la sesión ordinaria número 16-2007, del trece de marzo del dos mil siete, haya sido derogada; y, 3.) Que la Municipalidad de Belén haya aprobado la iniciación del procedimiento de nulidad o lesividad del permiso de construcción número 7604-2008, para la construcción del Condominio San Vicente.\n\nIII.- DE LOS AGRAVIOS DE LA APELACIÓN.- El personero de la desarrolladora Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, formula recurso de apelación contra el artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos mil nueve sobre la base de las siguientes consideraciones: a.) Que la actuación de la Administración municipal vulnera el contenido esencial de la función pública, que se refleja a través de normas y principios que integran el ordenamiento administrativo, tales como el de eficiencia y celeridad, por haberse dado más de seis meses después de planteada la gestión, y de manera defectuosa, al no indicar de forma expresa la recursos oponibles contra el acuerdo impugnado, el plazo para interponerlos y el órgano ante el cual proceden; lo que le deja en abierta indefensión, lo que lo hace absolutamente nulo, y en consecuencia, no puede surtir efectos jurídicos; b.) Que el negar totalmente y de manera infundada -por falta de valoración de la prueba y normativa- la gestión de disponibilidad de agua, infringe el derecho humano de acceso al agua potable que deriva de los artículos 21, 45 y 50 de la Constitución Pública, la Ley General de Salud, la Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, que el órgano municipal no aplica, burlándose así de la legalidad y de la ciencia y la técnica. Sobre el particular alega que ante la carencia de infraestructura del acueducto municipal y el alto costo que implicaría su implementación, la opción viable es permitir el abastecimiento con el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; que no se pone en peligro a los usuarios del acueducto local y a los futuros habitantes del proyecto, por estar garantizado el servicio del agua por el ente indicado, cuyos estudios e informes técnicos demuestran la factibilidad de otorgar el servicio, por contar con la infraestructura (constructiva y operativa) adecuada e implicar únicamente una conexión de cinco metros. Así, la decisión impugnada riñe abiertamente con la normativa y jurisprudencia, al tenor de las cuales las únicas razones para rechazar la disponibilidad de agua potable son: la viabilidad técnica; que sea en detrimento de la calidad del servicio que se presta; y que no exista infraestructura; presupuestos que no se cumplen en relación con el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, según las manifestaciones de funcionarios de la entidad. Advierte que tanto el Nombre5630 como la Municipalidad de Belén determinaron - con estudio técnico-, que era totalmente viable otorgar el servicio, por la existencia suficiente del recurso hídrico para abastecer al proyecto habitacional; y además, su empresa previó obras constructivas necesarias para el uso racional y proporcional del recurso hídrico dentro de la red interna del proyecto, tales como tanques de captación, bombas, tuberías de impulsión y distribución; c.) Que abusa así el ente local de la autoridad pública, al no considerar que el suministro de agua se encuentra debidamente autorizado por el Nombre2449 y el MINAET, de autoabastecimiento, mediante un pozo, como por el servicio público brindado por el Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; y, d.) Que el acceso al agua potable no es un asunto de interés local que deba ser regulado ni administrado según el buen saber y entender de la Municipalidad, su Concejo o asesores legales, sino que se rige por normas de orden público, que a la fecha desconoce el Concejo del cantón de Belén, al no aplicar el artículo 33 de la Ley de Aguas y 1, 5 y 6 de la Ley General de Agua Potable, en virtud de las cuales el servicio público del abastecimiento de agua potable debe ser prestado de manera eficiente, y faculta al órgano rector en la materia -Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados- a adoptar las medidas necesarias para garantizar su acesso a los ciudadanos; y, d.) Que el Concejo no consideró que desde diciembre del dos mil ocho existe compromiso de cerrar el pozo AB-1571 si se garantiza un servicio de calidad, cantidad y continuidad suficiente; de donde, si el pozo está cerrado -conforme al procedimiento y requisitos técnico-jurídicos pertinentes-, dejaría de existir el perímetro de protección requerido, porque jurídica y materialmente no existiría pozo alguno. Así, afirma que el Concejo Municipal hace \"... suponer que aún y cuando se cierre en definitiva el pozo AB-1571 siempre existiría un perímetro de protección que debería ser respetado. Nada sería más contrario a la sana lógica y el ordenamiento jurídico, ya que, al ser el pozo clausurado el mismo ya no existiría jurídica no materialmente, por lo que se respectivo perímetro de protección desaparece y, por ende, evidentemente el proyecto a desarrollar no podría provocar impactos ambientales sobre el manto acuífero.\" Al tenor de las anteriores consideraciones, acusa de arbitrario e ilegal el acuerdo impugnado, y pide que así de declare, de manera que se hagan los siguientes pronunciamientos: \"a) Que el Concejo Municipal del cantón de Belén reconozca inmediatamente la orden de aprovechamiento de pozo AB-1571 girada por el Departamento de aguas del MINAET; b) Que el Concejo Municipal del cantón de Belén reconozca inmediatamente que el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados brinde el servicio de abastecimiento de agua potable a este proyecto habitacional; y c) Que se lleven a cabo los procedimientos respectivos y gestiones pertinentes para determinar si en el caso de marras existe o no responsabilidad civil, administrativa y eventualmente penal (abuso de autoridad) de los Concejales que ordenaron la denegatoria del derecho humano de acceso al agua potable.\" (Folios 102 frente a105 vuelto a 151 a 155).\n\nIV.- DE LA INEXISTENCIA DE LA NULIDAD POR INDEFENSIÓN ACUSADA.- Conforme a lo dispuesto en el artículo 245 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, la notificación de la decisión debe contener, no sólo el texto íntegro del acto, sino también la indicación de los recursos procedentes contra ella, el órgano ante el cual deben presentarse, el que los resolverá y el plazo para interponerlos. En efecto, no obstante lo anterior, la comunicación que hizo la Municipalidad de Belén del acuerdo impugnado -artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos mil nueve al personero de la empresa apelante -Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima- no cumplió con tales garantías, que son integrantes del debido proceso. Sin embargo, a criterio de este Tribunal, esta omisión no se traduce en la nulidad del acuerdo en cuestión, toda vez que no impidió que el interesado interpusiera los recursos de ley, tanto de revocatoria como de apelación ante el órgano respectivo (Concejo) y en el plazo previsto en el ordenamiento (cinco días), de manera tal que en virtud de la impugnación que formuló, conoce esta instancia, en condición de jerarca impropio bifásico, de conformidad con los artículos 173 de la Constitución Política, 156 del Código Municipal y 190 del Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. A mayor abundamiento, debe recordarse que en materia de nulidad de actos administrativos, rigen los principios de conservación: \"En caso de duda sobre la existencia o calificación e importancia del vicio deberá estarse a la consecuencia más favorable a la conservación del acto\" (artículo 168 de la Ley General de Administración Pública que reza); y que el de trascendencia, en virtud del cual, no hay nulidad sin perjuicio, por cuanto la declaratoria de nulidad consiste en una sanción para restituir el derecho violado y reparar el daño causado. En este caso, según se ha indicado, la nulidad por sí misma que se solicita, no representa ninguna ventaja procesal para la sociedad apelante, toda vez que quedó en evidencia que no se ha producido ninguna indefensión que le impidiera ejercer las acciones correspondientes para verificar el control de legalidad de la decisión impugnada.\n\nV.- DEL CONTENIDO DEL ACUERDO IMPUGNADO.- El acuerdo municipal impugnado en este asunto -artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria número 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos mil nueve-, con el voto de tres regidores a favor y dos en contra, dispuso, aceptar la propuesta planteada por los regidores Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez y Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso, en el sentido de denegar en todos sus extremos la solicitud de disponibilidad de agua formulada por el personero de la empresa Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad AnónimO, tanto en lo que respecta a la conexión del acueducto municipal como la autorización de que el servicio lo prestara el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. En este sentido advierte que la actuación de la Administración municipal, avalando el proyecto en contravención de la normativa que rige la materia, es susceptible de generar responsabilidad administrativa y penal -tanto en la Ley Contra la Corrupción, como normativa ambiental- de los funcionarios involucrados, al haberse otorgado un permiso de manera abiertamente ilegal, que califica como desviación de poder. Las graves infracciones que consideró son las siguientes:\n\na.) La imposibilidad de derivar ningún efecto jurídico del permiso de construcción construcción número 7604, al tenor de lo dispuesto en los numerales 166, 169 y 170 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, al evidenciarse la gravedad y un gran número de violaciones del acto administrativo de otorgamiento permiso de construcción para el proyecto San Vicente, que \"tipifica claramente un caso de nulidad absoluta, por ausencia de elementos válidos constitutivos, por lo que su ejecución implicaría \"la responsabilidad civil de la Administración (o sea la municipalidad como tal), y civil administrativa y eventualmente penal\" de sus autores y ejecutores, si tal ejecución llegare a tener lugar.\" Tales infracciones son las siguientes: \n\n1.- El proyecto no presentó la disponibilidad de agua potable otorgada por Municipalidad de Belén; siendo que ni el Plan Maestro vigente ni el plan de contigencia de dicha corporación contemplan el abastecimiento de agua para proyectos urbanísticos nuevos, lo que no garantiza su suministro; con lo cual, se aprobó un permiso de construcción que no cuenta con todos los requisitos necesarios para su valoración, con infracción del principio de legalidad, al omitir las formalidades previstas conforme a la normativa urbanística del cantón, en contravención de la Política de Crecimiento Urbano y el respectivo reglamento de Requisitos mínimos para la valoración de disponibilidad de agua para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos, publicados en La Gaceta 124 y 147, del veinticuatro de junio y del veintiocho de julio, ambas publicaciones, del dos mil cuatro;\n\n2.- El permiso de construcción lo da un funcionario municipal sin el aval del Concejo, como lo exige la normativa urbana del cantón respeto de proyectos habitacionales de más de cuarenta unidades, sino la Unidad de Desarrollo, con el visto bueno de un funcionario no legitimado del Área Técnica Operativa y de Desarrollo Urbano al no estar adscrito al Colegio Profesional respectivo y no ser el Coordinador del Departamento;\n\n3.- A sabiendas, se autoriza instalar parte del proyecto habitacional (torres 4 y 5 y áreas de estacionamiento, según planos constructivos aprobados) dentro del área de protección del pozo AB-1571; desatendiéndose así los criterios técnicos, dictámenes y opiniones consultivos del Nombre2449 emitidos en los oficios ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07 y GE-049-09 relativos al deber de guardar el área de protección del pozo AB-1571, como se desprende del fallo constitucional 2008-015657, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho;\n\n4.- El permiso se dio al amparo de la existencia y explotación de concesión de pozo AB-1571, como única fuente de abastecimiento del agua potable, la cual estaba sujeta a plazo cierto y determinado; lo que además de insuficiente para este proyecto según criterio técnico del Director del Área de Servicios Públicos de la Municipalidad de Belén - en oficio Oficio ASP-327-2007-;\n\n5.- El permiso se otorgó sin atender a criterios técnicos que recomendaban otra decisión: a saber, el Oficio ASP-327-2007 de la Dirección del Área de Servicio Público de la Municipalidad de Belén -Luis Carlos Cháves-, que señaló que conforme a la concesión otorgada por el MINAE y la estructura prevista de almacenamiento (tanque subterráneo) y el caudal asignado, no puede ser llenado durante las dieciocho horas de bombeo autorizado; lo que hace evidente, que exista un faltante en la dotación de agua (faltante de agua); el oficio UA-204-2007 de la Unidad Ambiental de la Municipalidad de Belén que indicó que los diseños de sitio, la existencia de dos edificios, calles y parqueos se encontraban en la zona de protección del pozo; el oficio UO 276-2007 de la Unidad de Obras de la Municipalidad de Belén, que la propuesta sólo solventaba parcialmente los problemas de capacidad vial, sin atender a necesidad de accesibilidad que podía generarse sobre la vía; oficio O-023-2007 de la Unidad de Obras de la Municipalidad de Belén, relativo al impacto vial en la vía de acceso al proceso conocido como Potrerillos, que hizo planteamiento de serios problemas de escurrimiento de aguas pluviales debido a las carencias de un colector, canalización y descargo pluvial, además del colapso de la estructura del pavimento a lo largo de la vía hacia la radial de Santa Ana; sistema de drenaje, ancho de calzada.\n\n6.- No se cumplió con el debido proceso en su otorgamiento, en tanto no se entregaron al interesado los informes de rechazo de la Unidad Ambiental (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008 y UA 36-2008) para su corrección.\n\nb.) Que las Municipalidades tienen a su cargo la administración plena de los sistemas de abastecimiento de agua potable que estén bajo su competencia; competencia exclusiva que deriva de la siguiente normativa: 169 de la Constitución Política; 4 y 113 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública; 58 inciso 6) de la Ley de Planificación Urbana; 3 y 4 inciso c) del Código Municipal; la Ley de Aguas, 5 de la Ley General de Agua Potable, número 1634, de mil novecientos cincuenta y tres, la Ley General de Salud; el Reglamento para la calidad de Agua Potable, 4, 5 y 11 del Reglamento para la Operación y Administración del Acueducto Municipal y las Políticas de requisitos mínimos para la valoración de disponibilidad de agua para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos, a contabilizar en urbanizaciones, filiales de condominios y complejos residenciales, emitida por la corporación de Belén; y que encuentra amplio respaldo en la jurisprudencia de la Sala Constitucional. Advierte que para resolver la disponibilidad requerida, se debe valorar integralmente y acorde con la Política de Crecimiento Urbano del ente local y las reglamentaciones para el acueducto municipal; y en este sentido, \"En ningún supuesto puede autorizarse suministro de agua del acueducto municipal, como fuente principal o subsidiaria, minimizando o sacrificando el abastecimiento del resto de la población aledaña. El costo urbanístico del proyecto no debe ser soportado por la mayoría, sino por el propio urbanizador, quien debe proveer al proyecto desde su inicio de fuentes confiables y sostenibles\". Así, el control de la disponibilidad del recurso hídrico que administra como un servicio público dentro de su esfera competencia, lo ejerce conforme a sus planes y presupuestos, siendo que en la actualidad no existen, ni planes ni presupuesto en la municipalidad para la ejecución de obras requeridas para abastecer el sector en que se ubica el proyecto de Condominios San Vicente, por atenderse prioridades de necesidades reales establecidas en el Plan Maestro actual, según criterios de densidad y cobertura (margen de población y crecimiento habitacional del cantón) contenidos en el Plan Regulador y normativa urbana de su jurisdicción; y siendo que se está en negociación por parte de la Alcaldía, de la confección de un nuevo Plan Maestro para el acueducto. Lo anterior implica que la gestión de disponibilidad de agua se valora conforme a la Política de Crecimiento Urbano de la Municipalidad de Belén y la reglamentación del acueducto municipal.\n\nc.) Que mal haría el Concejo en adoptar acuerdos que no se orienten a proteger la esfera de los intereses del pueblo belemita, como origen de su propia existencia, de su autoridad y finalmente de su autonomía, instituida por el constituyente precisamente para garantizar esa independencia de acción para la protección de tales intereses locales, por lo que a su criterio, se debe mantener la autonomía en la administración del agua potable dentro del Cantón de Belén, lo anterior considerando que la calidad y cantidad de agua existente en el sistema, reúne las condiciones necesarias para el consumo humano de toda la población belemita y algunos sectores aledaños. \n\nd.) Que es obvio que se trata de un proyecto urbanístico de gran envergadura, que requiere del servicio de agua potable, de manera eficiente, permanente, contínua, sostenible, sin interrupciones, alteración o merma alguna; que, desde un principio, no se sostenía únicamente con la explotación de la concesión del pozo AB-1561. Esa situación evidencia la vulnerabilidad del desarrollo, que no cuenta con fuente alternativa de suministro de agua potable -plan de contingencia-, ante la falla de equipo o colapso del pozo. Al respecto considera que la disponibilidad de agua es un pre-requisito que se gestiona antes de tramitar el permiso de construcción, y que no genera derecho alguno del permiso de construcción, disponibilidad que en todo caso, no se otorga en forma parcial, ya que ponen en entredicho el derecho fundamental a la salud (artículos 21 de la Constitución Política y 16 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública) de los posibles compradores.\n\nV.- DE LA COMPETENCIA MUNICIPAL EN LO ATINENTE A LA ORDENACIÓN URBANÍSTICA DEL CANTÓN. REGULACIÓN NORMATIVA DE LA QUE DIMANA.- La regulación urbanística ha sido encomendada tradicionalmente, y sin discusión alguna, a las municipalidades, en tanto se ha estimado que \n\n\"(...) la competencia urbanística ha sido una competencia municipal genuina, quizá la primera entre todas\" (GARCÍA DE ENTERRÍA, Eduardo y PAREJO ALFONSO, Luciano, Lecciones de Derecho Urbanístico. Editorial Civitas, Madrid, España, S.N.E., 1981. p. 116.);\n\nde manera que se ha configurado, como una tradición del Derecho Urbanístico, especialmente en aquellos momentos en que su contenido ha sido expresado por medio de las \"ordenanzas de construcción y policía urbana\", de competencia de los gobiernos locales, bajo el entendido de que la competencia pública urbanística es propia de la ciudad, y en consecuencia, de las municipalidades. En efecto, el urbanismo comienza siendo una competencia exclusivamente municipal. Posteriormente, a medida que va dejando de ser una función propia del ámbito urbano y pretende abarcar la ordenación de todo el territorio, se responsabilizan de él otras Administraciones superiores, modificándose de esa manera el nivel competencial de la materia urbanística, al incluir a otras instancias, en nuestro ordenamiento, tales como el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo -ente descentralizado-, y los Ministerios de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, con la Secretaría Técnica Ambiental (órgano desconcentrado) y el Ministerio de Planificación Nacional. Pero en lo que respecta propiamente con la planificación urbana local, conviene recordar que es en la Ley de Construcciones, aprobada por Decreto-Ley número 833, del cuatro de noviembre de mil novecientos cuarenta y nueve -norma pre-constitucional, al ser promulgada por el Gobierno de Facto de la Junta Fundadora de la Segunda República, dirigida por José Figueres Ferrer-, donde se establece que las Municipalidades son las encargadas de que las ciudades y demás poblaciones reúnan las condiciones necesarias de seguridad, salubridad, comodidad y belleza en sus vías públicas y en los edificios y construcciones que en terrenos de las mismas se levanten, sin perjuicio de las facultades que las leyes conceden en estas materias a otros órganos administrativos (artículo 1º), así como que ninguna edificación podrá hacerse en el país que contraríe sus disposiciones (artículo 74). Y no obstante que nuestra Constitución Política vigente –del siete de noviembre de mil novecientos cuarenta y nueve- es un poco parca en la definición de las funciones propias y esenciales de las municipalidades, la jurisprudencia constitucional -concretamente en las sentencias número 5097-93, 5303-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, y 2003-3656-, ha interpretado que a partir de lo dispuesto en sus artículos 169 y primer párrafo del artículo 170, la titularidad primaria en materia de planificación urbana local corresponde a las municipalidades, con exclusión de cualquier otro ente público. En este sentido, en el Código Municipal, número 4574, de cuatro de mayo de mil novecientos setenta, -vigente hasta mil novecientos noventa y ocho-, expresamente se reconoció como competencia municipal, la materia de urbanismo, en su artículo 4. En consonancia con la anterior disposición, y como un derivado de las normas constitucionales, son concordantes los artículos 15 y 19 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana, número 4240, de quince de noviembre de mil novecientos sesenta y ocho, en tanto disponen textualmente:\n\n\"Artículo 15.- Conforme al precepto del artículo 169 de la Constitución Política, reconócese la competencia y autoridad de los gobiernos municipales para planificar y controlar el desarrollo urbano, dentro de los límites de su territorio jurisdiccional. Consecuentemente, cada uno de ellos dispondrá lo que proceda para implantar un plan regulador, y los reglamentos de desarrollo urbano conexos, en las áreas donde deba regir, sin perjuIcio de extender todos o algunos de sus efectos a otros sectores, en que priven razones calificadas para establecer un determinado régimen contralor.\" (El resaltado no es del original.)\n\n\"Artículo 19.- Cada Municipalidad emitirá y promulgará las reglas procesales necesarias para el debido acatamiento del plan regulador y para la protección de los intereses de las salud, seguridad, comodidad y bienestar de la comunidad.\" (El resaltado no es del original.)\n\nVI.- DE LA COMPETENCIA MUNICIPAL EN LA VERIFICACIÓN DEL CUMPLIMIENTO DE LAS NORMAS URBANÍSTICAS.- El ámbito de la competencia municipal en la planificación urbana local no se circunscribe únicamente a la promulgación de las respectivas regulaciones -planes reguladores y regulaciones conexas-, sino que se extiende también al control que ejerce respecto del cumplimiento de la normativa urbanística local. En este sentido, como lo ha señalado este Tribunal en diversos pronunciamientos (entre ellos, los número 175-2009, de las quince horas cuarenta minutos 176-2009, de las quince horas cincuenta minutos, ambos, del treinta de enero del dos mil nueve), \"los gobiernos locales deben actuar oportunamente en el ejercicio del poder de policía, utilizando las potestades que el ordenamiento jurídico les ha otorgado para alcanzar sus cometidos\" (el subrayado no es del original); que en la materia de urbanismo, se concreta en el control de los procesos de urbanización y fraccionamiento, y que se concreta de manera taxativa en el artículo 1 de la Ley de Construcciones, en tanto dispone literalmente:\n\n\"Las Municipalidades de la República son las encargadas de que las ciudades y demás poblaciones reúnan las condiciones necesarias de seguridad, salubridad, comodidad, y belleza en sus vías públicas, en los edificios y construcciones que en terrenos de las mismas levanten sin perjuicio de las facultades que las leyes conceden en estas materia a otros órganos administrativos.\"\n\nEl \"poder de policía\" es la competencia que se le reconoce a la Administración, para que, con fundamento en una ley, ésta regule y reglamente una actividad, a fin de asegurar el orden público, la salubridad, la tranquilidad; la seguridad de las personas, así como la organización moral, política y económica de la sociedad; atribución, en virtud de la cual, la imposición de restricciones al goce de los derechos fundamentales, resulta razonable, en tanto su justificación se encuentra precisamente en la consideración de que los derechos fundamentales se encuentran limitados por los de las demás personas, toda vez que deben coexistir con todos y cada uno de los otros derechos fundamentales. Con lo cual, las medidas que el Estado adopte con la finalidad de proteger la seguridad, la salubridad y tranquilidad, son de interés público social, que se manifiestan por medio del poder de policía, entendida como la facultad reguladora del goce de los derechos y del cumplimiento de los deberes constitucionales. (En este sentido, se pueden consultaR las sentencias número 401-91, de las catorce horas del veinte de febrero y 619-91, de las catorce horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del veintidós de marzo, ambas, resoluciones de mil novecientos noventa y uno y 2003-2864, de las quince horas veinte minutos del nueve de abril del dos mil tres, de la Sala Constitucional.) \n\nVII.- DE LA DISTINCIÓN DE LOS PROCESOS DE FRACCIONAMIENTO Y URBANIZACIÓN.- Por la trascendencia derivada de las implicaciones jurídicas que conllevan los procesos de fraccionamiento y urbanizaciones, resulta necesario clarificar el significado de ambos conceptos. Así, \n\n\"El fraccionamiento, es la división de un predio con la finalidad de introducirlo al comercio de los hombres, lo que supone, tal y como lo debe constatar cada gobierno local al otorgar el visado correspondiente, que el mismo se ajuste, en cuanto a tamaño y características, a las disposiciones urbanísticas vigentes, en especial, al Plan Regulador del suelo local –si lo hubiere- así como a la normativa de desarrollo y demás leyes especiales de orden público. El fraccionamiento que la ley denomina como “simple”, no incluye un proceso de habilitación urbana para el uso y disfrute de las parcelas resultantes de ese fraccionamiento y ello es así porque el legislador parte de que en estos, los fundos cuentan con accesos y áreas verdes producto de un desarrollo urbanístico anterior. Es por este motivo que el artículo 40 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana dispone:\n\n“(…)Asimismo se exceptúa de la obligación de ceder áreas para parques y facilidades comunales a los simples fraccionamientos de parcelas en áreas previamente urbanizadas…” (el destacado no es del original). \n\nCuando una determinada área se encuentra previamente urbanizada, los adquirentes de las parcelas fraccionadas cuentan con acceso a los fundos, parques y facilidades comunales y es que no debe perderse de vista que ello hace parte de su derecho a disfrutar de un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado (artículo 50 constitucional). Por este motivo –se reitera- el legislador no ha estimado necesario exigir en el caso del fraccionamiento “simple” con desarrollo urbanístico, mayores dotaciones de tierra por motivos de interés social. El visado para fraccionamientos simples, por su poca trascendencia, suele otorgarse a un funcionario (v.gr. Ingeniero Municipal) diverso de aquél al que se encomiendan los visados “complejos” (v. gr. Concejo Municipal, comisiones de urbanismo, etc), careciendo el primero de competencia para autorizar un visado diverso; ello en el caso de que las normas urbanísticas hagan tal distinción. Ahora bien, al fraccionamiento que hace parte del proceso urbanizador y que conlleva una habilitación de los fundos, por vez primera, para fines urbanos, debe proveérsele de calles, áreas verdes y parques, así como de los servicios necesarios para su uso y disfrute. En este segundo supuesto, estamos ante un proceso complejo de fraccionamiento y urbanización que introduce limitaciones a la propiedad privada por razón de urbanismo (artículo 22 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana), las que el Tribunal Constitucional ha señalado son totalmente conformes con el Derecho de la Constitución (voto N° 5097-93 de las 10:24 hrs del 15 de octubre de 1993 ) . El proyecto residencial o de fraccionamiento que llamaremos “complejo”, se encuentra previsto en el numeral 40 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana que, en lo conducente, dispone:\n\n“Todo fraccionador de terrenos (…) y todo urbanizador cederá gratuitamente al uso público tanto las áreas destinadas a vías como las correspondientes a parques y facilidades comunales; lo que fijará por los dos conceptos últimos se determinará en el respectivo reglamento, mediante la fijación de porcentajes, del área total a fraccionar o urbanizar, que podrá fluctuar entre un cinco por ciento a un veinte por ciento, según el tamaño promedio de los lotes, el uso que se pretenda dar al terreno y las normas al respecto. No obstante lo anterior, la suma de los terrenos que deben cederse para vías públicas, parques y facilidades comunales no excederá de un cuarenta y cinco por ciento de la superficie total del terreno a fraccionar o urbanizar. (…)\n\nLa obligación del urbanizador de dotar las parcelas fraccionadas de accesos, zonas verdes, parques, vías públicas, le obliga a acatar las disposiciones urbanas que establecen estándares mínimos en cuanto a espacio, calidad, cantidad y demás requisitos exigidos por ley y los reglamentos de desarrollo en cuanto a esas áreas. El gobierno local tiene que ejercer oportunamente su poder de policía, garantizando a los vecinos del cantón, que las obras se realizarán de la forma que las normas urbanísticas lo indican y con las condiciones que aquellas disponen. Basta que un parcelamiento requiera obras para habilitar el ingreso y brindar servicios diversos a algunos de esos fundos, para sostener que no existe un “simple fraccionamiento”, sino un proyecto residencial que debe, en consecuencia, cumplir con todos los requisitos señalados. Los proyectos residenciales urbanos sólo pueden habilitar el ingreso a los fundos a través de vías públicas que deben tener las dimensiones y exigencias de la Ley General de Caminos Públicos y, el Reglamento para el Control Nacional de Fraccionamintos y Urbanizaciones, a falta, -en este ultimo caso- de disposiciones concretas en las normas locales. Ninguno de los órganos municipales tiene competencia para autorizar un proyecto en el que las habilitaciones a los fundos se hace mediante “servidumbres agrícolas adoquinadas”, \"servidumbres agrícolas\" o “simples servidumbres”, puesto que ellas son figuras propias del Derecho Privado y no del régimen urbanístico residencial que se rige por las normas y principios del Derecho Público.\" (Resoluciones número 175-2009 y 176-2009, supra citadas.)\n\nAl tenor de lo cual, reviste de especial interés el control que corresponde verificar al gobierno local, en este caso a cargo del órgano deliberativo (Concejo), tratándose de la aprobación de permisos de construcción de urbanizaciones, ya que debe corroborar que cumple a cabalidad con los requerimientos de ley, a saber dotación de vías públicas, áreas verdes y comunales, y en especial -de relevancia para resolución de este asunto- de la habilitación e implementación, a cargo del urbanizador, de los servicios públicos, tales como el de la luz, telefonía, agua potable y acueductos y alcantarillados, éste último, en caso de que exista la infraestructura para ello. Con lo cual, la no adecuación de los proyectos urbanísticos a los requerimientos establecidos en el ordenamiento urbano, obligan -per ser-, al rechazo de las gestiones incoadas, en aplicación del principio de legalidad, que sujeta a todo el aparato estatal, del que forman parte las municipalidades. A este respecto, resulta de relevancia recordar que el bloque de legalidad está conformado no sólo por las fuentes escritas , partiéndose de la Constitución Política, no sólo en lo que respecta a su texto, sino también a los valores y principios que de ella dimanan, los tratados internacionales, con especial significación de los relativos a derechos fundamentales, las leyes y disposiciones reglamentarias, según ordena el numeral 6 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública; sino también, y en particular, las reglas unívocas de la ciencia y la técnica, en tanto se constituyen, además, en un parámetro delimitador de la discrecionalidad administrativa, conforme al artículo 16 del citado cuerpo legal, en tanto obliga a la Administración a que su actuación esté debidamente motivada en el conocimiento teórico adquirido de las distintas metodologías y disciplinas de la ciencia y la técnica, cuando ello lo amerite –como en el caso de la materia urbanística-, de manera que la voluntad de las instituciones públicas no depende de su libre arbitrio (o escogencia), sino de las valoraciones objetivas obtenidas conforme a las reglas técnicas aplicables al caso. En este sentido, se destaca la objetividad de los criterios técnicos, por cuanto \"... si una técnica es científica y, por lo tanto, por definición, cierta, objetiva, universal, sujeta a reglas uniformes que no dependen de la apreciación personal de un sujeto individual, es obvio que no pueda en este aspecto hablarse de «completa discrecionalidad, sino que corresponde, por el contrario, hablar poco menos que de 'regulación' (sujeción a normas, en el caso de la técnica)»\" (MARTÍN GONZÁLEZ, M., en su obra El grado de determinación legal de los conceptos jurídicos. RAP, número 54, 1967, p.239), citado por DESDENTADO DAROCA, Eva. Los problemas del control judicial de la discrecionalidad técnica. (Un estudio crítico de la jurisprudencia. Editorial Civitas, S. A. Madrid. España. 1997. p. 43.) En forma concordante, se manifestó Eduardo ORTIZ ORTIZ en la Comisión Legislativa que discutió el proyecto de ley de la Ley General de Administración Pública para incluir como parámetro de la discrecionalidad administrativa las reglas unívocas de la ciencia y la técnica, al considerar \"... en los casos en que la Administración actúe en materias técnicas que tengan un significado claro y preciso en el caso, las reglas técnicas van a ser, en este caso, como leyes, la violación de los aspectos técnicos de un acto administrativo de un servicio público, naturalmente va a ser una ilegalidad exactamente como si se estuviera violando un precepto legal.\" (QUIRÓS CORONADO, Roberto. Ley General de Administración Pública, Concordada y Anotada con el Debate Legislativo y la Jurisprudencia Constitucional. Editorial Aselex, S. A. San José, Costa Rica. 1996. p. 99.) \n\nVII.- DE LA MOTIVACIÓN COMO ELEMENTO ESENCIAL DE LA ACTUACIÓN FORMAL DE LA ADMINISTRACIÓN PÚBLICA.- Siendo que uno de los reparos que se hacen en este apelación es precisamente la falta de motivación del acuerdo impugnado, precisamente por no sustentarse ni en la prueba aportada a los autos ni a la normativa que rige la materia, resulta de importancia hacer una breve reflexión sobre el punto, sobre la base de la doctrina y normativa que lo regulan. La existencia y validez de todo acto administrativo depende de la concurrencia de varios elementos esenciales, impuestos por el ordenamiento jurídico, que para una mayor comprensión, pueden clasificarse en materiales, relativos a los elementos subjetivos (competencia, legitimación e investidura), objetivos (fin, contenido y motivo -artículos 131, 132 y 133 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública y 49 de la Constitución Política) y formales, comprensivos de la forma en que se adopta el acto, sea, el medio de expresión o manifestación (instrumentación), la motivación o fundamentación (artículo 136 de la citada Ley General) y el procedimiento seguido para su adopción (artículos 214 y 308 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública y 39 y 41 de la Constitución). La motivación consiste \n\n\"... en una declaración de cuáles son las circunstancias de hecho y de derecho que han llevado a la respectiva administración pública al dictado o emanación del acto administrativo. La motivación es la expresión formal del motivo y, normalmente, en cualquier resolución administrativa, está contenida en los denominados 'considerandos' -parte considerativa-. La motivación, al consistir en una enunciación de los hechos y del fundamento jurídico que la administración pública tuvo en cuenta para emitir su decisión o voluntad, constituye un medio de prueba de la intencionalidad de esta y una pauta indispensable para interpretar y aplicar el respectivo acto administrativo.\" (JINESTA LOBO, Ernesto. Tratado de Derecho Administrativo. Tomo I. (Parte General). Biblioteca Jurídica Dike. Primera edición. Medellín, Colombia. 2002. p. 388.) \n\nDe manera que la motivación debe determinar la aplicación de un concepto a las circunstancias de hecho singulares de que se trate (según desarrollo de la jurisprudencia española, propiamente en la sentencia del 18 de mayo de 1991, RA 4120, aceptando considerando de la apelada, que cita las SSTS de 23 de setiembre de 1969, RA 6078, y 7 de octubre de 1970, RA 4251, citado por el autor Marcos M. Nombre60531 , en su obra La motivación del acto administrativo. (Editorial Tecnos, S. A. Madrid. 1993, página 190); es decir, se trata de una decisión concreta, que liga los hechos con el sustento normativo; de manera que cuando hay una breve alusión a normas generales y hechos inespecíficos, se puede concluir que no hay aporte suficiente de justicación, en la medida en que de ellos no es posible deducir los elementos valorados por la autoridad gubernativa para tomar la decisión, lo cual adquiere la mayor trascendencia cuando se trata de actos limitativos o restrictivos de derechos subjetivos o en los que se impone una sanción al administrado. Por su contenido, se constituye en factor determinante del debido proceso y derecho de defensa, que tiene plena aplicación en el ámbito administrativo, según lo señaló la Sala Constitucional a partir de la sentencia 15-90, de las dieciséis horas cuarenta y cinco horas del cinco de enero de mil novecientos noventa, al enunciar los elementos mínimos de este principio constitucional \n\n\"(...) a) Notificación al interesado del carácter y fines del procedimiento; b) derecho de ser oído, y oportunidad del interesado para presentar los argumentos y producir las pruebas que entienda pertinentes; c) oportunidad para el administrado de preparar su alegación, lo que incluye necesariamente el acceso a la información y a los antecedentes administrativos, vinculados con la cuestión de que se trate; ch) derecho del administrado de hacerse representar y asesorar por abogados, técnicos y otras personas calificadas; d) notificación adecuada de la decisión que dicta la administración y de los motivos en que ella se funde y e) derecho del interesado de recurrir la decisión dictada ...\" (El resaltado no es del original.)\n\nEs por ello que al tenor del artículo 136 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, resulta exigido para la Administración motivar los actos que imponen obligaciones; limiten, supriman o denieguen derechos subjetivos; resuelvan recursos; los que se dictan con separación del criterio seguido en actuaciones precedentes o del dictamen de los órganos consultivos; los que mantienen la ejecución del que es impugnado; los generales de carácter normativo (reglamentos) y los discrecionales de carácter general. Así, si no hay motivación, se incurre en un vicio de forma que afecta gravemente el acto, viciándolo de nulidad absoluta. \n\nVIII.- DEL ANÁLISIS DE LA LEGALIDAD DEL ACUERDO IMPUGNADO.- Es a la luz de las anteriores consideraciones que se ejercerá el control de legalidad del acuerdo municipal impugnado en lo que respecta a su contenido, en lo relativo al ámbito competencial del gobierno municipal, como ha sido requerido. Estima este Tribunal que el acuerdo municipal impugnado -artículo 29 de la sesión ordinaria 53-2009, del ocho de setiembre del dos mil nueve de la Municipalidad de Belén- resulta conforme con el ordenamiento jurídico. A tal efecto, deben hacerse las siguientes reflexiones.\n\nPrimero: Fue dictado precisamente en ejercicio de las funciones que el ordenamiento -constitucional y legal- le ha delegado a los gobiernos municipales, en lo que atañe, no sólo a la ordenación urbano-local, sino en particular de control (poder de policía) en ese ámbito. Y es dictado con ocasión de una gestión de disponibilidad de agua potable para un proyecto urbanístico, previamente aprobado. Según se indicó anteriormente, la potestad urbanística que ejercen las municipalidades no se restringe al dictado de la normativa de la materia de su cantón, sino en la verificación, caso por caso, según las propias solicitudes y gestiones de los munícipes y empresarios, del cumplimiento de esa normativa; ámbito en el cual, obviamente resulta comprendido el tema de la disponibilidad de agua; que es de resorte exclusivo del gobierno local el determinarla, según se dijo, al tenor de la competencia constitucional asignada a estas corporaciones conforme al numeral 169, y legal en la Ley de Planificación Urbana (artículos 32 a 41) y Ley de Construcciones (artículos 1º y 74, supra citados), pues sin duda, se trata de un servicio local; según lo consideró de manera enfática la Sala Constitucional en diversos pronunciamientos. En efecto, en sentencia número 6706-93, de las quince horas veintiún minutos del veintiuno de diciembre siguiente, indicó:\n\n\"II).- La Sala estima que la potestad atribuida a los gobiernos locales para planificar el desarrollo urbano dentro de los límites de su territorio sí integra el concepto constitucional de «intereses y servicios locales» a que hace referencia el artículo 169 de la Constitución, competencia que fue reconocida por la Ley de Planificación Urbana (# 4240 del 15 de noviembre de 1968, reformada por Leyes # 6575 de 27 de abril de 1981 y # 6595 de 6 de agosto de ese mismo año), específicamente en los artículos 15 y 19 aquí impugnados, (...)\n\nIII).- (...) La planificación urbana, sea la elaboración y puesta en marcha de los planes reguladores, es una función inherente a las municipalidades con exclusión de todo otro ente público, salvo lo dicho en cuanto a las potestades de dirección general atribuidas al Ministerio de Planificación y a la Dirección de Urbanismo.-\" (El resaltado no es del original.)\n\nFinalmente, en la sentencia número 4205-96, de las catorce horas treinta y tres minutos del veinte de agosto de mil novecientos noventa y seis, facultó la existencia de otras regulaciones distintas de las municipalidades -entendiéndose por tales, del Instituto de Vivienda y Urbanismo-, pero condicionadas a dos supuestos fundamentales, que no existiera norma municipal al respecto, y que la Municipalidad la haga suya esa normativa a través de un acuerdo municipal expreso: \n\n\"(...) se reitera la tesis de que sigue siendo atribución exclusiva de los gobiernos municipales la competencia de la ordenación urbanística, y sólo de manera excepcional y residual, en ausencia de regulación dictada al efecto por las municipalidades, es que el INVU tiene asignada la tarea de proponer planes reguladores, pero a reserva de que sean previamente aprobados por el ente local; de manera que las disposiciones que al efecto dicte esta institución autónoma en lo que se refiere a planificación urbana, deben siempre considerarse transitorias, y en defecto del uso de las competencias municipales\"\n\nAl tenor de lo cual, cabe concluir que la competencia municipal en el ámbito de la planificación urbana local; es exclusiva, y la de los órganos nacionales -que sea concurrente- es supletoria, a fin de garantizar la autonomía municipal. Por tales motivos, no puede pretenderse que otra dependencia pública, como en este caso, el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados pueda intervenir en decisiones propias de la ordenación urbanística de un cantón determinado, como lo es la determinación de si se da o no la disponibilidad del agua a un proyecto de urbanización en concreto, y menos, alegándose -como se hace-, una competencia nacional en lo que atañe a la función de dirección e intervención ante problemas de dotación de este líquido. Nótese que se está en la fase previa de construcción de un proyecto urbanístico, fase en el que resulta absolutamente legítima la acción preventiva y de fiscalización de la municipalidad; de manera que no puede alegarse la infracción del derecho fundamental a la dotación del agua, como se alega en este caso, que valga aclarar, cuyos titulares son únicamente los propios usuarios y no los empresarios o desarrolladores de proyectos urbanísticos; de donde la petición que se analiza, se circunscribirse en el ámbito del ejercicio de la libertad de empresa y del derecho de edificación, conforme a los permisos y actuaciones emanadas del propio ente local. Vale reiterar que la función de control urbano que compete a las municipalidades es esencial para garantizar la seguridad y respeto de los derechos fundamentales de los munícipes y futuros habitantes del cantón. \n\nSegundo: Tampoco resulta legítimo pretender defender la supremacía del Instituto Costarricense en la prestación del servicio público del agua, sobre los gobiernos locales, sobre la base de una ley de nacionalización del mismo, como alega el apelante, con fundamento en un pronunciamiento del Departamento Jurídico de la indicada institución autónoma. Tanto este Tribunal (de legalidad), como el Constitucional, han defendido la competencia asignada a las municipalidades en lo que respecta a la materia \"eminentemente\" local, esto es, la \"administración de los servicios e intereses locales\" conforme al mandato del artículo 169 de la propia Constitución Política, bajo las siguientes consideraciones:\n\n\"[...] al haber incluido el constituyente un concepto jurídico indeterminado en el artículo 169, al señalar que le corresponde a la Municipalidad de cada cantón administrar los servicios e intereses «locales», se requiere, para precisar este concepto, estar en contacto con la realidad a la que va destinado de manera que la única forma de definir o de distinguir lo local de lo que no lo es, es por medio de un texto legal, es decir, que es la ley la que debe hacerlo, o en su defecto, y según sea el caso, deberá hacerse por medio de la interpretación jurisprudencial que de esos contenidos haga el control jurisdiccional. Y puede decirse que el empleo de conceptos indeterminados por la Constitución significa, ante todo, un mandato dirigido al Juez para que él -no el legislador- los determine, como bien lo afirma la mejor doctrina nacional sobre el tema. [...], lo local tiene tal connotación que definir sus alcances por el legislador o el juez, debe conducir al mantenimiento de la integridad de los intereses y servicios locales, de manera que ni siquiera podría el legislador dictar normativa que tienda a desmembrar el Municipio (elemento territorial), si no lo hace observando los procedimientos previamente establecidos en la Constitución Política; ni tampoco promulgar aquella que coloque a sus habitantes (población) en claras condiciones de inferioridad con relación al resto del país; ni la que afecte la esencia misma de lo local (gobierno), de manera que se convierta a la Corporación en un simple contenedor vacío del que subsista solo la nominación, pero desactivando todo el régimen tal y como fue concebido por la Asamblea Nacional Constituyente. En otro giro, habrá cometidos que por su naturaleza son municipales -locales- y no pueden ser substraídos de ese ámbito de competencia para convertirlos en servicios o intereses nacionales, porque hacerlo implicaría desarticular a la Municipalidad, o mejor aún, vaciarla de contenido constitucional, y por ello, no es posible de antemano dictar los límites infranqueables de lo local, sino que para desentrañar lo que corresponde o no al gobierno comunal, deberá extraerse del examen que se haga en cada caso concreto [...] Consecuentemente, no sólo por norma legal expresa (el Código Municipal, la Ley de Licores), sino, y esto es lo más importante, por contenido constitucional expreso (artículo 169), no pueden subsistir funciones de ningún ente público, que disputen su primacía con las municipalidades, cuando se trata de materia que integra lo local.\" (El subrayado no es del original.) (Sentencia número 6469-97, de las dieciséis horas veinte minutos del ocho de octubre de mil novecientos noventa y siete, reiterada en la número 5445-99, de las catorce horas treinta minutos del catorce de julio de mil novecientos noventa y nueve.)\n\nEsta asignación competencial es desarrollada en la normativa de segundo orden (legal), concretamente en los artículos 13 inciso b), 17 incisos a) 68 y 74 del Código Municipal, que facultan la reglamentación por parte del Concejo municipal atinente a la prestación de los servicios municipales, al Alcalde su organización y administración y, consiguientemente, el establecimiento de las tarifas de los impuestos (tasas) municipales. En este sentido, en el citado fallo constitucional 5445-99 el Tribunal Constitucional advirtió \n\n\"[...] por voluntad expresa de nuestra Carta Fundamental, se asigna una competencia específica a los gobiernos locales, atribución que además es exclusiva de éstos; es decir, se trata de una competencia originaria de la municipalidad y sólo mediante una ley de nacionalización o de regionalización es que puede ser desplazada, total o parcialmente. En este orden de ideas, no debe dejarse de lado la problemática institucional, en tanto debe determinarse para que la transferencia del caso proceda, si la municipalidad está o no en capacidad real y técnica para cumplir con los servicios públicos que le competen, prefiriéndose el traslado del servicio a instituciones de carácter regional o nacional; y asimismo, cuando el problema desborda la circunscripción territorial a la que están supeditados los gobiernos locales, es que puede trasladarse esa competencia a las instituciones del Estado nacionales o regionales correspondientes; en ambos supuestos, se insiste, se requiere de una ley de nacionalización o de regionalización, según sea el caso.\"\n\nAl tenor de las anteriores consideraciones, no resulta, ni legítima ni verdadera la aseveración que hace la asesora legal del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, de que el servicio de agua potable se nacionalizó, de manera tal que se trasladó a esa institución, dejándole una competencia residual a las municipalidades. Todo lo contrario, según se indicó, la competencia primigenia u originaria en la prestación de los servicios locales, entre los que está incluida la dotación de agua potable, es de las corporaciones locales, según mandado constitucional, y concretamente, al tenor de lo dispuesto en el artículo 5 de la Ley de Agua Potable, número 1634, del dieciocho de setiembre de mil novecientos cincuenta y tres, que dispone literalmente:\n\n\"Las Municipalidades tendrán a su cargo la plena administración de los sistemas de abastecimiento de aguas potables que estén bajo su competencia\";\n\ny es en el numeral 2 inciso g) de la Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, número 2726, del catorce de abril de mil novecientos sesenta y uno y sus reformas, que se le asignó la competencia para administrar y operar los sistemas de acueductos y alcantarillados de todo el país, pero tratándose de los que están en manos de las municipalidades, únicamente si la prestación del servicio es deficiente. A la anterior conclusión se llega, luego de revisar minuciosamente el expediente legislativo de la indicada ley (número 2726), en tanto, en efecto, la intención inicial de los legisladores de la época fue sustraer totalmente de la esfera local el abastecimiento de agua potable en el país, endosándole esta tarea a un órgano técnico y especializado, pero la reacción de los gobiernos municipales de la fecha (San José, La Unión, Jiménez, Buenos Aires, Turrialba, Siquirres, Escazú, Osa, Limón, Pacayas, Golfito, Santa Cruz, Mora, Heredia, Desamparados, Santo Domingo de Heredia, Bagaces, Curridabat, Juan Viñas, Alajuelita, Pérez Zeledón, Tres Ríos, Tarrazú, El Guarco, Poás, Goicoechea, Grecia, Pococí, San Mateo, San Ramón, Alvarado, Puerto Cortés, San Pedro de Poás, a folios 72 a 107, 179, 180, 113, 193 a 204, 215 a 213, 244 a 255, 298, 299, 302 a 305, 342, 367, 373, 400 y 501), no se hicieron esperar, quienes se opusieron fuertemente al proyecto en cuestión, por estimar mancillada, no sólo la autonomía municipal, conferida por mandato constitucional (170), sino el ámbito competencia (169) y las finanzas municipales, producto de la prestación del servicio; a tal punto que se llegó a alegar:\n\n\"Con motivo de la discusión del proyecto de ley que crea la Dirección de Aguas y Alcantarillados, se hace necesario aclarar conceptos--\n\nNo es menester hilar muy delgado para concluir en que si a las Municipalidades del País (sic) se les quita la atribución que actualmente tienen de administrar los servicios de agua y alcantarillados, se les está privando de tan importantes atribuciones, que sería discutible si las actividades que después de ello quedarían bajo su atención ameritarían su subsistencia.\n\nInsistir en que no se perjudica a las Municipalidades al quitárseles la administración de tan importantes servicios, es negar la realidad de los hechos.\n\nEl artículo 169 de la Constitución Política es terminante al establecer que la administración de los servicios locales en cada cantón estará al cargo del Gobierno Municipal. Por otra parte la legislación vigente apunta los aludidos servicios de cañerías como municipales. Dónde quedará la autonomía municipal que el artículo 170 de la Constitución consagra, si mediante leyes se crean organismos no locales, para la atención de los servicios al cuidado de las municipalidades? No será este modo directo de terminar con el Régimen Municipal en Costa Rica, burlando lo que estatuye el citado artículo 169, haciéndose caso omiso del 170, y mofándose de la elección popular, puesto que se dejará a los Regidores electos para administrar los intereses y servicios locales, sin funciones ni atribuciones?\n\nNadie puede negar que si el proyecto de ley en estudio se convierte en ley de la República, en Costa Rica se habrá dado el primer paso para terminar con el Régimen Municipal.-\n\nSi lo que se quiere es tecnificar, centralizar o delegar la atención de servicios públicos, mediante la creación de un organismo especial y no como parece desprenderse del proyecto aludido, terminar con las municipalidades al no dejárseles servicios importantes que administrar, el camino lo da la ley.-\n\nEl artículo 27 de la Ley de Organización Municipal No. 131 de 9 de noviembre de 1909, reformado por Ley No. 1401 de 6 de diciembre de 1951 prevee el caso de que para prestar mejor un servicio comunal sea menester la creación de un organismo delegado de las Municipalidades, sin lesionar el estatuto de autonomía municipal. Dicho artículo en lo conducente dice:\n\n\"Articulo 27.- La administración de los intereses y servicios de las comunidades cantonales corresponde a las Municipalidades en su potestad de gobiernos autónomos municipales ...\"\n\nEl estatuto de autonomía municipal no impide, sin embargo, que dos o más Municipalidades puedan concertar acuerdos, convenios o uniones provinciales o de región, cuando por interés general, economía administrativa o mejor servicio común, consideren útil y necesario tecnificar, centralizar o delegar la realización de determinadas obras o SERVICIOS PÚBLICOS. Tales acuerdos, convenios o uniones, requieren, para su perfeccionamiento legal, de aprobación legislativa especial cuando impliquen variación de la división territorial administrativa o CREACIÓN DE UN ORGANISMO DELEGADO INDEPENDIENTE DE LOS DELEGANTES. La entidad, corporación o establecimiento delegado deberá conservar siempre su carácter esencialmente local o municipal.\n\nSi siguiendo lo que prevé el citado artículo se puede lograr un mejor servicio, porqué la insistencia en aprobar un proyecto que terminará con el Régimen Municipal en Costa Rica, y que se dictará contra la voluntad de los representantes del pueblo en los cantones?\" (Nota de la Municipalidad de San José, del doce de enero de mil novecientos sesenta, a la Asamblea Legislativa, a folios 298 y 299. El subrayado es del original.)\n\nResulta ilustrativo que la Asociación Democrática de Juntas Progresistas, se manifestó conforme con el proyecto, siempre y cuando, el organismo se crease, fuese \"un organismo de dirección y coordinación técnica, exclusivamente\" (folio 397), para respetar la autonomía y competencia de las municipalidades, \"cuando debe ser preocupación de todos fortalecerlo\" (folios 397, 402 y 403). Consecuencia del conflicto suscitado es la normativa finalmente aprobada que, creó al Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillado, no como el órgano encargado de \"operar, dirigir, planificar, diseñar, construir, mantener, fijar y resolver todo lo relacionado con el suministro de agua potable para usos domiciliarios, industriales y de cualquier otra naturaleza a todos los habitantes de la República\", como propugnaba el artículo 1º del proyecto; sino más bien con una competencia de dirección en esta materia, según se desprende del texto actual del citado numeral, \"Con el objeto de dirigir, fijar políticas, establecer y aplicar normas y promover el planteamiento, financiamiento y desarrollo y de resolver todo lo relacionado con el suministro de agua potable y recolección y evacuación de aguas negras, residuos industriales líquidos, lo mismo que el aspecto normativo de los sistemas de alcantarillado pluvial en áreas urbanas, para todo el territorio nacional se crea el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, como una institución autónoma del Estado.\" Así, no debe confundirse la competencia que por ley de su creación -supra indicada-, y sus reformas, le asigna al indicado ente, cual es la de ejercer como ente rector en la materia de agua a nivel nacional, lo que se traduce en la obligación de mantener un estricto control sobre el sistema de operación de los acueductos rurales y municipales, a fin de que éstos se ajusten a las directrices emanadas del instituto, para garantizar la calidad del servicio, en tanto involucra la salud pública; de donde, sólo por vía de excepción, en los supuestos en que no se preste adecuadamente aquel servicio, en condiciones de calidad, cantidad y desarrollo eficiente, o no existan condiciones económicas sociales adecuadas para su administración a cargo de los entes municipales o las asociaciones administradoras (Asadas), puede asumir la administración, operación y mantenimiento de los sistemas de acueductos y alcantarillados. (En este sentido, entre otras, se pueden consultar las sentencias números 2003-1367, de las nueve horas cuarenta y nueve minutos del veintiuno de febrero del dos mil tres y 2009-18311, de las trece horas cuarenta y cuatro minutos del dos de diciembre del dos mil nueve, ambas de la Sala Constitucional.) Ahora bien, se insiste en que en este caso no se dan los presupuesto que legitiman la intervención del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados para dotar de agua al proyecto Condominios o Apartamentos San Vicente, toda vez que se está en la fase de construcción del proyecto, en el que la actuación de la municipalidad se da en la esfera competencial de control urbanístico, según se explicó anteriormente.\n\nTercero: Contrario a lo alegado por el apelante, el acto impugnado está suficientemente motivado, tanto en la normativa que rige la materia urbanística y competencia de la municipalidad, como de las múltiples probanzas, consistentes en su mayoría en criterios técnicos, tanto de varias dependencias de la corporación local como del Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones y del Servicio Nacional de SENARA; de los que se desprende que el proyecto de Condominios San Vicente se proyectó con un problema de faltante agua, condición, que lejos de mejorar ha empeorado, a tal punto que motiva la gestión, cuya decisión es objeto de esta impugnación. En efecto, en el oficio Oficio ASP-327-2007, el Director del Área de Servicio Público de la Municipalidad de Belén -Luis Carlos Cháves-, señaló que conforme a la concesión otorgada por el MINAET del pozo AB-1571, la estructura prevista de almacenamiento (tanque subterráneo) y el caudal asignado, los tanques no podían ser llenados durante las dieciocho horas de bombeo autorizado; lo que hace evidente, que exista un faltante en la dotación de agua (faltante de agua). Asimismo, es con ocasión de la sentencia de amparo número 2008-15657, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, que la propia empresa desarrolladora solicitó la clausura temporal del pozo al Ministerio respectivo, lo que se llevó a cabo el diecisiete de diciembre del dos mil ocho, con la presencia de funcionarios municipales; sin que a la fecha haya sido autorizada la apertura del mismo; lo que hace evidente que siga existiendo el faltante del agua que proveerá al indicado proyecto. Nótese que conforme se indicó en el oficio IMN-DA-1347-2009 del cuatro de mayo del dos mil nueve (del Jefe del Departamento de Aguas del MINAET), en atención a los criterios técnicos vertidos en los oficios GR-276-09, del Gerente General del SENARA, DIGH-145-2009 de la Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica del SENARA, el Estudio Hidrogeológico para delimitar la zona de captura y protección del pozo AB-1571 ante la amenaza de su contaminación y el Mapa de Vulnerabilidad Hidrogeológica de una parte del Valle Central de Costa Rica, \"considera que puede abrirse el pozo y ser aprovechada el agua de conformidad con lo dispuesto en la resolución de concesión R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET\", previo al cumplimiento de varias recomendaciones técnicas, cuyo acatamiento debía ser informado al Departamento de Aguas \"con el fin de verificar su cumplimiento efectivo, de previo a la apertura\" (folios 13 vuelto a 15 vuelto.) Así las cosas, no obstante que se cumplieron los requerimientos indicados, no consta en los autos ninguna orden de apertura del pozo AB-1571 emanada del órgano competente (entiéndase MINAET); por lo que no existe causa para \"reconocer\" -como se pide ante esta instancia-, una situación que materialmente no se ha dado. Lo dicho evidencia que tampoco es cierta la afirmación que hace el apelante respecto de que el cierre del pozo AB-1571 estaba condicionado únicamente a que la Municipalidad aprobara la disponibilidad del agua a través de su acueducto o de la conexión a la red del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, con la prestación de un servicio de calidad, cantidad y continuidad suficiente; porque se repite, su cierre se debió a la implementación del citado fallo constitucional. Es claro que, conforme a la reforma de la Política de regulación anual del crecimiento urbano (aprobada en sesión ordinaria número 37-2004, del ocho de junio del dos mil cuatro por el Concejo de Belén, publicada en La Gaceta número 147, del veintiocho de julio siguiente), es obligación del urbanizador (desarrollador) garantizar -a plenitud- el suministro de agua del proyecto, como requisito previo para su aprobación por parte del Concejo, lo que resulta evidente que no se dio en el caso en estudio. Dicha normativa urbanística establece los requisitos y procedimiento para aprobación y tramitación de nuevos proyectos urbanísticos, a saber:\n\n\"Procedimiento:\n\na) El Control de crecimiento urbano y las autorizaciones para nuevos desarrollos habitacionales, se establecerá mediante la autorización de disponibilidad de pagas de agua para cada proyecto o etapa de estos, hasta tanto la Municipalidad de Belén establezca más variables en su Reglamentación del Plan Regulador.\n\nb) La Municipalidad emitirá la disponibilidad de agua a desarrollos habitacionales cuya demanda sea menor o igual a 40 (cuarenta) pajas de agua anualmente.\n\nc) Las autorizaciones para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos, que excedan más de 40 (cuarenta) unidades de vivienda a contabilizar en urbanizaciones y filiales de condominios, deberá ser propuestas al Concejo Municipal por el Desarrollador, indicando las obras que garanticen un impacto ambiental urbano mínimo. Las propuestas deben garantizar el suministro de agua a los usuarios actuales y futuros del sector, tratamiento de aguas negras y servidas, sistemas de conducción y amortiguamiento de pluviales antes de ser vertidos a cauces que provoquen inundaciones hacia aguas abajo, acciones en materia de ampliación y señalamiento vial, así como otras acciones estructurales que aseguren un desarrollo urbano ordenado y proporcionado; conjunto de asuntos que deber ser refrendado por el Concejo Municipal.\" \n\nLa regulación anterior resulta conforme con la establecida en los Requisitos mínimos para valoración de disponibilidad de agua para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos a contabilizar en urbanizaciones, filiales de condominios y complejos habitacionales, aprobado por el Concejo Municipal de Belén en sesión ordinaria número 44-2004, del trece de julio del dos mil cuatro, en que, en el punto B inciso vii) exige para la aprobación de la disponibilidad de agua en proyectos cuya demanda exceda de más de cuarenta unidades de vivienda, la presentación, por parte del desarrollador, de la \"Propuesta de suministro de agua para los usuarios actuales y futuros del sector, planteada para un período mínimo de 10 años, previa consulta al Plan Maestro del Acueducto del Cantón y el Área de Servicios Públicos sobre las condiciones de operación del sistema de acueducto municipal.\" Asimismo, es de hacer notar que, ante el requerimiento de disponibilidad de agua que hizo la empresa Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, previo a la adopción de su decisión, se requirió al Director del Área de Servicio Públicos de la corporación que determinara la viabilidad de la propuesta, y fue en el oficio ASP-064-2009, del veinte de febrero del dos mil nueve (a folios 86 vuelto y 87 frente), el cual es consistente con el que había emitido la misma dependencia municipal en el Memorando ASP-045-09, del cuatro de enero anterior (a folios 177 a 179), en el que se indica de la posibilidad de prestar el servicio, pero condicionado a la realización de mejoras en el acueducto municipal, con un elevado costo económico -aproximadamente doscientos mil dólares en moneda americana-, para garantizar una prestación efectiva y eficiente, siendo que a ese momento, no existen planes ni presupuesto para llevarlas a cabo, por atenderse otras necesidades y prioridades del cantón; debiéndose, en todo caso modificar o reestructurar el Plan Maestro actual. Con lo cual, resulta materialmente imposible que la municipalidad asuma la prestación del servicio. En este sentido, bien hizo el Concejo municipal al valorar esta situación, en tanto, la aprobación de la disponibilidad de agua pedida por el apelante, no puede poner en entredicho el servicio que ya presta a la comunidad de Belén, lo que se traduciría en un debilitamiento del acueducto municipal; siendo inviable en este momento para la corporación local -según se explicó-, el asumir los costos de la infraestructura requerida para poder dotar de agua a un proyecto, siendo la única manera de hacerlo, con la contribución de la empresa desarrolladora. Se advierte que la disponibilidad de agua es un requisito previo a la autorización de cualquier permiso de construcción, y su otorgamiento, tampoco se traduce en el otorgamiento de la licencia constructiva, ya que es un requisito -uno más entre otros- que deben cumplir los desarrolladores para obtenerla. En el caso en estudio, es con ocasión del cierre temporal del pozo AB-1571 -a petición voluntaria del propio desarrollador-, que se requiere la intervención de la municipalidad, y en su defecto, del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, para que presten el servicio de la dotación del agua potable al proyecto. Ello evidencia, una vez más, el incumplimiento que se da en esta área tan sensible, como lo es es la garantía, a cargo del urbanizador, de la dotación y suministro del agua. \n\nCuarto: Por otra parte, tampoco son de recibo para este Colegio las consideraciones que hace el apelante, en torno a la posibilidad de continuar las obras sobre el área de protección del pozo AB-1571, al amparo de la inexistencia de contaminación y por haberse realizado las obras técnicas recomendadas Jefe de Departamento de Aguas del MINAET -José Miguel Zeledón Calderón- en oficio IMN-1347-2009, del cuatro de mayo del dos mil nueve. Olvida el petente que es con ocasión de la sentencia constitucional número 2008-15657, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho, que se obligó a las autoridades competentes, entiéndase tanto el Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones como a la Municipalidad de Belén, delimitar y respetar el área protegida señalada en el ordenamiento jurídico, conforme a la advertencia que Nombre2449 había hecho. La consideración técnica -Estudio Hidrológico para delimitar la zona de captura y protección del pozo AB-1571, el Mapa de Vulnerabilidad Hidrogeológica de una parte del Valle Central de Costa Rica, y los oficios DIGH-145-2009, de la Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica de Nombre2449 y IMN-DA-1347-2009, del cuatro de mayo del dos mil nueve, del Jefe del Departamento de Aguas del MINAET-, de que no existe riesgo de contaminación, ni de las aguas subterráneas ni del pozo, no levanta la restricción establecida en el ordenamiento jurídico; disposición que en todo caso encuentra sustento en el principio preventivo en materia ambiental, que resulta de aplicación en la materia urbanística. \n\nQuinto: Finalmente, también es legítimo el razonamiento que hace el Concejo de la Municipalidad de Belén, que ante la imposibilidad material de poder prestar el servicio de agua a través de su acueducto -por el estado actual de la infraestructura- lo que no autoriza a que lo asuma el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, por estimar que existe imposibilidad legal de derivar efectos jurídicos de un acto absolutamente nulo, al tenor de los numerales 166, 169 y 170 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, al evidenciarse, según se indica, la gravedad y un gran número de violaciones del acto administrativo de otorgamiento permiso de construcción para el proyecto San Vicente, que, se afirma, \"tipifica claramente un caso de nulidad absoluta, por ausencia de elementos válidos constitutivos, por lo que su ejecución implicaría \"la responsabilidad civil de la Administración (o sea la municipalidad como tal), y civil administrativa y eventualmente penal\" de sus autores y ejecutores, si tal ejecución llegare a tener lugar.\" En este sentido, la entidad local advierte que la actuación de la Administración municipal, avalando el proyecto en contravención de la normativa que rige la materia, es susceptible de generar responsabilidad administrativa y penal -tanto en la Ley Contra la Corrupción, como normativa ambiental- de los funcionarios involucrados, al haberse otorgado un permiso de manera abiertamente ilegal, que califica como desviación de poder. En efecto, a la hora de sustentar esa nulidad absoluta del permiso de construcción número 7604-2008, a favor de Nombre16224 -por estar la propiedad en fideicomiso- para la construcción de once torres compresivas de ciento veintiún apartamentos, al amparo de la existencia y explotación de la concesión del pozo AB-1571 como única fuente de abastecimiento de agua potable, enuncia el ayuntamiento, las siguientes graves infracciones del ordenamiento jurídico: \n\n1.- El proyecto no presentó la disponibilidad de agua potable otorgada por Municipalidad de Belén; siendo que ni el Plan Maestro vigente ni el plan de contigencia de dicha corporación contemplan el abastecimiento de agua para proyectos urbanísticos nuevos, lo que no garantiza su suministro; con lo cual, se aprobó un permiso de construcción que no cuenta con todos los requisitos necesarios para su valoración, con infracción del principio de legalidad, al omitir las formalidades previstas conforme a la normativa urbanística del cantón, en contravención de la Política de Crecimiento Urbano y el respectivo reglamento de Requisitos mínimos para la valoración de disponibilidad de agua para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos, publicados en La Gaceta 124 y 147, del veinticuatro de junio y del veintiocho de julio, ambas publicaciones, del dos mil cuatro;\n\n2.- El permiso de construcción lo dio un funcionario municipal sin el aval del Concejo, como lo exige la normativa urbana del cantón respeto de proyectos habitacionales de más de cuarenta unidades, sino la Unidad de Desarrollo, con el visto bueno de un funcionario no legitimado del Área Técnica Operativa y de Desarrollo Urbano al no estar adscrito al Colegio Profesional respectivo y no ser el Coordinador del Departamento. Razona que actuación asimismo es es contraria al Dictamen C-235-99 de la Procuraduría General de la República, que indica que es el Concejo a quien le corresponde acto final de aprobación o improbación de la construcción de una urbanización de un cantón, siendo el departamento de ingeniería municipal, un órgano consultivo del Concejo;\n\n3.- A sabiendas, se autorizó instalar parte del proyecto habitacional (torres 4 y 5 y áreas de estacionamiento, según planos constructivos aprobados) dentro del área de protección del pozo AB-1571; desatendiéndose así los criterios técnicos, dictámenes y opiniones consultivos del Nombre2449 emitidos en los oficios ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07 y GE-049-09 relativos al deber de guardar el área de protección del pozo AB-1571, como se desprende del fallo constitucional 2008-015657, de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del diecisiete de octubre del dos mil ocho; lo que a su criterio se constituye en la no aplicación de la jurisprudencia vinculante de la Sala Constitucional en torno al principio precautorio respecto de las aguas subterráneas (propiamente en sentencia número 2007-1923 de ese Tribunal), en relación con la protección de las aguas subterráneas;\n\n4.- El permiso se dio al amparo de la existencia y explotación de concesión de pozo AB-1571, como única fuente de abastecimiento del agua potable, la cual estaba sujeta a plazo cierto y determinado; lo que explicó, además de insuficiente para este proyecto según criterio técnico del Director del Área de Servicios Públicos de la Municipalidad de Belén - en oficio Oficio ASP-327-2007-, es una condición incompatible con un proyecto urbanístico, ya que el agua debe ser inherente al proyecto mismo por tratarse de punto tan esencial como permanente, lo que implica que no debe tener interrupciones o alteraciones de ningún tipo;\n\n5.- El permiso se otorgó sin atender a criterios técnicos que recomendaban otra decisión: a saber, el Oficio ASP-327-2007 de la Dirección del Área de Servicio Público de la Municipalidad de Belén -Luis Carlos Cháves-, que señaló que conforme a la concesión otorgada por el MINAE y la estructura prevista de almacenamiento (tanque subterráneo) y el caudal asignado, no puede ser llenado durante las dieciocho horas de bombeo autorizado; lo que hace evidente, que exista un faltante en la dotación de agua (faltante de agua); el oficio UA-204-2007 de la Unidad Ambiental de la Municipalidad de Belén que indicó que los diseños de sitio, la existencia de dos edificios, calles y parqueos se encontraban en la zona de protección del pozo; el oficio UO 276-2007 de la Unidad de Obras de la Municipalidad de Belén, que la propuesta sólo solventaba parcialmente los problemas de capacidad vial, sin atender a necesidad de accesibilidad que podía generarse sobre la vía; oficio O-023-2007 de la Unidad de Obras de la Municipalidad de Belén, relativo al impacto vial en la vía de acceso al proceso conocido como Potrerillos, que hizo planteamiento de serios problemas de escurrimiento de aguas pluviales debido a las carencias de un colector, canalización y descargo pluvial, además del colapso de la estructura del pavimento a lo largo de la vía hacia la radial de Santa Ana; sistema de drenaje, ancho de calzada;\n\n6.- Que no se cumplió con el debido proceso en su otorgamiento, en tanto no se entregaron al interesado los informes de rechazo de la Unidad Ambiental (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008 y UA 36-2008) para su debida corrección.\n\nSin que entre a valorar este Tribunal los anteriores elementos en forma concreta, y sin que tampoco se avale la nulidad absoluta del acto en cuestión -permiso de construcción 7604-2008 de la municipalidad de Belén-, por no haber sido declarada como tal en un procedimiento ordinario administrativo, previos dictámenes de la Procuraduría General de la República, conforme al artículo 183 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, o derive de un procedimiento de lesividad -artículo 173 de la citada Ley, 10 inciso 5) y 34 Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo; se estima que el rechazo que hace de la gestión incoada por Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 se encuentra suficientemente motivada en la nulidad alegada. En este sentido, un acto absolutamente nulo no se presume válido, como lo prevé expresamente el numeral 169 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, de manera que, en tesis de principio, no pueden derivarse de él efecto jurídico alguno, una vez que ha sido declarada -pero que bien puede ser la causa o motivo de medidas precautorias, según se indicará a continuación-, y en consecuencia, tampoco puede ser ejecutado, lo cual es una consecuencia lógica de su ilegitimidad flagrante e ineficacia intrínseca; y por ello, por la gravedad de sus vicios, en elementos esenciales del acto, no puede ser saneado ni convalidado (artículo 172 del mismo cuerpo legal); y el propio numeral 170 de la citada Ley, hace incurrir en responsabilidad civil de la Administración y del funcionario por la ejecución de un acto de tal naturaleza. \n\nIX.- CONSIDERACIONES FINALES EN TORNO A LA LEGALIDAD DEL ACUERDO IMPUGNADO.- Para este Órgano Colegiado, lo resuelto por el Concejo Municipal de Belén resulta conforme a derecho y debe confirmarse en el tanto, la desestimatoria, en todos los extremos de la solicitud de disponibilidad de agua que hace la empresa desarrolladora Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, debe ser tenida, como en efecto lo es, de una medida precautoria, dictada por el órgano deliberativo al evidenciar la falta de uno de sus elementos esenciales del proyecto -la dotación de agua-; y precisamente, en resguardo de su propia sostenibilidad, en tutela de la seguridad y derechos de los futuros habitantes; la cual a su vez se sustenta en la suspensión de obras acordadas por la Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano en oficios ODU-022-2009 y ODU-13-2009 del once y trece de mayo del dos mil nueve (folios 166 a 169), que se motivan en la falta de previsión de disponibilidad del agua de las obras proyectadas. Asimismo, resulta conforme con la reforma transitoria introducida al plan regulador del cantón, por acuerdo tomado en el artículo 5 de la sesión ordinaria número 16-2007, del trece de marzo del dos mil siete, con el visto bueno del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (en sesión ordinaria de Junta Directiva número 23-2006, del veinticinco de abril del dos mil seis, en que conoció del oficio 1535 del Director de Urbanismo) y de la Sala Constitucional (en sentencias número 2005-8915 y 2005-6399), en virtud de la cual, temporalmente se suspendió \"el otorgamiento de disponibilidad de agua y de permisos de construcción, a los proyectos de desarrollo habitacional, comercial e industrial, en condominios o urbanización, por el tiempo necesario para actualizar y poner en ejecución el nuevo Plan Regulador para el Cantón de Belén, a la luz de los nuevos elementos conocidos. ...\" No consta en los autos ni en los registros electrónicos derogatoria de tal regulación. No obstante las anteriores consideraciones, estima este Tribunal que la situación planteada en este asunto no puede quedarse en los términos resueltos por el Concejo en el acuerdo impugnado; ya que no puede mantenerse indefinidamente en el tiempo, lo anterior, por estar vigente un acto declarativo de derechos -permiso de construcción 7604-2008 de la municipalidad de Belén-, que se repite, a la fecha no ha sido anulado conforme a los mecanismos previstos al efecto por el ordenamiento jurídico; y que le sirva de sustento, en tanto de lo contrario dejaría de tener la característica de instrumentalidad que le es propia, convirtiéndose en una sanción autónoma e impropia del Estado de derecho. En efecto, en materia municipal, la declaratoria de nulidad de un acto administrativo firme que le ha otorgado un derecho al administrado, puede producirse de varias formas: a) a instancia de un tercero “interesado”,“cualquiera\", en los términos del artículo 173 de la Constitución Política, a través de la presentación del recurso extraordinario de revisión; en los términos en que lo permiten los numerales 157 y 163 del Código Municipal o; b) volviendo el gobierno local contra aquél acto suyo anterior, declaratorio de derechos subjetivos, ya sea a través del procedimiento ordinario administrativo, en la propia sede administrativa, en los supuestos de nulidad absoluta evidente y manifiesta, conforme lo faculta el artículo 183 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, previo dictamen favorable de la Procuraduría General de la República, o con la interposición del proceso de lesividad en sede contenciosa, en los casos de nulidad absoluta no evidente y no manifiesta, que se regula en los numerales 173 de la indicada ley, 10 inciso 5) y 34 del Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. Lo anterior encuentra sustento en la teoría o doctrina de los actos propios, que ha desarrollado la jurisprudencia de la Sala Constitucional, que ha señalado:\n\n\"[...] existe en derecho un principio general según el cual nadie puede volver sobre sus propios actos, sin embargo en lo que respecta a los actos emanados de la Administración en ejercicio de sus funciones opera el principio general de que los actos administrativos son esencialmente revocables existiendo sin embargo una excepción, cual es que los actos administrativos no son revocables cuando crean, declaran o reconocen derechos en favor de terceros siempre y cuando esos actos hayan sido dictados en cabal cumplimiento de los requisitos esenciales para su validez cuales son el objeto, competencia, voluntad y forma, pues en caso de que no cumplan tales requerimientos precisamente por ser actos que crean, declaran o reconocen derechos podrían engendrar nulidad absoluta o relativa la cual es declarada a partir de procedimientos previamente establecidos por ley [...]\" (sentencia de la Sala Constitucional número 5808-93, de las dieciséis horas cuarenta y dos minutos del diez de noviembre de mil novecientos noventa y tres). \n\nCon ello no se está desconociendo a la Administración Pública la facultad de revocar y modificar sus propias decisiones; pero se sabe que ésta no es totalmente libre, sino que debe sujetarse a los límites –ya señalados– dispuestos expresamente por el legislador, y que, por interpretación de la Sala Constitucional, se constituyen en garantía de la legitimidad de la actuación de la Administración, y en derecho para el administrado.\n\nSe advierte, que la revisión oficiosa o anulación con quebranto de los requisitos legales según se ha indicado, “sea por omisión de las formalidades previstas o por no ser la nulidad absoluta evidente y manifiesta” (v. gr. que el dictamen sea desfavorable, que no se recabó el dictamen o que no se abrió un procedimiento administrativo ordinario) es absolutamente nula y hace responsable por los daños y perjuicios provocados tanto a la administración pública como al funcionario (artículo 173, párrafo 6°, ibídem).\n\nX.- Corolario de lo anterior, debe confirmarse el acuerdo impugnado. Al tenor de lo indicado en el Considerando IX.- anterior, de manera inmediata a la notificación de esta resolución, el Concejo Municipal, como jerarca supremo del gobierno local y, el Alcalde municipal como ejecutor de sus acuerdos, deben proceder de inmediato a buscar la eliminación del ordenamiento jurídico del permiso de construcción 7604-2008 que otorgó la Unidad Ambiental de la Municipalidad de Belén a Improsa, para la construcción del proyecto de Condominios o Apartamentos San Vicente, que desarrolla la empresa Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, de conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 174.1 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, que dispone literalmente:\n\n\"1. La Administración estará obligada a anular de oficio el acto absolutamente nulo, dentro de las limitaciones de esta ley.\"\n\nAl no caber contra lo dispuesto en esta resolución ulterior recurso, se da por agotada la vía administrativa.\n\nXI.- DE LA IMPROCEDENCIA DEL REQUERIMIENTO DE RESPONSABILIDAD DE LOS MIEMBROS DEL CONCEJO.- Finalmente, debe rechazarse por improcedente, la solicitud que se hace ante esta instancia de que lleve a cabo los procedimientos respectivos para determinar la responsabilidad administrativa y civil de los funcionares concejales que intervinieron en la adopción del acuerdo impugnado. Se recuerda al efecto que este Tribunal ejerce una competencia revisora, en calidad de jerarca impropio bifásico, al tenor de lo dispuesto en los numerales 173 de la Constitución Política, y que desarrolla el artículo 156 del Código Municipal y 189 y 190 del Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. Con lo cual, ejerce una función eminentemente administrativa, no obstante tratarse de un Tribunal de Justicia, inserto en la organización del Poder Judicial, en tanto le ha sido delegado el control último de la legalidad de decisiones administrativas concretas de las decisiones municipales, previo al control jurisdiccional. Así, actúa como un mecanismo de tutela administrativa, el cual debe insertarse dentro de la esfera organizacional de la Administración -en este caso, de las municipalidades; que al tenor de lo establecido en el artículo 181 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, puede revisar, únicamente, la legalidad del acto en virtud de recurso administrativo y debe decidir dentro del límite de las pretensiones y cuestiones de hecho planteadas por el recurrente pudiendo aplicar una norma no invocada en el recurso. Como en lo pretendido no existe pronunciamiento de parte del Concejo, ello impide el conocimiento por parte de este Tribunal.\n\nPOR TANTO:\n\nPor improcedente, se rechaza la solicitud de sentar responsabilidades a los funcionarios municipales. En lo demás, con las consideraciones dadas, se confirma el acuerdo impugnado. Se da da por agotada la vía administrativa. Tome especial nota la Municipalidad de Belén de las razones esgrimidas en los Considerandos IX.- y X.- de esta resolución.\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nHubert Fernández Argüello\n\n \n\n \n\n I. Rocío Rojas Morales Silvia Consuelo Fernández Brenes\n\n Exp. No. Placa16782\n\nProceso Municipal. Jerarquía Impropia.\n\nCondominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 contra la Municipalidad de Belén",
  "body_en_text": "Exp. No. 09-002856-1027-CA\n\nNo. 416-2010\n\nTHIRD SECTION OF THE CONTENTIOUS-ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. Second Judicial Circuit of San José II CIRCUITO JUDICIAL DE SAN JOSÉ. ANEXO A. Goicoechea, at eleven hours twenty-five minutes on February eight, two thousand ten.-\n\nAppeal filed by Nombre101959, of legal age, single, businessman, with a single surname due to his U.S. nationality, holding residency card number CED77875, a resident of San Rafael de Escazú, in his capacity as unlimited general agent without sum limit of CONDOMINIO LA RIBERA BELEMITA CINCUENTA, SOCIEDAD Nombre101960, against the agreement adopted by the Municipal Council of Belén in Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eight, two thousand nine.\n\nDrafted by Judge Fernández Brenes.\n\nCONSIDERING (CONSIDERANDO):\n\nI.- OF THE FACTS DEEMED PROVEN.- Of importance for the resolution of this matter, the following list of proven facts is deemed accredited: 1.) That in session 73-96, of December seventeen, nineteen ninety-six, the Municipal Council of Belén approved the Regulations for the Regulatory Plan of its canton (publication in La Gaceta number 19 of January twenty-eight, nineteen ninety-seven, an uncontested fact); 2.) That in the Agreement given in Article 7 of Chapter IV of ordinary session 01-2006, of January three, two thousand six, the Council endorsed the recommendation given in official communication AC-306-2005, from the person in charge of the municipality's aqueduct process, regarding file number 3394, for a water availability request from Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, thus rejecting the request, as it did not meet the minimum requirements for evaluating water availability for developments whose demand exceeds forty housing units, published in La Gaceta number 147 of July twenty-eight, two thousand four (folios 2 verso and 16 verso); 3.) That with the approval of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (in ordinary session of the Board of Directors number 23-2006, of April twenty-five, two thousand six, in which it reviewed official communication 1535 from the Director of Urbanism) and of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) (in rulings number 2005-8915 and 2005-6399), in Article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007 held on March thirteen, two thousand seven, the Municipal Council of Belén approved the modification of its regulatory plan, to include a Transitory Article so that \"... the granting of water availability and construction permits for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects, in condominiums or subdivisions (urbanización), be immediately and generally suspended, for the time necessary to update and put into effect the new Regulatory Plan for the Canton of Belén, in light of the new elements known. ...\"; clarifying that \"... the Transitory is not retroactively applicable; on the contrary, construction permit applications submitted to the Municipality of Belén with a date prior to the publication in the Official Gazette La Gaceta of the agreement approving the implementation of the Transitory must be respected. However, the Developer must comply with possible recommendations that may be issued, as determined by the progress of the technical studies of the Regulatory Plan.\" For the implementation of this agreement, in that same act, it ordered \"to approve the Budget for conducting the execution studies of: the Storm Drainage Master Plan, the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan, the Road Master Plan for the complementation of Public Infrastructure; specifically the purchase of land for the expansion of schools, a municipal building, and health centers\" (publication in La Gaceta number 59 of March twenty-three, two thousand seven, an uncontested fact); 4.) That in official communication UA-64.2007, of March twenty-nine, two thousand seven, the Environmental Unit (Unidad Ambiental) of the Municipality of Belén denied approval of the Condominio San Vicente project, due to the lack of a tree-planting plan (plan de arborización), a concession permit for the exploitation of well AB-1571, because buildings 3 and 6, streets, and parking areas were within the well's protection zone, for not having authorization from the Ministry of Health for the drinking water supply, nor from MINAE for discharges from the treatment plant into a receiving water body; for not having a location permit for the treatment plant; for an inconsistency between the environmental viability (viabilidad ambiental) and the construction permit request regarding the number of buildings and the area to be built, and doubts about the discharge and the stone apron with mortar (folio 6 recto, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional); 5.) That by resolution number R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAE, of ten hours on June seven, two thousand seven, the Ministry of Environment and Energy granted a concession for the exploitation of well AB-1571 to La Rivera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, for domestic use for apartments, with a flow rate of 1.20 liters per second, in consideration of the fact that according to the technical recommendation report AT-0122-2007, to supply water to four hundred people, that flow rate is required, and the available flow rate of that well being 3.15 liters per second, therefore there is no problem in supplying said project (folio 3 verso, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional); 6.) That by official communication ASUB 452-07, of October twelve, two thousand seven, the Geologist of the Groundwater Area of Nombre2449 –Roberto Ramírez Chavarría–, issued a criterion on the protection zone of well AB-1571 in San Antonio de Belén, indicating that like all wells, it must have an absolute and immediate protection zone, based on the principle of prevention of possible contamination, not only bacteriological, but also by organic compounds such as hydrocarbons and solvents, extremely toxic in low concentrations, pursuant to Article 8 of the Water Law (Ley de Aguas), which establishes a distance of forty meters. This criterion was adopted and reiterated in official communication SL-232-2007, of December nineteen, two thousand seven, from the Legal Advisory Office of SENARA. (folios 6 verso and 7 recto, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 12, by reference in official communication DIGJ-145-145-2009 of the indicated institution); 7.) That in memorandum ASP-327-2007, of November five, two thousand seven, the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén accepted the allocation of 1.2 liters per second from well AB-1571 for the project of La Rivera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, as it was a self-supply project, but clarified that he considers it insufficient for the final population of the same, in view of the fact that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the allocated flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a deficit in the water allocation (water deficit) (folios 6 verso, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 verso and 86 verso, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 8.) That by official communication GE-049-08, of January twenty-eight, two thousand eight, the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) annulled official communication GE-738-07, of December twenty, two thousand seven, forwarding, in turn, the legal criterion SL-232-2007, of December nineteen of that year, and expressed the willingness to collaborate with the local entity in order to establish the harmlessness of the project on the public domain asset (bien demanial). Said report was reviewed by the Council of the canton of Belén in an ordinary session on January twenty-nine, two thousand eight (folios 3 verso and 4 recto, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional, folios 117 recto and verso, by reference in the agreement of Chapter V, Article 4 of ordinary session 61-2009, of October fifteen, two thousand nine); 9.) That the construction permit request filed by the legal representative of the company Condominio La Ribera Belemita, Sociedad Nombre101960 before the Municipality of Belén, was denied by the Council in a review presented in ordinary session number 08-2008, of February five, two thousand eight, based on official communication GE-049-08 from Nombre2449, since the construction project did not respect the protection radius of well AB-1571; under the consideration that \"and this being so, not only are the requirements demanded for approval not fulfilled, but also provisions of public order related to the protection radius of a water extraction well destined for human consumption are directly violated, and fundamental rights and environmental provisions enshrined in Article 50 of the Political Constitution are affected\"; for which reason the Mayor was required to issue the necessary instructions to have the pertinent studies and clarifications carried out by the Environmental and Public Services Units, and if not done so, they would establish the corresponding responsibilities. Additionally, it denied the positive silence (silencio positivo) request made by the interested party (folios 84 verso, 85 recto and 89 verso, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 10.) That upon returning the file, the municipal administrative officials assumed responsibility for the matter and continued with the processing of construction permit request number 114-2007 from the company Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 (folios 7, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 11.) That by official communication DU-019-2008, of March seventeen, two thousand eight from the Development Unit, with the endorsement by memorandum AM-A-134-2008 of the same day, issued by the bachelor Esteban Ávila Fuentes of the Environmental Unit of that corporation and of the Operational Technical Area and Urban Development, a construction permit was granted in favor of Nombre16224, because the property was in a real estate trust, for the construction of eleven towers, comprising one hundred twenty-one apartments, based on the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of drinking water supply. Said permit corresponds to number 7604-2008 (folios 7, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 12.) That the Council learned of the above in ordinary session 19-2008, of March 25, 2009, by official communication AM-A-141-2008 from the Mayor (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), as communicated to him by memorandum DU-019-2008 (folio 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 13.) That by official communication DU-019-2008, of March seventeen, two thousand eight from the Development Unit, with the endorsement by memorandum AM-A-134-2008 of the same day, issued by the bachelor Esteban Ávila Fuentes of the Environmental Unit of that corporation and of the Operational Technical Area and Urban Development, a construction permit was granted in favor of Nombre16224, because the property was in a real estate trust, for the construction of eleven towers, comprising one hundred twenty-one apartments, based on the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of drinking water supply. Said permit corresponds to number 7604-2008 (folios 7, by reference in amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 14.) That the Council learned of the above in ordinary session 19-2008, of March 25, 2009, by official communication AM-A-141-2008 from the Mayor (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), as communicated to him by memorandum DU-019-2008 (folio 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 15.) That the amparo appeal filed by Nombre101961 against the Ministry of Environment and Energy and the Municipality of Belén for the non-application of the criterion of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento set forth in official communication GE-049-08 regarding the respect of the protection area of well AB-1571, allowing the development of the project Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960, was upheld by the Sala Constitucional in judgment number 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, clarified by judgment number 2008-18934, of fourteen hours twenty-four minutes on December nineteen, two thousand eight, a Court that ordered the Minister of Environment and Energy, the Mayor of the Municipality of Belén, and the President of the Council, to take the necessary measures so that the protection distance between well AB-1571 and the construction project is respected, according to official communications GE-049-08, SL-232-2007, and ASUB-452-07, all from the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (folios 3 to 11 verso and the Judicial Branch management system); 16.) That in response to the water availability request filed by the legal representative of the Condominio San Vicente project on October twenty-nine, two thousand eight before the Unidad de Nuevos Servicios y Desarrollos of the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, that unit responded by note of the following December two, indicating that according to the update of official communication UNSD-GAM-1755-2008-01628, \"Drinking water service CAN be provided according to Technical Report DAM-2008-659 and Official Communication SB-2008-1272 from the Deputy General Management, which are attached. All the above provided that the municipality accepts that Nombre5630 provide the service. Therefore, THERE IS drinking water feasibility and THERE IS NO wastewater service in this area. To enjoy the services in front of your property, you must assume the cost (without any charge to Nombre5630) and execution of the works indicated: ...\" (Highlighting is from the original). It warns that this document does not imply an obligation for the respective Municipality to approve the project (folio 174); 17.) That by written submission of December nine, two thousand eight, the legal representative of the developer project informed the municipality of Belén that they decided to seal well AB-1571 in a preventive and temporary manner, to conduct studies in execution of amparo judgment 2008-015657, which was brought to the attention of the respective Ministry in a note of December three previous. Likewise, it indicates that given the rejection of water availability by the Belén corporation, they requested and were granted water availability from the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (folios 172 and 173); 18.) That on December fifteen, two thousand eight, the legal representative of the San Vicente project informed the municipality of Belén that on the following seventeenth, at ten hours, the sealing of well AB-1571 would proceed, so that they could be present; which was indeed carried out on that date, with the presence of municipal officials (folio 118 verso, by reference in agreement 61-2009); 19.) That in Memorandum ASP-045-09, of January four, two thousand nine, the Acting Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén expanded the technical criterion for the case of the project Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, in the following terms: \"System: San Antonio. Supply Source: Zamora Spring (Naciente Zamora). Extraction flow rate: Belén I 34,631/sec. and Belén II 19.9 l/sec. Conduction network conditions: the conduction network begins at the outlet of the spring (naciente) to the pumping tank, from which water is extracted by two 50 HP centrifugal pumps. The water transferred by the pumps is carried through a high-density polyethylene pipe with a diameter of 640 mm (25\"), up to the settlement tank. And from this tank to the distribution network, the diameter is 797 mm (31\"). Storage capacity: 1,000 m3. Conditions of the distribution network in front of the property: PVC pipe, SDR-26, is cemented and with gaskets. Sections have been observed where the transfer capacity of the pipe is less than the demand. Depth and location in accordance with current regulations in some sections. Significant loss due to diameter reduction. Population supplied: comprises from the project to the end of Dirección2022 in San Rafael de Alajuela. Conclusions: 1. The sector where the project is located is considered the lower part of the San Antonio system (this statement is due to topographical aspects and the form of supply). Because of the above, the effects caused in this zone impact the entire system up to the supply tank. 2. The pipes currently installed are not of the suitable diameter to be able to supply the needs of the project and the neighboring population; it is clarified that there are important sections that can be improved to increase the supply capacity. 3. The Municipality, pursuant to the Urban Planning Law, can receive works to improve the system in order to grant drinking water service in this area; the improvements are proposed by the developer and must have the approval of the Aqueduct Process. For the particular case, the distribution pipes in several sectors must be improved, the water production source of this district must be maximized, and pressures in some points of the system must be improved so as not to leave the neighbors of the project without supply. 4. The Urban Development policy of the Municipality of Belén determines that the \"Proposal for water supplies for current and future users of the sector, planned for a period of 10 years, after consulting the Aqueduct Master Plan of the canton and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system.\" Therefore, the Services Directorate has full availability to review the proposal(s) to be able to grant water availability for the project. 5. The water resource to supply drinking water to the Project, object of this document, exists potentially; however, the necessary infrastructure to meet its needs does not exist, since the existing diameters are insufficient to achieve the minimum pressures required to provide an adequate service. 6. It is the criterion of this Directorate that autonomy in the administration of drinking water within the canton of Belén must be maintained. The above considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meets the necessary conditions for human consumption, for the entire belemita population and some surrounding sectors, even. And that what is required is to make improvements to the system\" (the highlighting is from the original) (folios 177 to 179); 20.) That in resolution IMN-DA-0077-2009, of nine hours on January nine, two thousand nine, the Head of the Water Department of MINAE, ordered the well to be kept closed, pursuant to numeral 26 of the Water Law (Ley de Aguas) (folios 118 verso to 119 recto, by reference in agreement 61-2009); 21.) That by official communication DU-01-2009, of January six, two thousand nine, the Urban Development Unit, in application of the constitutional ruling and Article 26 of the Water Law (Ley de Aguas), and due to MINAE's approval of the temporary closure of well AB-1571, required the developer to determine the institution that would be responsible for the water supply for the project (folio 118 verso, by reference in agreement 61-2009); 22.) That on February eleven, two thousand nine, the legal representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 filed a petition before the Council for approval of water availability, with connection to Nombre5630 or from the municipal aqueduct; a petition that is reiterated on August nine of the same year (folio 175 the first and 28 recto and verso the second); 23.) That in ordinary session 11-2009, of February seventeen, two thousand nine, the Council reviewed file 579-2009, presented by the developer's representative, for the water availability request for the Condominios San Vicente project, with two proposals: a.- approval of water availability so that the service would be provided by the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, considering that a drinking water pipe from that institution passes in front of the property, with service availability existing according to official communication from the Unidad de Servicios Nuevos y Desarrollos of that institution, with the costs of the necessary improvements being at its charge; and b.- provision of the service with connection to the municipal aqueduct, with the cost of the necessary improvements being at its charge. In response to said request, the Council agreed: 1.- to request from the Public Service Area a report on the current technical conditions of the municipal aqueduct in order to be able to respond to the petition, answering the following points: \"a) Whether it is possible for the municipal aqueduct to provide the water availability service required in file number 579-2009. b) If it is not possible, the reasons and technical considerations be expressly and in detail indicated. c) If it is possible to grant availability, it should be indicated and clarified if there is aqueduct infrastructure capable of supplying the required availability; d) if there is a water supply in sufficient quantity to provide the service and e) if granting this availability does not affect the current users of the municipal aqueduct. f) In the event that improvements or investments are required to improve the infrastructure, the quantity of liquid, or to guarantee that current users will not be affected, it should be expressly clarified: f.1) Specifically what those improvements consist of. f.2) What is their projected cost (preferably in indexable values such as making the estimate in dollars). f.3) The time it could take to carry out the improvements. f.4) And a supervision proposal from the municipal officials responsible for the administration and maintenance of the aqueduct, so that there is a municipal counterpart that technically supervises, guarantees, and receives the completed improvements to satisfaction\" (folios 180 to 183); 24.) That in response to the previous requirement from the Council, the Director of the Public Services Area, Engineer Luis Carlos Cháves, renders Report ASP-064-2009, of February twenty, two thousand nine, which states: \"* Characteristics of the San Antonio System: Supply source: Zamora Spring (Naciente Zamora) with a storage capacity of 1,000 m3 and an extraction flow rate in Belén I of 34.63 l/sec. and Belén II of 19.9 l/sec., with a conduction network that begins at the outlet to the pumping tank, from which water is extracted by two 50 HP centrifugal pumps. The water transferred by the pumps is carried through a high-density polyethylene pipe with a diameter of 640 mm (25”), up to the settlement tank and from this tank to the distribution network in a diameter of 797 mm (31”). * That the conditions of the distribution network in front of the requesting property are PVC pipe, SDR-26, varied diameters, which are cemented and with gaskets, with sections where the transfer capacity of the pipe is less than the demand, with depth and location that is in accordance with current regulations, in some sections and significant loss due to diameter reductions, for a population supplied by the system comprising: the homes located in the San Antonio district, including Dirección11462, Potrerillos and Antiguas Bodegas de Abonos Agro. * That regarding the inquiry about the possibility of the municipal aqueduct providing the water availability service required in file number 579-2009, they indicate that it is possible as long as improvement works are carried out on the distribution network, given that currently the budget is not considered for making improvements to the system that increase the transfer and distribution capacity of water in the area and the diameters of some of the pipes that supply the surroundings and the area itself are not sufficient to provide the necessary flow for when the project is completed. * That the infrastructure at the production source covers the needs of the project, but it clarifies that the infrastructure installed in the area in question must be improved in how the water is carried to the area, the diameter of the pipes, and control of water consumption and usage in the project must be maintained once it is completed to avoid water waste. * That in the sector where the project is located, it is considered the lower part of the San Antonio system; this statement is based on topographical aspects, the location of the spring (naciente), and the form of gravity-fed supply, therefore the effects caused in the area will impact the entire system, up to the storage tank. * That after reviewing the current master plan and studies conducted by other parties interested in developing on the site, they consider that a pressure zone must be created to allow supplying the water in the area with standardized pressures, an action that must be carried out with hydraulic valves that regulate downstream water pressure and maintain upstream pressure; therefore, the pipe diameters must be improved in sectors where the demand is almost equal to the supply, and they emphasize that the Urban Development policy of the Municipality of Belén determines that the \"Proposal for water supplies for current and future users of the sector, planned for a period of 10 years, after consulting the Aqueduct Master Plan of the canton and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system\"; therefore, they are available with all the technical willingness to review the proposal(s) to grant water availability for the project. * That the cost of the works must be adjusted to the proposal to be submitted by the developer and that the investment is approximately $200,000.00 dollars, without this meaning that the amount could not increase after the study that the developer must conduct. To which it must be added that currently, there are no plans and budget in the Municipality of Belén for the execution of works in the sector because, as already indicated, the established priorities in the current Master Plan are being addressed and a new Master Plan for the Belén aqueduct is under negotiation by the Municipal Mayor's Office\" (folios 86 verso and 87 recto, by reference in Agreement Art. 29 of ordinary session 53-2009); 25.) That when the Council reviewed file number 579-2009, relating to the water availability request of Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 for the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project, in ordinary session number 18-2009, of March twenty-four, two thousand nine, in article 19 of Chapter IV, under the consideration that this deliberative body did not intervene in the processing of the construction permit approval or in the construction control process of the work, and in application of the precautionary principle that governs environmental matters, it ordered \"..\n\n… not resolve the requested action …, until such time as the Sala Constitucional rules on the substance of compliance or non-compliance with ruling 2008-15657, since if that Court determines that said resolution has not been complied with, liability could exist in relation to the construction permit, and even its continuity over the protection area, especially considering that the issue related to this ruling is precisely a matter related to the fundamental rights to health and to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment on the part of the users and inhabitants of the project in question\" (folios 184 to 203); 26.) That by official communication IMN-DA-0674-009, from the Department of Waters of MINAET, it was warned that while well AB-1571 is closed, the water resource cannot be used; and also that until the pertinent studies are approved, the water resource from that source cannot be opened or used (folio 12 verso, by reference in official communication DIGJ-145-145-2009- SENARA); 27.) That by official communication GE-276-09, of April seventeen, two thousand nine, the General Manager of Nombre2449 indicated: \"... Endorses and approves the protection perimeter of 15 meters between well AB-1571 and the construction project. Consequently, this Management has corroborated that there is not and has not been any risk of contamination of well AB-1571 or the groundwater, whether from bacteriological contamination, organic compounds, or any other type of contaminating agent. /Therefore, this General Management considers that the studies and reports carried out have been conducted in accordance with the univocal rules and the exact application of science and technique, thus allowing us to reach a state of absolute scientific certainty about the environmental innocuousness of the project\" (folios 16 recto and 17 recto and verso); 28.) That by official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May four, two thousand nine, the Head of the Department of Waters of MINAET –José Miguel Zeledón Calderón–, pursuant to the Hydrogeological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571, given the threat of its contamination, the Hydrogeological Vulnerability Map of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and official communications GR-276-09 from the General Manager of Nombre2449 and official communication DIGH-145-2009 from the Directorate of Water Research and Management of Nombre2449 which endorses and approves the protection perimeter of fifteen meters between well AB-1571 and the construction project, being conclusive that there is no risk of contamination of the source or the groundwater, neither from bacteriological contamination, nor organic compounds, nor any other type of contaminating agents, considers that the indicated well can be opened and used, in accordance with resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET, but subject to the following prior conditions: \"Topographically delimit in the field the arranged protection as indicated by Geologist Roberto Ramírez of the Directorate of Water Research and Management in his official communication DIGH-145-2009 and must place the impermeable geotextile mesh on the internal street and parking areas in order to prevent any risk of spillage of contaminating substances on the running surface that could eventually move towards the well and install a concrete upper slab over the well and above ground level to prevent the ingress of water by runoff, this according to the recommendation issued in the acknowledged Hydrogeological Study endorsed by Nombre2449 and the Department of Waters of MINAET. This must be reported to the Department of Waters in order to verify its effective compliance, prior to opening\" (Highlighting is not from the original) (folios 13 verso to 15 verso); 29.) That by note of May five, two thousand nine, addressed to Architect Luis Bogantes Miranda, of the Urban Development Unit of the Municipality of Belén, the representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, communicates that pursuant to official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009 of the Department of Waters of MINAET, invites municipal personnel to the reopening of well AB-1571, to be held on May eight following, which translates into the restarting of works, as of the 11th of the same month (folios 206 and 207);\n\n30.) That by official communications ODU-022-2009 and DU-013-2009, from the Urban Development Unit of the Municipality of Belén of May eleven and thirteen, respectively, in application of the precautionary principles, ruling number 2008-15657 of the Sala Constitucional and the temporary and preventive closure of well AB-1571, the stoppage of works was requested from the representative of Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, there being no certainty regarding the water supply for the project that would house families in that place (folios 208 and 209 the first and 204 and 205 the second); 31.) That by official communication IMN-DA-1425-2009, of May 13, 2009, engineers Andrés Phillips Ureña and José Manuel Zeledón Calderón of the Department of Waters of MINAET communicate to the developer that they conducted a technical visit to the site where delimitation and protection was carried out around well AB-1571, work that complied with what was ordered by the study of surveying engineer Alexander Arce Alfaro - since three layers of geotextile membrane were placed to waterproof the zone - and consequently, also with official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May four, two thousand nine (folio 18 recto); 32.) That in official communication UAA-045-2009, of June 15, 2009, Esteban Ávila Fuentes, of the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén, communicated to the developer that he respects technical criteria issued by Nombre2449 and the Department of Waters of MINAET in relation to the determination of the protected area of well AB-1571; finds no aspects that should be clarified or added; and acknowledges receipt of the hydrogeological report presented by hydrogeologist Mauricio Vásquez Fernández, and accepts its scope, insofar as other entities support it (folios 18 verso to 19 verso); 33.) That by resolution number 2946-2009 of the Urban Development Unit, architect Luis Bogantes Miranda rejected the application for a construction permit for a part of the area of the Eco-residencial San Vicente project, based on Article 14 of the Regulations for the granting of construction permits of the canton of Belén, published in Gaceta number 133, of July 11, 2006; official communication ODU-013-2009; the application of the precautionary principle; and the lack of a potable water supply source for the project (folios 23 to 27, by reference of the challenge brief filed by the developer against this agreement); 34.) That on August eighteen, two thousand nine, the representative of Condominio La Rivera Belemita, Sociedad Nombre101960 filed ordinary appeals (for reconsideration and subsidiary appeal against the previous decision, and requests: a.) to annul the total suspension order of the works and immediately order the resumption of works; b.) to approve water availability granted by the AYA, being the most sustainable option from an environmental perspective, to satisfy the water demand of the housing project. c.) to order the processing of the construction permit application number 2946-2009, related to the construction of a recreational part of the Eco-residencial San Vicente project (folios 23 to 27); 35.) That in resolution 1711-09, at fifteen hours fifty-eight minutes of August twenty, two thousand nine, in a proceeding for an early interim measure, filed by Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, S.A. against the Municipality of Belén, processed under case file 09-1541-1027-CA, the Administrative Litigation Court ordered the Municipality to retrieve the administrative file, so that within five working days it would place it in chronological order, indicating the elements that comprise it; rejected the interim measures requested (a.- that the effects of official communications DU-013-2009, of March thirteen, two thousand nine, ODU-022-2009, of May eleven, two thousand nine, ODU-024-2009, of May twenty, two thousand nine, all from the Urban Development Unit of the municipality of Belén, be suspended, and the immediate reopening of the Eco-Residencial San Vicente project be ordered; b.- the immediate resumption of works, counting on well AB-1571 and its concession as the potable water supply source for that housing project, c.- to enforce its right to access potable water in sufficient quantity, quality, and continuity); rejected the request for water and ordered the municipality to resolve proceeding 579 within the fifteen subsequent working days, on the understanding that said decision would not apply to towers 4 and 5 (minutes of the hearing, at folios 170 and 171); 36.) That in agreement Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eight, two thousand nine, issued by the Concejo in compliance with resolution 1711-09, at fifteen hours fifty-eight minutes of August twenty, two thousand nine by the Administrative Litigation Court, in a proceeding for an early interim measure, processed under case file 09-1541-1027-CA, proceeding number 579-2009, presented by Nombre101962 , representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, was resolved with the vote of three council members in favor and two against in the following terms: “FIRST: Accept the proposal put forward by Council Members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso. SECOND: Not to grant water availability to the Apartamentos San Vicente Urban Development Project for the technical and legal reasons stated. THIRD: Not to authorize the water supply by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados for the technical and legal reasons stated” An agreement that became final in the same act. (folios 80 to 97); 37.) That said decision was notified to the representative of the developer company, on September ten, two thousand nine (certificate of notification, at folio 99); 38.) That on September twenty-one, two thousand nine, the developer filed appeals for reconsideration and a subsidiary appeal, in briefs addressed to the Concejo; in which it requested: 1.- that the Concejo immediately approve that the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados provide the potable water supply service for the housing project it is carrying out; and, 2.- that a procedure be carried out to determine civil, administrative, and criminal liability for abuse of authority and obstructionism by the council members, who denied the fundamental right to potable water (folios 101 to 105); 39.) That by agreement of Chapter IV, Article 3 of extraordinary session number 61-2009, of October fifteen, two thousand nine, the Concejo ordered: \"... the Reconsideration Appeal not having been filed and there being no reasons to revoke the contested agreement, the Appeal is admitted\" (folios 126 to 130); 40.) That by official communication PRE-J-CO-2009-4195, of October seven, two thousand nine, the Legal Directorate, Commercial Legal Advisory of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados indicates to the developer company that \"... it is not legally viable to include in the wording of the availability letter UNSD-GAM-2262-2008-01628, the section that textually indicates: 'All of the foregoing provided that the municipality accepts that Nombre5630 provide the Service.', given that this Institute, ... is not subject to the authorization of a Municipality for the provision of a service; on the contrary, it has sufficient authority and power in matters of aqueducts and sewers for the granting of the public water service.\" Said criterion is shared by the Legal Directorate of the same institution in official communication PRE-J-2009-4628, of October twenty-nine, two thousand nine (folios 144 and 146 to 150); and, 41.) That in a note of November five, two thousand nine, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, based on official communications PRE-J-CO-2009-4195 and SUB-G-SGAM-2009-792 responds to the developer's requirements for changes to water availability, for the eventual provision of one hundred twenty-one subsidiary properties, as follows: \"Yes, potable water service can be provided as indicated in Technical Report DAM-2008-659 and Official Communication SB-2008-1272 of the Deputy General Management. Technically, the supply of the development in question is feasible, for which a 200mm (8\") branch must be installed covering the front of the property, to connect existing connections in a concrete box, in front of the development, from the Finca San Antonio and Potrerillos discharge pipeline towards Puente de Mulas (in front of the community hall of San Vicente de Belén). Potable water supply can be provided by means of a single 100mm (4\") connection and a meter of adequate diameter. For this, the developer must equip the appropriate meter protection infrastructure. The condominium must have a cistern tank and internal pumping system, as the service pressure is limited. At least one 150 mm (6\") multi-valve hydrant must be installed, on the front along the public road.\" Furthermore, it is warned that said note does not imply any obligation for the M. to approve this project (folio 145).\n\nII.- UNPROVEN FACTS.- As there is no support in the records nor do they derive from them, the following facts are considered unproven: 1.) That the Ministry of Environment and Energy ordered the reopening of well AB-1571, allowing the use of the water resource by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima; 2.) That the amendment introduced to the regulatory plan of the Municipality of Belén in Article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteen, two thousand seven, was repealed; and, 3.) That the Municipality of Belén approved the initiation of the nullity or lesivity procedure for construction permit number 7604-2008, for the construction of Condominio San Vicente.\n\nIII.- OF THE GRIEVANCES IN THE APPEAL.- The representative of the developer Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, files an appeal against Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eight, two thousand nine, on the basis of the following considerations: a.) That the action of the municipal Administration violates the essential content of the public function, which is reflected through norms and principles that integrate the administrative legal system, such as efficiency and speed, for having taken place more than six months after the application was filed, and in a defective manner, by not expressly indicating the appeals that could be filed against the contested agreement, the period to file them, and the body before which they were appropriate; which leaves it in a state of defenselessness, which makes it absolutely null and void, and consequently, it cannot produce legal effects; b.) That fully and groundlessly denying - due to lack of assessment of evidence and regulations - the application for water availability, infringes the human right of access to potable water which derives from Articles 21, 45, and 50 of the Political Constitution, the General Health Law, the Organic Environmental Law, which the municipal body does not apply, thus flouting legality and science and technique. In this regard, it alleges that given the lack of infrastructure of the municipal aqueduct and the high cost that its implementation would entail, the viable option is to permit supply by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; that the users of the local aqueduct and the future inhabitants of the project are not endangered, since water service is guaranteed by the indicated entity, whose technical studies and reports demonstrate the feasibility of granting the service, as it has adequate infrastructure (constructive and operational) and implies only a five-meter connection. Thus, the contested decision openly contradicts the regulations and jurisprudence, according to which the only reasons to reject potable water availability are: technical viability; that it would be to the detriment of the quality of the service provided; and that there is no infrastructure; assumptions that are not met in relation to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, according to statements by officials of the entity. It warns that both Nombre5630 and the Municipality of Belén determined - with a technical study - that it was entirely viable to grant the service, due to the sufficient existence of the water resource to supply the housing project; and in addition, its company planned the constructive works necessary for the rational and proportional use of the water resource within the internal network of the project, such as catchment tanks, pumps, and discharge and distribution pipelines; c.) That the local entity thus abuses public authority, by not considering that the water supply is duly authorized by Nombre2449 and MINAET, both by self-supply, through a well, and through the public service provided by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; and, d.) That access to potable water is not a matter of local interest to be regulated or administered according to the best knowledge and understanding of the Municipality, its Concejo, or legal advisors, but is governed by public order norms, which to date the Concejo of the canton of Belén disregards, by not applying Article 33 of the Water Law and 1, 5, and 6 of the General Potable Water Law, by virtue of which the public service of potable water supply must be provided efficiently, and empowers the governing body in the matter -Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados- to adopt the necessary measures to guarantee its access to citizens; and, d.) That the Concejo did not consider that since December two thousand eight there is a commitment to close well AB-1571 if a service of sufficient quality, quantity, and continuity is guaranteed; hence, if the well is closed - according to the pertinent technical-legal procedure and requirements - the required protection perimeter would cease to exist, because legally and materially no well would exist. Thus, it affirms that the Consejo Municipal makes \"...it suppose that even if well AB-1571 is definitively closed, a protection perimeter would always exist that must be respected. Nothing would be more contrary to sound logic and the legal system, since, once the well is closed down, it would no longer exist legally or materially, and therefore its respective protection perimeter disappears and, consequently, the project to be developed obviously could not cause environmental impacts on the aquifer.\" In light of the foregoing considerations, it denounces the contested agreement as arbitrary and illegal, and requests that it be so declared, so that the following pronouncements be made: \"a) That the Consejo Municipal of the canton of Belén immediately recognize the order for the use of well AB-1571 issued by the Department of Waters of MINAET; b) That the Consejo Municipal of the canton of Belén immediately recognize that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados provide the potable water supply service to this housing project; and c) That the respective procedures and pertinent actions be carried out to determine whether or not there is civil, administrative, and potentially criminal liability (abuse of authority) of the Council Members who ordered the denial of the human right to access potable water.\" (Folios 102 recto to 105 verso to 151 to 155).\n\nIV.- OF THE NON-EXISTENCE OF NULLITY FOR ALLEGED DEFENSELESSNESS.- Pursuant to the provisions of Article 245 of the General Law of Public Administration, the notification of the decision must contain not only the full text of the act, but also the indication of the admissible appeals against it, the body before which they must be filed, which body will resolve them, and the period for filing them. Indeed, notwithstanding the foregoing, the communication made by the Municipality of Belén of the contested agreement - Article 29 of ordinary session 53-2009, of September eight, two thousand nine, to the representative of the appellant company -Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima- did not comply with such guarantees, which are integral to due process. However, in the opinion of this Court, this omission does not translate into the nullity of the agreement in question, since it did not prevent the interested party from filing the legal appeals, both for reconsideration and appeal before the respective body (Concejo) and within the period provided for in the legal system (five days), such that by virtue of the challenge it filed, this instance hears the case, in its capacity as improper two-phase superior, in accordance with Articles 173 of the Political Constitution, 156 of the Municipal Code and 190 of the Administrative Litigation Procedure Code. More abundantly, it must be remembered that in matters of nullity of administrative acts, the principles of conservation govern: \"In case of doubt about the existence or qualification and importance of the defect, the consequence most favorable to the conservation of the act shall be adopted\" (Article 168 of the General Law of Public Administration which reads); and that of materiality, by virtue of which, there is no nullity without harm, since the declaration of nullity consists of a sanction to restore the violated right and repair the damage caused. In this case, as has been indicated, the nullity by itself that is requested represents no procedural advantage for the appellant company, since it became evident that no defenselessness has occurred that would prevent it from exercising the corresponding actions to verify the legality control of the contested decision.\n\nV.- OF THE CONTENT OF THE CONTESTED AGREEMENT.- The municipal agreement contested in this matter -Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eight, two thousand nine-, with the vote of three council members in favor and two against, ordered, to accept the proposal put forward by council members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso, in the sense of denying in all its aspects the application for water availability made by the representative of the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad AnónimO, both regarding the connection to the municipal aqueduct and the authorization for the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados to provide the service. In this regard, it warns that the action of the municipal Administration, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is susceptible to generating administrative and criminal liability - both under the Law Against Corruption and environmental regulations - for the officials involved, a permit having been granted in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as an abuse of power. The serious violations it considered are the following:\n\na.) The impossibility of deriving any legal effect from construction permit number 7604, pursuant to the provisions of numerals 166, 169, and 170 of the General Law of Public Administration, upon evidencing the seriousness and a large number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which \"clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to absence of valid constituent elements, so its execution would entail 'the civil liability of the Administration (i.e., the municipality as such), and civil, administrative, and eventually criminal liability' of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.\" Such violations are the following:\n\n1.- The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipality of Belén; the current Master Plan and the contingency plan of said corporation do not contemplate water supply for new urban development projects, which does not guarantee its supply; thereby, a construction permit was approved that does not meet all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in violation of the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for in accordance with the urban planning regulations of the canton, in contravention of the Urban Growth Policy and the respective regulations on Minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of June twenty-fourth and July twenty-eighth, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n2.- The construction permit was granted by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Concejo, as required by the urban regulations of the canton for housing projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Development Unit, with the approval of an unauthorized official of the Technical Area for Operations and Urban Development as he was not registered with the respective Professional Association and was not the Coordinator of the Department;\n\n3.- Knowingly, authorization was given to install part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, opinions, and advisory opinions of Nombre2449 issued in official communications ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07 and GE-049-09 relating to the duty to maintain the protection area of well AB-1571, as can be inferred from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, at eleven hours forty-five minutes of October seventeen, two thousand eight;\n\n4.- The permit was granted under the shelter of the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined deadline; which besides being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén - in official communication Oficio ASP-327-2007-;\n\n5.- The permit was granted without attending to technical criteria that recommended another decision: namely, Official Communication ASP-327-2007 from the Public Service Area Directorate of the Municipality of Belén -Luis Carlos Cháves-, which pointed out that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen authorized pumping hours; which makes it evident that there is a deficit in the water allocation (water deficit); official communication UA-204-2007 from the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, roads, and parking areas were located in the protection zone of the well; official communication UO 276-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén, stating that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the need for accessibility that could be generated on the road; official communication O-023-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén, relating to the road impact on the access road to the process known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of stormwater runoff due to the lack of a storm sewer, channeling, and rainwater discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the Santa Ana radial road; drainage system, road width.\n\n6.- Due process was not followed in its granting, as the rejection reports from the Environmental Unit (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008 and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for correction.\n\nb.) That the Municipalities are in charge of the full administration of the potable water supply systems under their competence; exclusive competence derived from the following regulations: 169 of the Political Constitution; 4 and 113 of the General Law of Public Administration; 58 subsection 6) of the Urban Planning Law; 3 and 4 subsection c) of the Municipal Code; the Water Law, 5 of the General Potable Water Law, number 1634, of nineteen fifty-three, the General Health Law; the Regulations for Potable Water Quality, 4, 5 and 11 of the Regulations for the Operation and Administration of the Municipal Aqueduct and the Policies on minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, to be accounted for in urbanizations, condominium subsidiaries and residential complexes, issued by the corporation of Belén; and that it finds broad support in the jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional. It warns that to resolve the required availability, a comprehensive assessment must be made in accordance with the Urban Growth Policy of the local entity and the regulations for the municipal aqueduct; and in this sense, \"Under no circumstances can water supply from the municipal aqueduct be authorized, as the main or subsidiary source, minimizing or sacrificing the supply to the rest of the surrounding population. The urban development cost of the project must not be borne by the majority, but by the developer itself, who must provide the project from its inception with reliable and sustainable sources.\"\n\nThus, the control of the availability of the water resource, which it administers as a public service within its sphere of competence, is exercised in accordance with its plans and budgets, given that currently there are neither plans nor a budget in the municipality for the execution of works required to supply the sector in which the Condominios San Vicente project is located, because priority is given to real needs established in the current Master Plan, according to density and coverage criteria (population margin and housing growth of the canton) contained in the Regulating Plan (Plan Regulador) and urban regulations of its jurisdiction; and given that the Mayor's Office is in negotiations for the drafting of a new Master Plan for the aqueduct. The foregoing implies that the management of water availability is assessed in accordance with the Urban Growth Policy of the Municipality of Belén and the regulations of the municipal aqueduct.\n\nc.) That the Council would be wrong to adopt agreements that are not aimed at protecting the sphere of interests of the people of Belén, as the origin of its own existence, its authority, and ultimately its autonomy, instituted by the constituent power precisely to guarantee that independence of action for the protection of such local interests; therefore, in its opinion, autonomy in the administration of potable water within the Canton of Belén must be maintained, considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meets the necessary conditions for human consumption for the entire population of Belén and some surrounding sectors.\n\nd.) That it is obvious that this is a large-scale urban development project, which requires potable water service in an efficient, permanent, continuous, sustainable manner, without interruptions, alterations, or any reduction; that, from the beginning, it was not sustained solely by the exploitation of the concession for well AB-1561. This situation demonstrates the vulnerability of the development, which does not have an alternative source of potable water supply—a contingency plan—in the event of equipment failure or well collapse. In this regard, it considers that water availability is a prerequisite that is managed before processing the construction permit, and that it does not generate any right to the construction permit, an availability which, in any case, is not granted partially, since it calls into question the fundamental right to health (articles 21 of the Political Constitution and 16 of the General Law of Public Administration) of potential buyers.\n\nV.- OF MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE IN MATTERS CONCERNING THE URBAN PLANNING OF THE CANTON. THE NORMATIVE REGULATION FROM WHICH IT DERIVES.- Urban regulation has been traditionally entrusted, without any discussion, to the municipalities, as it has been considered that\n\n\"(...) urban planning competence has been a genuine municipal competence, perhaps the first among all\" (GARCÍA DE ENTERRÍA, Eduardo and PAREJO ALFONSO, Luciano, Lecciones de Derecho Urbanístico. Editorial Civitas, Madrid, Spain, S.N.E., 1981. p. 116.);\n\nthus, it has been configured as a tradition of Urban Planning Law, especially in those moments when its content has been expressed through \"construction and urban police ordinances,\" under the competence of local governments, on the understanding that public urban planning competence is proper to the city, and consequently, to the municipalities. Indeed, urban planning begins as an exclusively municipal competence. Subsequently, as it ceases to be a function specific to the urban sphere and seeks to encompass the planning of the entire territory, other higher Administrations become responsible for it, thereby modifying the competence level in urban planning matters by including other bodies, in our legal system, such as the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism (Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo)—a decentralized entity—and the Ministries of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications, with the Technical Environmental Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Ambiental) (a deconcentrated body) and the Ministry of National Planning. But regarding local urban planning itself, it is worth remembering that it is in the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones), approved by Decree-Law number 833, of November 4, 1949—a pre-constitutional norm, having been promulgated by the de facto Government of the Founding Junta of the Second Republic, led by José Figueres Ferrer—where it is established that the Municipalities are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public roads and in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers that the laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies (article 1), as well as that no building may be constructed in the country that contravenes its provisions (article 74). And although our current Political Constitution—of November 7, 1949—is somewhat sparse in defining the proper and essential functions of municipalities, constitutional jurisprudence—specifically in rulings number 5097-93, 5303-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, and 2003-3656—has interpreted that, based on the provisions of its articles 169 and the first paragraph of article 170, the primary authority in matters of local urban planning corresponds to the municipalities, to the exclusion of any other public entity. In this sense, the Municipal Code, number 4574, of May 4, 1970—in force until 1998—expressly recognized urban planning matters as a municipal competence in its article 4. In accordance with the foregoing provision, and as a derivative of constitutional norms, articles 15 and 19 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana), number 4240, of November 15, 1968, are concordant, as they textually provide:\n\n\"Article 15.- In accordance with the precept of article 169 of the Political Constitution, the competence and authority of municipal governments to plan and control urban development within the limits of their jurisdictional territory is recognized. Consequently, each of them shall provide what is necessary to implement a regulating plan (plan regulador), and the related urban development regulations, in the areas where it must govern, without prejudice to extending all or some of its effects to other sectors where qualified reasons exist for establishing a specific control regime.\" (Emphasis is not from the original.)\n\n\"Article 19.- Each Municipality shall issue and promulgate the procedural rules necessary for due compliance with the regulating plan (plan regulador) and for the protection of the interests of the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the community.\" (Emphasis is not from the original.)\n\nVI.- OF MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE IN VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH URBAN PLANNING RULES.- The scope of municipal competence in local urban planning is not limited solely to the promulgation of the respective regulations—regulating plans (planes reguladores) and related regulations—but also extends to the control exercised regarding compliance with local urban planning regulations. In this sense, as this Court has indicated in various pronouncements (among them, numbers 175-2009, at fifteen hours forty minutes, and 176-2009, at fifteen hours fifty minutes, both of January 30, 2009), \"local governments must act in a timely manner in the exercise of police power, using the powers that the legal system has granted them to achieve their purposes\" (underlining is not from the original); which in the matter of urban planning, is concretized in the control of urbanization and subdivision (fraccionamiento) processes, and which is exhaustively specified in article 1 of the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones), as it literally provides:\n\n\"The Municipalities of the Republic are responsible for ensuring that the cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public roads, in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers that the laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies.\"\n\nThe \"police power\" is the competence recognized to the Administration, so that, based on a law, it may regulate and rule an activity, in order to ensure public order, health, tranquility; the safety of persons, as well as the moral, political, and economic organization of society; an attribution by virtue of which, the imposition of restrictions on the enjoyment of fundamental rights is reasonable, as its justification lies precisely in the consideration that fundamental rights are limited by those of other persons, since they must coexist with each and every one of the other fundamental rights. Thus, the measures that the State adopts with the purpose of protecting safety, health, and tranquility are of public social interest, manifested through the police power, understood as the regulatory power over the enjoyment of rights and the fulfillment of constitutional duties. (In this sense, see rulings number 401-91, at fourteen hours on February 20, and 619-91, at fourteen hours forty-five minutes on March 22, both rulings of 1991, and 2003-2864, at fifteen hours twenty minutes on April 9, 2003, of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional).)\n\nVII.- OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUBDIVISION AND URBANIZATION PROCESSES.- Due to the importance derived from the legal implications of subdivision (fraccionamiento) and urbanization processes, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of both concepts. Thus,\n\n\"A subdivision (fraccionamiento) is the division of a property for the purpose of introducing it into commerce, which presupposes, as each local government must verify when granting the corresponding approval (visado), that it conforms, in terms of size and characteristics, to the current urban planning provisions, especially the local land Regulating Plan (Plan Regulador)—if one exists—as well as the development regulations and other special public order laws. The subdivision (fraccionamiento) that the law calls 'simple' does not include an urban enablement process for the use and enjoyment of the parcels resulting from that subdivision (fraccionamiento), and this is so because the legislator assumes that in these cases, the properties have access routes and green areas resulting from a previous urban development. It is for this reason that article 40 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) provides:\n\n'(…) Likewise, simple subdivisions (fraccionamientos) of parcels in previously urbanized areas are exempt from the obligation of ceding areas for parks and community facilities…' (emphasis not from the original).\n\nWhen a certain area is previously urbanized, the purchasers of the subdivided parcels have access to the properties, parks, and community facilities, and it must not be overlooked that this constitutes part of their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (article 50 of the Constitution). For this reason—it is reiterated—the legislator has not deemed it necessary to require, in the case of a 'simple' subdivision (fraccionamiento) with urban development, further land endowments for reasons of social interest. The approval (visado) for simple subdivisions, due to its minor importance, is usually granted by a different official (e.g., Municipal Engineer) than the one entrusted with 'complex' approvals (e.g., Municipal Council, urban planning commissions, etc.), the former lacking the competence to authorize a different type of approval; this in the event that urban planning regulations make such a distinction. Now then, the subdivision (fraccionamiento) that is part of the urbanization process and entails the enablement of properties, for the first time, for urban purposes, must be provided with streets, green areas, and parks, as well as the services necessary for their use and enjoyment. In this second case, we are dealing with a complex subdivision (fraccionamiento) and urbanization process that introduces limitations on private property for urban planning reasons (article 22 of the Urban Planning Law [Ley de Planificación Urbana]), which the Constitutional Court has indicated are fully in accordance with the constitutional law (Ruling N° 5097-93 at 10:24 hrs on October 15, 1993). The residential or subdivision (fraccionamiento) project that we shall call 'complex' is provided for in section 40 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana), which, as relevant, provides:\n\n'Every land subdivider (…) and every urbanizer shall cede free of charge for public use both the areas destined for roads and those corresponding to parks and community facilities; the amount to be set for the last two concepts shall be determined in the respective regulation, by establishing percentages of the total area to be subdivided or urbanized, which may fluctuate between five percent and twenty percent, depending on the average size of the lots, the intended use of the land, and the relevant norms. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sum of the lands that must be ceded for public roads, parks, and community facilities shall not exceed forty-five percent of the total surface area of the land to be subdivided or urbanized. (...)\n\nThe obligation of the urbanizer to provide the subdivided parcels with access routes, green zones, parks, and public roads requires compliance with urban regulations that establish minimum standards regarding space, quality, quantity, and other requirements demanded by law and development regulations concerning these areas. The local government must exercise its police power in a timely manner, guaranteeing to the residents of the canton that the works will be carried out in the manner that urban planning regulations indicate and with the conditions they stipulate. It is sufficient that a lot division requires works to enable access and provide various services to some of those properties, to maintain that it is not a 'simple subdivision (fraccionamiento),' but rather a residential project that must, consequently, comply with all the stated requirements. Urban residential projects can only enable access to the properties through public roads that must have the dimensions and requirements of the General Law of Public Roads (Ley General de Caminos Públicos) and the Regulation for National Control of Subdivisions and Urbanizations (Reglamento para el Control Nacional de Fraccionamintos y Urbanizaciones)—in the absence, in this last case, of specific provisions in local regulations. None of the municipal bodies has the competence to authorize a project in which access to the properties is provided through 'paved agricultural easements (servidumbres agrícolas adoquinadas)', 'agricultural easements (servidumbres agrícolas)', or 'simple easements (simples servidumbres)', since these are concepts proper to Private Law and not to the residential urban planning regime governed by the rules and principles of Public Law.\" (Resolutions number 175-2009 and 176-2009, cited above.)\n\nPursuant to which, the control that the local government, in this case through the deliberative body (Council), is responsible for verifying is of special interest, in the case of approving construction permits for urbanizations, since it must confirm that it fully complies with the legal requirements, namely the provision of public roads, green and community areas, and especially—of relevance for resolving this matter—the enablement and implementation, at the urbanizer's expense, of public services, such as electricity, telephone, potable water and aqueducts, and sewers, the latter in case the infrastructure exists. Thus, the failure of urban development projects to conform to the requirements established in the urban legal system obliges—per se—the rejection of the initiated proceedings, in application of the principle of legality, to which the entire state apparatus, including the municipalities, is subject. In this regard, it is important to remember that the legal framework is composed not only of written sources, starting with the Political Constitution, not only regarding its text, but also the values and principles emanating from it, international treaties, with special significance of those relating to fundamental rights, laws and regulatory provisions, as ordered by section 6 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública); but also, and in particular, the unequivocal rules of science and technique, as they also constitute a delimiting parameter of administrative discretion, pursuant to article 16 of the cited legal body, as it obliges the Administration to ensure that its action is duly grounded in the theoretical knowledge acquired from the various methodologies and disciplines of science and technique, when appropriate—as in the case of urban planning matters—so that the will of public institutions does not depend on their free will (or choice), but on objective assessments obtained according to the technical rules applicable to the case. In this sense, the objectivity of technical criteria is highlighted, since \"... if a technique is scientific and, therefore, by definition, certain, objective, universal, subject to uniform rules that do not depend on the personal appreciation of an individual subject, it is obvious that one cannot speak of 'complete discretion' in this aspect, but rather, on the contrary, it corresponds to speak of little less than 'regulation' (subjection to norms, in the case of technique)\" (MARTÍN GONZÁLEZ, M., in his work El grado de determinación legal de los conceptos jurídicos. RAP, number 54, 1967, p.239), cited by DESDENTADO DAROCA, Eva. Los problemas del control judicial de la discrecionalidad técnica. (Un estudio crítico de la jurisprudencia. Editorial Civitas, S. A. Madrid. Spain. 1997. p. 43.) Concordantly, Eduardo ORTIZ ORTIZ spoke in the Legislative Commission that discussed the bill for the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) to include the unequivocal rules of science and technique as a parameter of administrative discretion, considering \"... in cases where the Administration acts in technical matters that have a clear and precise meaning in the case, the technical rules will be, in this case, like laws; the violation of the technical aspects of an administrative act of a public service will naturally be an illegality exactly as if a legal precept were being violated.\" (QUIRÓS CORONADO, Roberto. Ley General de Administración Pública, Concordada y Anotada con el Debate Legislativo y la Jurisprudencia Constitucional. Editorial Aselex, S. A. San José, Costa Rica. 1996. p. 99.)\n\nVII.- OF THE REQUIREMENT TO STATE REASONS AS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE FORMAL ACTION OF THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.- Given that one of the objections raised in this appeal is precisely the lack of reasoning for the challenged agreement, specifically because it is not supported by the evidence provided in the record or the regulations governing the matter, it is important to briefly reflect on this point, based on the doctrine and regulations that govern it. The existence and validity of any administrative act depends on the concurrence of several essential elements, imposed by the legal system, which, for a better understanding, can be classified as material elements, relating to the subjective elements (competence, standing, and investiture), objective elements (purpose, content, and cause—articles 131, 132, and 133 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) and 49 of the Political Constitution) and formal elements, encompassing the form in which the act is adopted, that is, the means of expression or manifestation (instrumentation), the statement of reasons or grounds (article 136 of the cited General Law) and the procedure followed for its adoption (articles 214 and 308 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) and 39 and 41 of the Constitution). The requirement to state reasons consists\n\n\"... of a declaration of the factual and legal circumstances that have led the respective public administration to the issuance or enactment of the administrative act. The statement of reasons is the formal expression of the cause and, normally, in any administrative resolution, it is contained in the so-called 'considering clauses' (considerandos)—the recitals section. The statement of reasons, by consisting of an enunciation of the facts and the legal grounds that the public administration took into account to issue its decision or will, constitutes a means of proof of its intentionality and an indispensable guideline for interpreting and applying the respective administrative act.\" (JINESTA LOBO, Ernesto. Tratado de Derecho Administrativo. Volume I. (Parte General). Biblioteca Jurídica Dike. First edition. Medellín, Colombia. 2002. p. 388.)\n\nThus, the statement of reasons must determine the application of a concept to the specific factual circumstances in question (according to the development of Spanish jurisprudence, specifically in the ruling of May 18, 1991, RA 4120, accepting the reasoning of the appealed decision, which cites the SSTS of September 23, 1969, RA 6078, and October 7, 1970, RA 4251, cited by the author Marcos M. Nombre60531, in his work La motivación del acto administrativo. (Editorial Tecnos, S. A. Madrid. 1993, page 190); that is, it is a concrete decision that links the facts with the normative support; so that when there is a brief allusion to general rules and unspecific facts, it can be concluded that there is no sufficient contribution of justification, insofar as it is not possible to deduce from them the elements assessed by the governmental authority to make the decision, which acquires the greatest importance when it comes to acts that limit or restrict subjective rights or in which a sanction is imposed on the administered party. By its content, it constitutes a determining factor for due process and the right of defense, which has full application in the administrative sphere, as indicated by the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) starting from ruling 15-90, at sixteen hours forty-five minutes on January 5, 1990, by enunciating the minimum elements of this constitutional principle\n\n\"(...) a) Notification to the interested party of the nature and purposes of the proceeding; b) the right to be heard, and the opportunity for the interested party to present arguments and produce evidence deemed pertinent; c) the opportunity for the administered party to prepare its allegation, which necessarily includes access to information and administrative records linked to the matter in question; ch) the right of the administered party to be represented and advised by lawyers, technicians, and other qualified persons; d) adequate notification of the decision issued by the administration and of the reasons on which it is based; and e) the right of the interested party to appeal the decision issued ...\" (Emphasis is not from the original.)\n\nTherefore, pursuant to article 136 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública), the Administration is required to state reasons for acts that impose obligations; limit, suppress, or deny subjective rights; resolve appeals; those issued departing from the criterion followed in previous proceedings or from the opinion of advisory bodies; those that maintain the execution of an act that is challenged; general acts of a normative nature (regulations); and general discretionary acts. Thus, if there is no statement of reasons, a formal defect is incurred that severely affects the act, rendering it absolutely null and void.\n\nVIII.- OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.- It is in light of the foregoing considerations that the legality review of the challenged municipal agreement will be exercised regarding its content, concerning the scope of competence of the municipal government, as required. This Court deems that the challenged municipal agreement—article 29 of the ordinary session 53-2009, of September 8, 2009, of the Municipality of Belén—is in accordance with the legal system. To this end, the following reflections must be made.\n\nFirst: It was issued precisely in exercise of the functions that the legal system—constitutional and legal—has delegated to municipal governments, regarding not only local urban planning but particularly control (police power) in that area. And it is issued on the occasion of a request for potable water availability for a previously approved urban development project. As previously indicated, the urban planning power exercised by municipalities is not restricted to issuing the regulations for their canton, but also to verifying, case by case, according to the requests and proceedings of the residents and businessmen, compliance with those regulations; an area in which the issue of water availability is obviously included, which is the exclusive purview of the local government to determine, as stated, pursuant to the constitutional competence assigned to these corporations under section 169, and legally in the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) (articles 32 to 41) and the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones) (articles 1 and 74, cited above), as it is undoubtedly a local service, as emphatically considered by the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) in various pronouncements. Indeed, in ruling number 6706-93, at fifteen hours twenty-one minutes on December 21, 1993, it stated:\n\n\"II).- The Chamber considers that the power attributed to local governments to plan urban development within the limits of their territory does indeed form part of the constitutional concept of 'local interests and services' referred to in article 169 of the Constitution, a competence that was recognized by the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) (# 4240 of November 15, 1968, amended by Laws # 6575 of April 27, 1981 and # 6595 of August 6 of that same year), specifically in articles 15 and 19 challenged here, (...)\n\nIII).- (...) Urban planning, that is, the elaboration and implementation of regulating plans (planes reguladores), is an inherent function of the municipalities to the exclusion of any other public entity, except as stated regarding the general directive powers attributed to the Ministry of Planning and the Directorate of Urbanism.-\" (Emphasis is not from the original.)\n\nFinally, in ruling number 4205-96, at fourteen hours thirty-three minutes on August 20, 1996, it allowed the existence of other regulations different from those of the municipalities—meaning by such, those of the Institute of Housing and Urbanism (Instituto de Vivienda y Urbanismo)—but conditioned on two fundamental assumptions: that no municipal regulation existed on the matter, and that the Municipality adopted that regulation through an express municipal agreement:\n\n\"(...) the thesis is reiterated that the competence for urban planning remains the exclusive attribution of municipal governments, and only exceptionally and residually, in the absence of regulations issued for this purpose by the municipalities, is INVU assigned the task of proposing regulating plans, but subject to them being previously approved by the local entity; so that the provisions issued by this autonomous institution regarding urban planning must always be considered transitory and in default of the use of municipal competences.\"\n\nPursuant to which, it can be concluded that municipal competence in the area of local urban planning is exclusive, and that of national bodies—which may be concurrent—is supplementary, in order to guarantee municipal autonomy. For these reasons, it cannot be claimed that another public agency, such as, in this case, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), may intervene in decisions pertaining to the urban planning of a specific canton, such as determining whether or not water availability is granted to a specific urbanization project, much less by alleging—as is done—a national competence regarding the function of direction and intervention in the face of water supply problems. Note that this is the pre-construction phase of an urban development project, a phase in which the preventive and supervisory action of the municipality is absolutely legitimate; so that the infringement of the fundamental right to water supply cannot be alleged, as is argued in this case—which, it is worth clarifying, has as its holders only the users themselves and not the businessmen or developers of urban projects—hence the petition under analysis is confined to the sphere of exercising the freedom of enterprise and the right to build, according to the permits and actions emanating from the local entity itself. It is worth reiterating that the urban control function incumbent upon the municipalities is essential to guarantee the safety and respect for the fundamental rights of the residents and future inhabitants of the canton.\n\nSecond: It is also not legitimate to attempt to defend the supremacy of the Instituto Costarricense in the provision of the public water service over local governments, based on a law nationalizing the same, as the appellant alleges, based on a pronouncement from the Legal Department of the indicated autonomous institution. Both this Court (of legality) and the Constitutional Court have defended the competence assigned to municipalities regarding \"eminently\" local matters, that is, the \"administration of local services and interests\" according to the mandate of Article 169 of the Political Constitution itself, under the following considerations:\n\n\"[...] by having included an indeterminate legal concept in Article 169, by stating that the Municipality of each canton is responsible for administering 'local' services and interests, to clarify this concept, it is necessary to be in contact with the reality to which it is intended, so that the only way to define or distinguish what is local from what is not, is through a legal text, that is, it is the law that must do so, or failing that, and as the case may be, it must be done through the jurisprudential interpretation that jurisdictional control makes of these contents. And it can be said that the use of indeterminate concepts by the Constitution means, above all, a mandate directed to the Judge so that he - not the legislator - determines them, as the best national doctrine on the subject rightly affirms. [...], the local has such a connotation that defining its scope by the legislator or the judge must lead to maintaining the integrity of local interests and services, so that the legislator could not even dictate regulations that tend to dismember the Municipality (territorial element), if it does not do so observing the procedures previously established in the Political Constitution; nor promulgate one that places its inhabitants (population) in clear conditions of inferiority in relation to the rest of the country; nor one that affects the very essence of the local (government), so as to turn the Corporation into a simple empty container of which only the name subsists, but deactivating the entire regime as it was conceived by the National Constituent Assembly. In another sense, there will be tasks that by their nature are municipal - local - and cannot be subtracted from that sphere of competence to convert them into national services or interests, because doing so would imply dismantling the Municipality, or better yet, emptying it of constitutional content, and therefore, it is not possible to dictate in advance the insurmountable limits of the local, but rather to discern what corresponds or not to the communal government, it must be extracted from the examination made in each specific case [...] Consequently, not only by express legal norm (the Municipal Code, the Liquor Law), but, and this is most important, by express constitutional content (Article 169), functions of any public entity that dispute their primacy with the municipalities cannot subsist when dealing with matters that comprise the local.\" (The underline is not from the original.) (Judgment number 6469-97, of sixteen hours twenty minutes of October eighth, nineteen ninety-seven, reiterated in number 5445-99, of fourteen hours thirty minutes of July fourteenth, nineteen ninety-nine.)\n\nThis allocation of competence is developed in the secondary (legal) regulations, specifically in Articles 13 subsection b), 17 subsections a), 68, and 74 of the Municipal Code, which empower the municipal Council to regulate the provision of municipal services, the Mayor to organize and administer them, and, consequently, the establishment of municipal tax (fee) rates. In this sense, in the aforementioned constitutional ruling 5445-99, the Constitutional Court warned\n\n\"[...] by express will of our Fundamental Charter, a specific competence is assigned to local governments, an attribution that is also exclusive to them; that is, it is an original competence of the municipality and only through a law of nationalization or regionalization can it be displaced, totally or partially. In this order of ideas, the institutional problem must not be set aside, insofar as it must be determined whether the municipality is in a real and technical capacity to fulfill the public services within its competence, preferring the transfer of the service to regional or national institutions; and likewise, when the problem goes beyond the territorial circumscription to which local governments are bound, that competence can be transferred to the corresponding national or regional State institutions; in both scenarios, it is insisted, a law of nationalization or regionalization is required, as the case may be.\"\n\nIn light of the foregoing considerations, the assertion made by the legal advisor of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados that the potable water service was nationalized, in such a way that it was transferred to that institution, leaving a residual competence to the municipalities, is neither legitimate nor true. Quite the contrary, as indicated, the primigenial or original competence in the provision of local services, among which the supply of potable water is included, belongs to the local corporations, according to a constitutional mandate, and specifically, in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 of the Potable Water Law, number 1634, of September eighteenth, nineteen fifty-three, which literally provides:\n\n\"The Municipalities shall have in their charge the full administration of the potable water supply systems under their competence\";\n\nand it is in numeral 2 subsection g) of the Constitutive Law of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, number 2726, of April fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one and its amendments, that it was assigned the competence to administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems of the entire country, but in the case of those in the hands of the municipalities, only if the provision of the service is deficient. This conclusion is reached after meticulously reviewing the legislative record of the indicated law (number 2726), since, in effect, the initial intention of the legislators of the time was to completely remove the supply of potable water in the country from the local sphere, endorsing this task to a technical and specialized body, but the reaction of the municipal governments of the time (San José, La Unión, Jiménez, Buenos Aires, Turrialba, Siquirres, Escazú, Osa, Limón, Pacayas, Golfito, Santa Cruz, Mora, Heredia, Desamparados, Santo Domingo de Heredia, Bagaces, Curridabat, Juan Viñas, Alajuelita, Pérez Zeledón, Tres Ríos, Tarrazú, El Guarco, Poás, Goicoechea, Grecia, Pococí, San Mateo, San Ramón, Alvarado, Puerto Cortés, San Pedro de Poás, at folios 72 to 107, 179, 180, 113, 193 to 204, 215 to 213, 244 to 255, 298, 299, 302 to 305, 342, 367, 373, 400 and 501) was not long in coming, who strongly opposed the project in question, deeming sullied not only the municipal autonomy conferred by constitutional mandate (170), but also the sphere of competence (169) and the municipal finances, product of the provision of the service; to the point that it came to be alleged:\n\n\"On the occasion of the discussion of the bill creating the Water and Sewer Directorate, it is necessary to clarify concepts--\n\nIt is not necessary to split hairs to conclude that if the Municipalities of the Country (sic) are stripped of the authority they currently have to administer water and sewer services, they are being deprived of such important attributions that it would be debatable whether the activities that would remain under their care after that would merit their subsistence.\n\nInsisting that the Municipalities are not harmed by taking away the administration of such important services is to deny the reality of the facts.\n\nArticle 169 of the Political Constitution is emphatic in establishing that the administration of local services in each canton shall be in charge of the Municipal Government. On the other hand, current legislation designates the aforementioned piped water services as municipal. Where will the municipal autonomy that Article 170 of the Constitution enshrines remain, if through laws non-local organisms are created for attending to the services under the care of the municipalities? Will this not be a direct way of ending the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, circumventing what the cited Article 169 prescribes, ignoring 170, and mocking popular election, since the elected Council Members will be left to administer local interests and services, without functions or powers?\n\nNo one can deny that if the bill under study becomes a law of the Republic, the first step will have been taken in Costa Rica to end the Municipal Regime.-\n\nIf what is wanted is to technify, centralize, or delegate the attention of public services, through the creation of a special organism and not, as it seems to be inferred from the aforementioned project, to end the municipalities by leaving them no important services to administer, the law provides the path.-\n\nArticle 27 of the Municipal Organization Law No. 131 of November 9, 1909, amended by Law No. 1401 of December 6, 1951, provides for the case that in order to better provide a communal service, it is necessary to create an organism delegated by the Municipalities, without injuring the statute of municipal autonomy. Said article, in the relevant part, states:\n\n\"Article 27.- The administration of the interests and services of the cantonal communities corresponds to the Municipalities in their power of autonomous municipal governments ...\"\n\nThe statute of municipal autonomy does not prevent, however, two or more Municipalities from concluding agreements, covenants, or provincial or regional unions, when for general interest, administrative economy, or better common service, they consider it useful and necessary to technify, centralize, or delegate the execution of certain works or PUBLIC SERVICES. Such agreements, covenants, or unions require, for their legal perfection, special legislative approval when they imply a variation of the administrative territorial division or the CREATION OF A DELEGATE ORGANISM INDEPENDENT OF THE DELEGATORS. The delegated entity, corporation, or establishment must always preserve its essentially local or municipal character.\n\nIf following what the cited article provides, a better service can be achieved, why the insistence on approving a project that will end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, and which will be dictated against the will of the people's representatives in the cantons?\" (Note from the Municipality of San José, of January twelfth, nineteen sixty, to the Legislative Assembly, at folios 298 and 299. The underline is from the original.)\n\nIt is illustrative that the Asociación Democrática de Juntas Progresistas declared itself in agreement with the project, provided that the organism created was \"an exclusively technical direction and coordination organism\" (folio 397), to respect the autonomy and competence of the municipalities, \"when it should be everyone's concern to strengthen it\" (folios 397, 402, and 403). A consequence of the conflict raised is the regulation finally approved which created the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillado, not as the body in charge of \"operating, directing, planning, designing, constructing, maintaining, fixing, and resolving everything related to the supply of potable water for domiciliary, industrial, and any other nature uses to all inhabitants of the Republic\", as Article 1 of the bill advocated; but rather with a directive competence in this matter, as inferred from the current text of the cited numeral, \"With the object of directing, setting policies, establishing and applying norms, and promoting the planning, financing, and development, and of resolving everything related to the supply of potable water and the collection and evacuation of blackwater and liquid industrial waste, as well as the normative aspect of storm drainage systems in urban areas, for the entire national territory, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is created, as an autonomous institution of the State.\" Thus, the competence that the law of its creation - indicated supra - and its amendments assign to the indicated entity must not be confused, which is to act as the governing body in water matters at the national level, which translates into the obligation to maintain strict control over the operating system of rural and municipal aqueducts, so that they conform to the guidelines emanating from the institute, to guarantee the quality of the service, insofar as it involves public health; whence, only by way of exception, in cases where that service is not provided adequately, under conditions of quality, quantity, and efficient development, or where adequate social and economic conditions do not exist for its administration by the municipal entities or the administrative associations (Asadas), can it assume the administration, operation, and maintenance of the aqueduct and sewer systems. (In this sense, among others, judgments number 2003-1367, of nine hours forty-nine minutes of February twenty-first, two thousand three, and 2009-18311, of thirteen hours forty-four minutes of December second, two thousand nine, both from the Constitutional Chamber, can be consulted.) Now then, it is reiterated that in this case, the conditions that legitimize the intervention of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados to supply water to the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project do not exist, given that it is in the construction phase of the project, in which the municipality's action occurs within the competence sphere of urban planning control, as previously explained.\n\nThird: Contrary to what the appellant alleged, the challenged act is sufficiently motivated, both in the regulations governing urban planning matters and the competence of the municipality, and in the multiple pieces of evidence, mostly consisting of technical opinions from various departments of the local corporation as well as from the Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones and the Servicio Nacional de SENARA; from which it is clear that the Condominios San Vicente project was planned with a water shortage problem, a condition that, far from improving, has worsened, to the point that it motivates the proceeding whose decision is the object of this challenge. Indeed, in Official Letter ASP-327-2007, the Director of the Public Service Area of the Municipality of Belén - Luis Carlos Cháves - pointed out that according to the concession for well AB-1571 granted by MINAET, the planned storage structure (underground tank), and the allocated flow rate, the tanks could not be filled during the eighteen authorized hours of pumping; making it evident that there is a shortage in the water supply (water shortage). Likewise, it was on the occasion of the constitutional relief judgment number 2008-15657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes of October seventeenth, two thousand eight, that the developer company itself requested the temporary closure of the well from the respective Ministry, which was carried out on December seventeenth, two thousand eight, in the presence of municipal officials; without the opening of the same having been authorized to date; making it evident that the shortage of water that will supply the indicated project continues to exist. Note that as indicated in Official Letter IMN-DA-1347-2009 of May fourth, two thousand nine (from the Head of the Water Department of MINAET), in consideration of the technical opinions rendered in Official Letters GR-276-09, from the General Manager of SENARA, DIGH-145-2009 from the Directorate of Water Research and Management of SENARA, the Hydrogeological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571 before the threat of its contamination, and the Hydrogeological Vulnerability Map of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, \"considers that the well can be opened and the water exploited in accordance with the provisions of the concession resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET\", prior to compliance with several technical recommendations, whose adherence was to be reported to the Water Department \"in order to verify its effective compliance, prior to the opening\" (folios 13 verso to 15 verso). That being the case, despite the fact that the indicated requirements were met, no order for the opening of well AB-1571 emanating from the competent body (understood to be MINAET) is recorded in the case file; therefore, there is no cause to \"recognize\" – as requested before this instance – a situation that materially has not occurred. The foregoing shows that the appellant's statement regarding the closure of well AB-1571 being conditioned only on the Municipality approving the availability of water through its aqueduct or connection to the network of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, with the provision of a service of sufficient quality, quantity, and continuity, is also untrue; because, it is repeated, its closure was due to the implementation of the cited constitutional ruling. It is clear that, according to the amendment of the Annual Urban Growth Regulation Policy (approved in ordinary session number 37-2004, of June eighth, two thousand four by the Council of Belén, published in La Gaceta number 147, of the following July twenty-eighth), it is the obligation of the urbanizer (developer) to fully guarantee the water supply for the project, as a prerequisite for its approval by the Council, which evidently did not occur in the case under study. Said urban planning regulation establishes the requirements and procedure for the approval and processing of new urban projects, namely:\n\n\"Procedure:\n\na) Urban growth control and authorizations for new housing developments shall be established through the authorization of water supply availability for each project or stage thereof, until the Municipality of Belén establishes more variables in its Regulatory Plan Regulations.\n\nb) The Municipality shall issue the water availability for housing developments whose demand is less than or equal to 40 (forty) pajas de agua annually.\n\nc) Authorizations for housing developments or stages thereof, exceeding more than 40 (forty) housing units to be counted in subdivisions and condominium branches, must be proposed to the Municipal Council by the Developer, indicating the works that guarantee minimal urban environmental impact. The proposals must guarantee the water supply to current and future users of the sector, blackwater and wastewater treatment, stormwater conveyance and buffering systems before being discharged into channels causing downstream flooding, actions regarding road widening and signage, as well as other structural actions that ensure orderly and proportionate urban development; a set of matters that must be endorsed by the Municipal Council.\"\n\nThe aforementioned regulation is in accordance with that established in the Minimum Requirements for Assessing Water Availability for Housing Developments or Stages Thereof to be counted in subdivisions, condominium branches, and housing complexes, approved by the Municipal Council of Belén in ordinary session number 44-2004, of July thirteenth, two thousand four, in which, point B subsection vii) requires, for the approval of water availability in projects whose demand exceeds more than forty housing units, the presentation by the developer of the \"Proposal for water supply for current and future users of the sector, planned for a minimum period of 10 years, prior consultation with the Canton's Aqueduct Master Plan and the Public Services Area regarding the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system.\" Likewise, it should be noted that, given the request for water availability made by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, prior to adopting its decision, the Director of the Public Services Area of the corporation was requested to determine the viability of the proposal, and it was in Official Letter ASP-064-2009, of February twentieth, two thousand nine (at folios 86 verso and 87 front), which is consistent with that issued by the same municipal department in Memorandum ASP-045-09, of the previous January fourth (at folios 177 to 179), indicating the possibility of providing the service, but conditioned on the realization of improvements to the municipal aqueduct, with a high economic cost - approximately two hundred thousand United States dollars - to guarantee effective and efficient provision, given that at that time, there were neither plans nor budget to carry them out, as other needs and priorities of the canton were being addressed; in any case, the current Master Plan must be modified or restructured. With this, it is materially impossible for the municipality to assume the provision of the service. In this sense, the Municipal Council did well in assessing this situation, since the approval of the water availability requested by the appellant cannot jeopardize the service already provided to the community of Belén, which would translate into a weakening of the municipal aqueduct; it being unfeasible at this moment for the local corporation – as explained – to assume the costs of the infrastructure required to supply water to a project, the only way to do so being with the contribution of the developer company. It is warned that water availability is a prerequisite to the authorization of any construction permit (permiso de construcción), and its granting does not translate into the granting of the construction license either, since it is a requirement – one more among others – that developers must fulfill to obtain it. In the case under study, it is on the occasion of the temporary closure of well AB-1571 – at the voluntary request of the developer itself – that the intervention of the municipality is required, and failing that, of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, to provide the service of potable water supply to the project. This demonstrates, once again, the non-compliance occurring in this such sensitive area, which is the guarantee, in charge of the urbanizer, of the provision and supply of water.\n\nFourth: On the other hand, the considerations made by the appellant regarding the possibility of continuing the works on the protection area of well AB-1571, under the protection of the non-existence of contamination and because the technical works recommended by the Head of the Water Department of MINAET - José Miguel Zeledón Calderón - in Official Letter IMN-1347-2009, of May fourth, two thousand nine, have been carried out, are also not acceptable to this Panel. The petitioner forgets that it is on the occasion of constitutional judgment number 2008-15657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes of October seventeenth, two thousand eight, that the competent authorities, meaning both the Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones and the Municipality of Belén, were obligated to delimit and respect the protected area indicated in the legal system, according to the warning that Nombre2449 had made. The technical consideration – the Hydrological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571, the Hydrogeological Vulnerability Map of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and Official Letters DIGH-145-2009, from the Directorate of Water Research and Management of Nombre2449 and IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May fourth, two thousand nine, from the Head of the Water Department of MINAET – that there is no risk of contamination, neither of the groundwater nor of the well, does not lift the restriction established in the legal system; a provision that in any case finds support in the preventive principle in environmental matters, which is applicable in urban planning matters.\n\nFifth: Finally, the reasoning made by the Council of the Municipality of Belén is also legitimate, that given the material impossibility of being able to provide the water service through its aqueduct – due to the current state of the infrastructure – which does not authorize it to be assumed by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, it is considered that there is a legal impossibility of deriving legal effects from an absolutely null act, in accordance with numerals 166, 169, and 170 of the General Law of Public Administration, as it is evidenced, as indicated, the seriousness and a large number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which, it is affirmed, \"clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to the absence of valid constitutive elements, so its execution would imply 'the civil liability of the Administration (that is, the municipality as such), and civil, administrative, and potentially criminal liability' of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.\" In this sense, the local entity warns that the municipal Administration's action, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is susceptible to generating administrative and criminal liability – both under the Anti-Corruption Law and environmental regulations – for the officials involved, having granted a permit in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as abuse of power. Indeed, when supporting that absolute nullity of construction permit number 7604-2008, in favor of Nombre16224 – as the property is in trust – for the construction of eleven comprehensive towers of one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571 as the sole source of potable water supply, the municipal government lists the following serious infractions of the legal system:\n\n1.- The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipality of Belén; given that neither the current Master Plan nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplates the supply of water for new urban projects, which does not guarantee its supply; with which, a construction permit was approved that does not have all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in violation of the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for in accordance with the canton's urban planning regulations, in contravention of the Urban Growth Policy and the respective regulation of Minimum Requirements for assessing water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of June twenty-fourth and July twenty-eighth, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n2.- The construction permit was granted by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Council, as required by the canton's urban regulations regarding housing projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Development Unit, with the approval of an official not authorized from the Operative Technical and Urban Development Area, as they are not affiliated with the respective Professional Association and are not the Department Coordinator.\n\nIt reasons that this action is likewise contrary to Legal Opinion C-235-99 of the Procuraduría General de la República, which indicates that the Concejo is the body responsible for the final act of approval or disapproval of the construction of an urbanization of a canton, the municipal engineering department being a consultative body of the Concejo;\n\n3.- Knowingly, authorization was granted to install part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, opinions, and consultative recommendations of the Nombre2449 issued in official letters ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07, and GE-049-09 concerning the duty to preserve the protection area of well AB-1571, as is evident from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight; which in its view constitutes the non-application of the binding jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional regarding the precautionary principle in relation to groundwater (specifically in judgment number 2007-1923 of that Court), in connection with the protection of groundwater;\n\n4.- The permit was granted under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined term; which, in addition to being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipalidad de Belén - in official letter ASP-327-2007 -, is a condition incompatible with an urban development project, since water must be inherent to the project itself as it is a matter as essential as it is permanent, which implies that it must not have interruptions or alterations of any kind;\n\n5.- The permit was granted without heeding technical criteria that recommended a different decision: namely, Official Letter ASP-327-2007 from the Directorate of the Public Service Area of the Municipalidad de Belén -Luis Carlos Cháves-, which indicated that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the allocated flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a shortfall in the water supply (water shortfall); official letter UA-204-2007 from the Environmental Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, streets, and parking areas were within the well's protection zone; official letter UO 276-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén, that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the need for accessibility that could be generated on the road; official letter O-023-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén, regarding the road impact on the access road to the area known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of stormwater runoff due to the lack of a collector, channeling, and stormwater discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the Santa Ana radial road; drainage system, road width;\n\n6.- That due process was not followed in its granting, insofar as the rejection reports from the Environmental Unit (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008, and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for their proper correction.\n\nWithout this Tribunal proceeding to assess the above elements concretely, and without endorsing the absolute nullity of the act in question -construction permit 7604-2008 of the Municipalidad de Belén-, as it has not been declared as such in an ordinary administrative procedure, with prior opinions from the Procuraduría General de la República, pursuant to Article 183 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, or derived from a claim of lesividad proceeding -Article 173 of the cited Law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo; it is considered that the rejection made of the action initiated by Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 is sufficiently motivated based on the alleged nullity. In this sense, an absolutely null act is not presumed valid, as expressly provided for in section 169 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, so that, in principle, no legal effect can derive from it, once it has been declared -but which may well be the cause or reason for precautionary measures, as will be indicated below-, and consequently, it cannot be executed either, which is a logical consequence of its flagrant illegitimacy and intrinsic ineffectiveness; and therefore, due to the seriousness of its defects, in essential elements of the act, it cannot be remedied or convalidated (Article 172 of the same legal body); and section 170 of the cited Law itself makes the Administration and the official incur civil liability for the execution of an act of such nature.\n\nIX.- FINAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.- For this Collegiate Body, what was resolved by the Concejo Municipal of Belén is in accordance with the law and must be confirmed insofar as the dismissal, in all its aspects, of the request for water availability made by the developer company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, must be considered, as it indeed is, a precautionary measure, issued by the deliberative body upon evidencing the lack of one of the essential elements of the project -the water supply-; and precisely, in safeguarding its own sustainability, in protection of the safety and rights of future inhabitants; which is in turn supported by the suspension of works agreed upon by the Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano in official letters ODU-022-2009 and ODU-13-2009 of May eleventh and thirteenth, two thousand nine (folios 166 to 169), which are motivated by the lack of provision for water availability for the projected works. Likewise, it is in accordance with the transitory amendment introduced to the canton's regulatory plan (plan regulador), by agreement taken in Article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteenth, two thousand seven, with the approval of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (in ordinary session of the Board of Directors number 23-2006, of April twenty-fifth, two thousand six, in which it took cognizance of official letter 1535 from the Director of Urbanism) and of the Sala Constitucional (in judgments number 2005-8915 and 2005-6399), by virtue of which, temporarily, \"the granting of water availability and construction permits, for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects, in condominiums or urbanizations\" was suspended \"for the time necessary to update and implement the new Plan Regulador for the Cantón de Belén, in light of the new known elements. ...\" There is no record in the case file or in the electronic records of the repeal of such regulation. Notwithstanding the foregoing considerations, this Tribunal considers that the situation raised in this matter cannot remain in the terms resolved by the Concejo in the challenged agreement; since the foregoing cannot be maintained indefinitely, as a declaratory act of rights is in force -construction permit 7604-2008 of the Municipalidad de Belén-, which, it is repeated, has not to date been annulled in accordance with the mechanisms provided for that purpose by the legal system; and which serves as its basis, as otherwise it would cease to have the characteristic of instrumentality that is proper to it, becoming an autonomous and improper sanction of the Rule of Law. Indeed, in municipal matters, the declaration of nullity of a final administrative act that has granted a right to the administered party can occur in several ways: a) at the instance of an \"interested\" third party, \"anyone\", in the terms of Article 173 of the Political Constitution, through the filing of the extraordinary appeal for review; in the terms permitted by sections 157 and 163 of the Código Municipal; or b) by the local government turning against its own prior act, declaratory of subjective rights, either through the ordinary administrative procedure, in the administrative venue itself, in cases of evident and manifest absolute nullity, as empowered by Article 183 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, with a prior favorable opinion from the Procuraduría General de la República, or by filing a lesividad process in the contentious-administrative venue, in cases of absolute nullity that is not evident and not manifest, which is regulated in sections 173 of the indicated law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. The foregoing finds support in the theory or doctrine of one's own acts (actos propios), which has been developed by the jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional, which has stated:\n\n\"[...] there exists in law a general principle according to which no one can go back on their own acts, however with respect to acts emanating from the Administration in the exercise of its functions, the general principle operates that administrative acts are essentially revocable, there being however an exception, which is that administrative acts are not revocable when they create, declare, or recognize rights in favor of third parties provided that those acts have been issued in full compliance with the essential requirements for their validity, which are the object, competence, will, and form, because in the event that they do not meet such requirements, precisely because they are acts that create, declare, or recognize rights, they could engender absolute or relative nullity which is declared through procedures previously established by law [...]\" (judgment of the Sala Constitucional number 5808-93, of sixteen hours forty-two minutes on November tenth, nineteen hundred ninety-three).\n\nThis does not mean that the Public Administration is denied the power to revoke and modify its own decisions; but it is known that this power is not completely free, but must be subject to the limits –already indicated– expressly established by the legislator, and which, by interpretation of the Sala Constitucional, constitute a guarantee of the legitimacy of the Administration's actions, and a right for the administered party.\n\nIt is warned that an ex officio review or annulment in breach of the legal requirements as indicated, \"either by omission of the required formalities or because the absolute nullity is not evident and manifest\" (e.g., that the opinion is unfavorable, that the opinion was not sought, or that an ordinary administrative procedure was not opened) is absolutely null and makes both the public administration and the official liable for the damages caused (Article 173, paragraph 6°, ibidem).\n\nX.- Corollary to the foregoing, the challenged agreement must be confirmed. Pursuant to what is indicated in Considerando IX.- above, immediately upon notification of this resolution, the Concejo Municipal, as the supreme head of the local government, and the Municipal Mayor as executor of its agreements, must immediately proceed to seek the elimination from the legal system of construction permit 7604-2008 that the Environmental Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén granted to Improsa, for the construction of the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project, developed by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, in accordance with the provisions of Article 174.1 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, which literally states:\n\n\"1. The Administration shall be obligated to annul ex officio the absolutely null act, within the limitations of this law.\"\n\nAs no further appeal lies against what is provided in this resolution, the administrative channel is deemed exhausted.\n\nXI.- ON THE INADMISSIBILITY OF THE REQUEST FOR LIABILITY OF THE CONCEJO MEMBERS.- Finally, the request made before this instance to carry out the respective procedures to determine the administrative and civil liability of the council member officials who intervened in the adoption of the challenged agreement must be rejected as inadmissible. It is recalled to this effect that this Tribunal exercises a reviewing competence, in the capacity of an improper two-phase hierarchical superior, pursuant to the provisions of sections 173 of the Political Constitution, and as developed by Article 156 of the Código Municipal and 189 and 190 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. As such, it performs an eminently administrative function, despite being a Court of Justice, embedded in the organization of the Judicial Branch, insofar as the ultimate control of the legality of specific administrative decisions of municipal decisions has been delegated to it, prior to jurisdictional control. Thus, it acts as a mechanism of administrative oversight, which must be inserted within the organizational sphere of the Administration -in this case, of the municipalities; which, pursuant to the provisions of Article 181 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, may review only the legality of the act by virtue of an administrative appeal and must decide within the limit of the claims and factual issues raised by the appellant, being able to apply a norm not invoked in the appeal. Since in the claim sought there is no pronouncement by the Concejo, this prevents this Tribunal from taking cognizance.\n\nPOR TANTO:\n\nAs inadmissible, the request to establish liabilities against the municipal officials is rejected. In all other respects, with the considerations given, the challenged agreement is confirmed. The administrative channel is deemed exhausted. The Municipalidad de Belén shall take special note of the reasons set forth in Considerandos IX.- and X.- of this resolution.\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nHubert Fernández Argüello\n\n \n\n \n\n I. Rocío Rojas Morales Silvia Consuelo Fernández Brenes\n\n Exp. No. Placa16782\n\nProceso Municipal. Jerarquía Impropia.\n\nCondominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 against the Municipalidad de Belén\n\nAdditionally, it denied the claim of positive silence (silencio positivo) raised by the interested party (folios 84 verso, 85 recto, and 89 verso, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of regular session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 10.) That upon returning the file, the municipal administrative officials assumed responsibility for the matter and continued processing the application for construction permit (permiso de construcción) number 114-2007 of the company Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 (folios 7, by reference to amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of regular session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 11.) That by official communication DU-019-2008, of March seventeen, two thousand eight, from the Development Unit, with endorsement by memorandum AM-A-134-2008 of the same day, issued by Bachiller Esteban Ávila Fuentes of the Environmental Unit of that corporation and of the Technical Operative and Urban Development Area, a construction permit was granted in favor of Nombre16224, the property being in a real estate trust (fideicomiso inmobiliario), for the construction of eleven towers, comprising one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply. Said permit corresponds to number 7604-2008 (folios 7, by reference to amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of regular session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 12.) That the Council became aware of the foregoing in regular session 19-2008, of March 25, 2009, by official communication AM-A-141-2008 from the Mayor (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), as communicated to him by memorandum DU-019-2008 (folio 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of regular session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 13.) That by official communication DU-019-2008, of March seventeen, two thousand eight, from the Development Unit, with endorsement by memorandum AM-A-134-2008 of the same day, issued by Bachiller Esteban Ávila Fuentes of the Environmental Unit of that corporation and of the Technical Operative and Urban Development Area, a construction permit was granted in favor of Nombre16224, the property being in a real estate trust (fideicomiso inmobiliario), for the construction of eleven towers, comprising one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply. Said permit corresponds to number 7604-2008 (folios 7, by reference to amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional and 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of regular session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 14.) That the Council became aware of the foregoing in regular session 19-2008, of March 25, 2009, by official communication AM-A-141-2008 from the Mayor (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), as communicated to him by memorandum DU-019-2008 (folio 85 recto, by reference to the Agreement given in article 29 of regular session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); 15.) That the amparo action filed by Nombre101961 against the Ministry of Environment and Energy and the Municipality of Belén for the non-application of the criterion of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento set forth in official communication GE-049-08 regarding the respect of the protection area for well AB-1571, allowing the development of the project of Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960, was granted by the Sala Constitucional in judgment number 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, clarified by judgment number 2008-18934, of fourteen hours twenty-four minutes on December nineteen, two thousand eight, a Court that ordered the Minister of Environment and Energy, the Mayor of the Municipality of Belén, and the President of the Council to take the necessary measures to ensure the protection distance between well AB-1571 and the construction project is respected, according to official communications GE-049-08, SL-232-2007 and ASUB-452-07, all from the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (folios 3 to 11 verso and management system of the Judicial Branch); 16.) That in response to the request for water availability (disponibilidad de agua) filed by the legal representative of the Condominio San Vicente project on October twenty-nine, two thousand eight before the New Services and Development Unit of the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, that unit replied by note of December second of the same year, indicating that according to the update of official communication UNSD-GAM-1755-2008-01628, \"Yes, potable water service can be provided according to Technical Report DAM-2008-659 and Official Communication SB-2008-1272 from the General Sub-Management, which are attached. All of the foregoing provided that the municipality accepts that Nombre5630 provide the service. Therefore, THERE IS feasibility of potable water and THERE IS NO wastewater service in this area. To enjoy the services at the front of your property, you must assume the cost (without any charge to Nombre5630) and execution of the works indicated: ...\" (Highlighted in the original). It warns that this document does not imply an obligation for the respective Municipality to approve the project (folio 174); 17.) That by brief of December nine, two thousand eight, the legal representative of the developer project informs the municipality of Belén that they decided to close well AB-1571 preventively and temporarily, to conduct studies in execution of amparo judgment 2008-015657, which was made known to the respective Ministry in a note of December third of the prior year. Likewise, it indicates that given the rejection of water availability by the Belén corporation, they requested and were granted water availability from the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (folios 172 and 173); 18.) That on December fifteen, two thousand eight, the legal representative of the San Vicente project informs the municipality of Belén that on the following seventeenth, at ten o'clock, the closure of well AB-1571 will proceed, so that they may be present; which indeed took place on that date, with the presence of municipal officials (folio 118 verso, by reference in agreement 61-2009); 19.) That in Memorandum ASP-045-09, of January four, two thousand nine, the Acting Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén expands the technical criterion for the case of the Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima project, in the following terms: \"System: San Antonio. Supply Source: Naciente Zamora. Extraction Flow: Belén I 34.631/sec. and Belén II 19.9 l/sec. Conduction Network Conditions: the conduction network begins at the outlet of the spring (naciente) to the pumping tank, from which water is extracted (sic) by two 50 HP centrifugal pumps. The water conveyed by the pumps is carried through high-density polyethylene pipe with a diameter of 640 mm (25\"), to the settlement tank. And from this tank to the distribution network the diameter is 797 mm (31\"). Storage Capacity: 1,000 m3. Distribution Network Conditions in front of the property: PVC pipe, SDR-26, it is cemented and with a gasket. Sections have been observed where the conveyance capacity of the pipe is less than demand. Depth and location according to current regulations in some sections. Significant loss due to diameter reductions. Population Supplied: comprises from the project to the end of Dirección2022 in San Rafael de Alajuela. Conclusions: 1. The sector where the project is located is considered the lower part of the San Antonio system (this assertion is due to topographic aspects and the form of supply). Therefore, the effects caused in this zone impact the entire system up to the supply tank. 2. The pipes currently installed are not of the ideal diameter to supply the needs of the project and the neighboring population; it is clarified that there are important sections that can be improved to increase supply capacity. 3. The Municipality (sic) applying the Urban Planning Law, can receive works to improve the system in order to grant potable water service in this area; the improvements are proposed by the developer and must have the approval of the Aqueduct Process. For this particular case, the distribution pipes in several sectors must be improved, the water production source of this district must be maximized, the pressures at some points of the system must be improved so as not to deprive the project's neighbors of supply. 4. The Urban Development policy of the Municipality of Belén determines that the \"Water supply proposal for current and future users of the sector, proposed for a period of 10 years, after consulting the Master Plan of the Canton's Aqueduct and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system.\" Therefore, the Services Directorate is fully available to review the proposal(s) to grant water availability for the project. 5. The water resources to supply potable water to the Project, the object of this document, potentially exist; however, the necessary infrastructure to meet its needs does not exist, since the existing diameters are insufficient to achieve the minimum pressures required to provide adequate service. 6. It is the criterion of this Directorate, that autonomy in the administration of potable water within the canton of Belén must be maintained. The foregoing considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meets the necessary conditions for human consumption, for the entire Belemita population and some surrounding sectors, even. And that what is required is to make improvements to the system\" (the highlighting is from the original) (folios 177 to 179); 20.) That in resolution IMN-DA-0077-2009, of nine hours on January nine, two thousand nine, the Head of the Water Department of MINAE ordered that the well remain closed, pursuant to numeral 26 of the Water Law (Ley de Aguas) (folios 118 verso to 119 recto, by reference in agreement 61-2009); 21.) That by official communication DU-01-2009, of January six, two thousand nine, the Urban Development Unit, in application of the constitutional ruling and article 26 of the Water Law (Ley de Aguas), and due to the MINAE's approval of the temporary closure of well AB-1571, required the developer to determine the institution that would be responsible for supplying water to the project (folio 118 verso, by reference in agreement 61-2009); 22.) That on February eleven, two thousand nine, the legal representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960, submitted a request to the Council for approval of water availability, with a connection to Nombre5630 or from the municipal aqueduct; a request reiterated on August nine of the same year (folio 175 for the first and 28 recto and verso for the second); 23.) That in regular session 11-2009, of February seventeen, two thousand nine, the Council took cognizance of proceeding 579-2009, presented by a representative of the developer, requesting water availability for the Condominios San Vicente project, with two proposals: a.- approval of water availability so that the service be provided by the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, considering that a potable water pipe from that institution passes in front of the property, with service availability existing according to the official communication from the New Services and Development Unit of that institution, with the costs of the necessary improvements for this being at its charge; and b.- provision of service with a connection to the municipal aqueduct, with the cost of the necessary improvements for this being at its charge. In response to said requirement, the Council agreed: 1.- to request from the Public Service Area a report on the current technical conditions of the municipal aqueduct in order to respond to the request, addressing the following points: \"a) Whether it is possible for the municipal aqueduct to provide the water availability service required in proceeding number 579-2009. b) If it is not possible, that the technical reasons and considerations be expressly and in detail indicated. c) If it is possible to grant the availability, that it be indicated and clarified whether there is aqueduct infrastructure capable of supplying the required availability; d) whether there is a water supply in sufficient quantity to provide the service and e) whether granting this availability does not affect the current users of the municipal aqueduct. f) In the event that improvements or investments are required to improve the infrastructure, the quantity of liquid, or to guarantee that current users will not be affected, that the following be expressly clarified: f.1) Specifically what those improvements consist of. f.2) What is the projected cost of the same (preferably in indexable values such as estimating in dollars). f.3) The time it could take to make the improvements. f.4) And a supervision proposal from the municipal officials responsible for the administration and maintenance of the aqueduct, so that there is a municipal counterpart that at a technical level supervises, guarantees, and receives the improvements made to satisfaction\" (folios 180 to 183); 24.) That in response to the previous requirement of the Council, the Director of the Public Services Area, Engineer Luis Carlos Cháves, renders Report ASP-064-2009, of February twenty, two thousand nine, in which he indicates: “* Characteristics of the San Antonio System: Supply source: Naciente Zamora with a storage capacity of 1,000 m3 and an extraction flow in Belén I of 34.63 l/sec. and Belén II of 19.9 l/sec., with a conduction network that begins at the outlet to the pumping tank, from which water is extracted by means of two 50 HP centrifugal pumps. The water conveyed by the pumps is carried through high-density polyethylene pipe with a diameter of 640 mm (25”), to the settlement tank and from this tank to the distribution network in a diameter of 797 mm (31”). * That the conditions of the distribution network in front of the requesting property are PVC pipe, SDR-26, varied diameters, which are cemented and with a gasket, with sections where the conveyance capacity of the pipe is less than demand, with depth and location that are in accordance with current regulations in some sections and significant loss due to diameter reductions, for a population supplied by the system comprising: the homes located in the San Antonio district, included Dirección11462, Potrerillos, and Antiguas Bodegas de Abonos Agro. * That in response to the inquiry about the possibility of the municipal aqueduct providing the water availability service required in proceeding number 579-2009, they indicate that it is possible provided that improvement works are carried out on the distribution network, given that currently the budget to make the system improvements that increase the conveyance and distribution capacity of water in the area is not contemplated, and the diameters of some of the pipes that supply the surroundings and the area itself are not sufficient to provide the necessary flow for when the project is completed. * That the infrastructure at the production source covers the project's needs, but it clarifies that the infrastructure installed in the area in question must be improved in terms of how water is carried to the area, the diameter of the pipes; control of consumption and use of water in the project must be maintained once it is completed to avoid water waste. * That the sector where the project is located is considered the lower part of the San Antonio system; this assertion is supported by the topographic aspects, the location of the spring (naciente) and the form of gravity-fed supply, so the effects caused in the zone will impact the entire system, up to the storage tank. * That after reviewing the current master plan and studies conducted by other interested parties in developing on the site, they consider that a pressure zone must be created to allow water to be supplied in the zone with standardized pressures, an action that must be carried out with hydraulic valves that regulate the water pressure downstream and sustain the pressure upstream; therefore, the pipe diameters must be improved in sectors where demand is almost equal to supply, and they emphasize that the Urban Development policy of the Municipality of Belén determines that the \"Water supply proposal for current and future users of the sector, proposed for a period of 10 years, after consulting the Master Plan of the Canton's Aqueduct and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system\"; therefore, they are fully technically available to review the proposal(s) to grant water availability for the project. * That the cost of the works must be adjusted to the proposal that the developer must present and that the investment is approximately $200,000.00 dollars, without this meaning that the amount could not increase after the study that the developer must conduct. To which it must be added that currently there are no plans or budget in the Municipality of Belén for the execution of works in the sector because, as already indicated, the priorities established in the current Master Plan are being addressed, and the drafting of a new Master Plan for the Belén aqueduct is under negotiation by the Municipal Mayor's Office” (folios 86 verso and 87 recto, by reference in Agreement Art. 29 of regular session 53-2009); 25.) That upon the Council taking cognizance of proceeding number 579-2009, concerning the request for water availability of Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 for the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project, in regular session number 18-2009, of March twenty-four, two thousand nine, in article 19 of Chapter IV, under the consideration that this deliberative body did not intervene in the approval process for the construction permit and regarding the construction control process of the work, and in application of the precautionary principle (principio precautorio) governing environmental matters, it ordered \"... not to resolve the requested action ..., until the Sala Constitucional rules on the merits regarding the compliance or not with ruling 2008-15657, since if that Court determines that said resolution has not been complied with, there could be responsibility in relation to the construction permit, and even its continuity over the protection area, especially considering that the topic related to this ruling is precisely a matter related to the issue of fundamental rights to health and to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment on the part of the users and inhabitants of the project in question\" (folios 184 to 203); 26.) That by official communication IMN-DA-0674-009, from the Water Department of MINAET, it was warned that while well AB-1571 is closed, the water resource cannot be exploited; and also that until the pertinent studies are approved, the water resource from that source cannot be opened or exploited (folio 12 verso, by reference in official communication DIGJ-145-145-2009- SENARA); 27.) That by official communication GE-276-09, of April seventeen, two thousand nine, the General Manager of Nombre2449 indicated: \"...\n\n**28.)** That by **official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May fourth, two thousand nine, the Head of the Water Department of MINAET –José Miguel Zeledón Calderón–**, based on the Hydrogeological Study to delineate the capture zone and protection area for well AB-1571, given the threat of contamination, the Map of Hydrogeological Vulnerability of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and official communications GR-276-09 from the General Manager of Nombre2449 and DIGH-145-2009 from the Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica of Nombre2449, which endorses and approves the protection perimeter of fifteen meters between well AB-1571 and the construction project, and which are conclusive that there is no risk of contamination of the source or the groundwater, either by bacteriological contamination, organic compounds, or any other type of contaminating agent, **considers that the indicated well can be opened and utilized, in accordance with resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET**, but subject to the following prior conditions: \"*Topographically delineate in the field the protection ordered as indicated by Geologist Roberto Ramírez of the Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica in his official communication DIGH-145-2009 and must install impermeable geotextile mesh in the internal street and parking areas in order to prevent any risk of spillage of contaminating substances on the driving surface that could eventually migrate towards the well, and install a concrete top slab over the well and above ground level to prevent the ingress of water by runoff, this in accordance with the recommendation issued in the known Hydrogeological Study endorsed by Nombre2449 and the Water Department of MINAET. The Water Department must be informed about this in order to verify its effective compliance,* **prior to the opening**\" (Emphasis is not from the original) (folios 13 verso to 15 verso); **29.)** That by note of **May fifth, two thousand nine,** addressed to Architect Luis Bogantes Miranda, of the Urban Development Unit of the Municipality of Belén, the representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, communicates that in accordance with official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009 from the Water Department of MINAET, municipal personnel are invited to the reopening of well AB-1571, to take place on the following May eighth, which translates into the resumption of works, starting on the 11th of the same month (folios 206 and 207);\n\n**30.)** That by **official communications ODU-022-2009 and DU-013-2009, from the Urban Development Unit of the Municipality of Belén of May eleventh and thirteenth, respectively**, in application of the precautionary principles, ruling number 2008-15657 of the Sala Constitucional, and the temporary and preventive closure of well AB-1571, the cessation of works was requested of the representative of Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, as there was no certainty regarding the water supply for the project that would house families in that location (folios 208 and 209 for the first and 204 and 205 for the second); **31.)** That by **official communication IMN-DA-1425-2009, of May 13, 2009,** engineers Andrés Phillips Ureña and José Manuel Zeledón Calderón of the Water Department of MINAET communicate to the developer that they made a technical visit to the site where delineation and protection around well AB-1571 was carried out, work that complied with what was ordered in the study by topographical engineer Alexander Arce Alfaro – since three layers of geotextile membrane were placed to waterproof the area – and consequently, also with official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May fourth, two thousand nine (folio 18 front); **32.)** That in **official communication UAA-045-2009, of June 15, 2009, Esteban Ávila Fuentes, of the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén**, communicated to the developer that it respects the technical criteria issued by Nombre2449 and the Water Department of MINAET in relation to the determination of the protected area of well AB-1571; finds no aspects that need to be clarified or added; and deems the hydrogeological report presented by hydrogeologist Mauricio Vásquez Fernández as submitted, and accepts its scope, insofar as other entities support it (folios 18 verso to 19 verso); **33.)** That by **resolution number 2946-2009 of the Urban Development Unit, architect Luis Bogantes Miranda** rejected the application for a construction permit for a part of the Eco-residencial San Vicente project area, based on Article 14 of the Reglamento para el otorgamiento de permisos de construcción del cantón de Belén, published in Gazette number 133, of July 11, 2006; official communication ODU-013-2009; the application of the precautionary principle; and the lack of a supply source of potable water for the project (folios 23 to 27, by reference from the challenge brief filed by the developer against this agreement); **34.)** That on **August eighteenth, two thousand nine**, the representative of Condominio La Rivera Belemita, Sociedad Nombre101960 filed ordinary remedies (reconsideration and appeal in subsidy against the previous decision, and requests: a.) to annul the order for total suspension of the works and immediately order the resumption of works; b.) to approve the water availability granted by the AYA, as it is the most sustainable option from an environmental perspective, to meet the water demand of the residential project; c.) to order that the application for construction permit number 2946-2009 be heard, related to the construction of a recreational part of the Eco-residencial San Vicente project (folios 23 to 27); **35.)** That in **resolution 1711-09, of three fifty-eight p.m. on August twentieth, two thousand nine**, in proceedings for an anticipatory precautionary measure, filed by Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, S.A. against the Municipality of Belén, processed in file 09-1541-1027-CA, **the Tribunal Procesal Contencioso Administrativo** ordered the Municipality to retrieve the administrative file, so that within five working days it could be placed in chronological order, with an indication of the elements that comprise it; rejected the precautionary measures requested (a.- that the effects of official communications DU-013-2009, of March thirteenth, two thousand nine, ODU-022-2009, of May eleventh, two thousand nine, ODU-024-2009, of May twentieth, two thousand nine, all from the Urban Development Unit of the municipality of Belén, be suspended, and that the immediate reopening of the Eco-Residencial San Vicente project be ordered; b.- the immediate resumption of the works, relying on well AB-1571 and its concession as a source of potable water supply for this residential project, c.- to enforce its right to access potable water in sufficient quantity, quality, and continuity); rejected the request for water and ordered the municipality to resolve procedure 579 within the following fifteen working days, on the understanding that said decision would not apply to towers 4 and 5 (minutes of the hearing, at folios 170 and 171); **36.) That in agreement Article 29 of the ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine**, issued by the Concejo in compliance with resolution 1711-09, of three fifty-eight p.m. on August twentieth, two thousand nine by the Tribunal Procesal Contencioso Administrativo, in proceedings for an anticipatory precautionary measure, processed in file 09-1541-1027-CA, procedure number 579-2009, filed by Nombre101962, representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, was resolved with the vote of three council members in favor and two against in the following terms: \"**FIRST:** Accept the proposal put forward by Council Members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso. **SECOND:** Do not grant water availability to the Proyecto Urbanístico Apartamentos San Vicente for the technical and legal reasons set forth. **THIRD:** Do not authorize the supply of water by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados for the technical and legal reasons set forth.\" An agreement that became final in the same act. (folios 80 to 97); **37.)** That said decision was notified to the representative of the developing company on September tenth, two thousand nine (certificate of notification, at folio 99); **38.)** That on **September twenty-first, two thousand nine**, the developer filed remedies of reconsideration and appeal in subsidy, in briefs addressed to the Concejo; in which it requested: 1.- that the Concejo immediately approve that the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados provide the potable water supply service for the residential project it is carrying out; and, 2.- that a procedure be carried out to determine civil, administrative, and criminal liability for abuse of authority and obstructionism of the council members who denied the fundamental right to potable water (folios 101 to 105); **39.)** That by **agreement of Chapter IV, Article 3 of the extraordinary session number 61-2009, of October fifteenth, two thousand nine, the Concejo** ordered: \"... *no Recurso de Revocatoria has been filed and there being no reasons to revoke the contested agreement, the Recurso de Apelación is admitted*\" (folios 126 to 130); **40.)** That by **official communication PRE-J-CO-2009-4195, of October seventh, two thousand nine, the Legal Directorate, Commercial Legal Advisory of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados** indicates to the developing company that \"... *it is not legally viable to include in the drafting of the availability letter UNSD-GAM-2262-2008-01628, the section that textually reads: 'All the foregoing provided that the municipality accepts that Nombre5630 provides the Service.', given that this Institute, ... is not subject to the authorization of a Municipality for the provision of a service; on the contrary, it has sufficient authority and power in matters of aqueducts and sewers for the granting of the public water service*.\" This criterion is shared by the Legal Directorate of the same institution in **official communication PRE-J-2009-4628, of October twenty-ninth, two thousand nine** (folios 144 and 146 to 150); and, **41.)** That in **a note of November fifth, two thousand nine, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados**, based on official communications PRE-J-CO-2009-4195 and SUB-G-SGAM-2009-792, responds to the developer's requirements for changes to the water availability, for the eventual provision of one hundred twenty-one subsidiary properties, as follows: \"*It is indeed possible to provide the potable water service as indicated in Informe Técnico DAM-2008-659 and Official Communication SB-2008-1272 from the Subgerencia General. Technically, the supply for the development in question is feasible, for which a 200mm (8\\\") branch line must be installed covering the front of the property, connecting existing provisions in the concrete box, in front of the development, of the Finca San Antonio and Potrerillos pipeline towards Puente de Mulas (in front of the community hall of San Vicente de Belén). The potable water supply can be provided through a single 100mm (4\\\") connection and a meter of adequate diameter. For this, the developer must set up the proper protective infrastructure for the meter. The condominium must have a cistern tank and internal pumping system, since the service pressure is limited. At least one 150 mm (6\\\") multi-valve hydrant must be installed, in front on a public street.*\" Furthermore, it is warned that said note does not imply the binding nature of the Municipality to approve this project (folio 145).\n\n**II.- UNPROVEN FACTS.-** For lack of support in the case file and not deriving from it, the following facts are held to be unproven: **1.)** That the Ministry of Environment and Energy has ordered the reopening of well AB-1571, which allows the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, to use the water resource; **2.)** That the amendment introduced to the regulatory plan of the Municipality of Belén in Article 5 of the ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteenth, two thousand seven, has been repealed; and, **3.)** That the Municipality of Belén has approved the initiation of the nullity or lesivity procedure for construction permit number 7604-2008, for the construction of the Condominio San Vicente.\n\n**III.- ON THE GRIEVANCES OF THE APPEAL.-** The representative of the developer Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, files an appeal against Article 29 of the ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, on the basis of the following considerations: **a.)** That the action of the municipal Administration violates the essential content of the public function, which is reflected through the norms and principles that make up the administrative order, such as those of efficiency and celerity, for having been rendered more than six months after the petition was filed, and in a defective manner, by not expressly indicating the remedies opposable against the contested agreement, the deadline to file them, and the body before which they are to be filed; which leaves it in open defenselessness, making it absolutely null and void, and consequently, it cannot produce legal effects; **b.)** That *totally and unjustifiably denying – for lack of assessment of the evidence and regulations – the water availability petition, infringes the human right of access to potable water derived from Articles 21, 45, and 50 of the Constitución Pública, the Ley General de Salud, the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente*, which the municipal body fails to apply, thus flouting legality and science and technology. On this matter, it alleges that given the lack of infrastructure of the municipal aqueduct and the high cost that its implementation would entail, the viable option is to allow supply with the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; that the users of the local aqueduct and the future inhabitants of the project are not put at risk, because the water service is guaranteed by the indicated entity, whose technical studies and reports demonstrate the feasibility of granting the service, as it has the adequate (constructive and operational) infrastructure and implies only a connection of five meters. Thus, the contested decision clearly conflicts with the regulations and jurisprudence, according to which the only reasons for rejecting the availability of potable water are: technical viability; that it is to the detriment of the quality of the service being provided; and that infrastructure does not exist; assumptions that are not met in relation to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, according to the statements of officials of the entity. It notes that both Nombre5630 and the Municipality of Belén determined - through a technical study - that it was completely viable to grant the service, due to the sufficient existence of the water resource to supply the residential project; and furthermore, its company anticipated necessary construction works for the rational and proportional use of the water resource within the internal network of the project, such as collection tanks, pumps, and supply and distribution pipes; **c.)** That the local entity thus abuses public authority, by not considering that the water supply is duly authorized by Nombre2449 and MINAET, both by self-supply, through a well, and by the public service provided by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; and, **d.)** That access to potable water is not a matter of local interest that should be regulated or administered according to the good knowledge and understanding of the Municipality, its Concejo, or legal advisors, but rather is governed by rules of public order, which to date the Concejo of the canton of Belén disregards, by not applying Article 33 of the Ley de Aguas and 1, 5, and 6 of the Ley General de Agua Potable, by virtue of which the public service of potable water supply must be provided efficiently, and empowers the governing body in the matter - Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados - to adopt the necessary measures to guarantee its access to citizens; and, **d.)** That the Concejo did not consider that since December two thousand eight, there has been a commitment to close well AB-1571 if a service of sufficient quality, quantity, and continuity is guaranteed; hence, if the well is closed - in accordance with the relevant technical-legal procedure and requirements - the required protection perimeter would cease to exist, because legally and materially no well would exist. Thus, it affirms that the Concejo Municipal makes \"*... it suppose that even if well AB-1571 is definitively closed, there would always be a protection perimeter that should be respected. Nothing would be more contrary to sound logic and the legal system, since, upon the well being closed, it would no longer legally or materially exist, therefore its respective protection perimeter disappears and, consequently, the project to be developed evidently could not cause environmental impacts on the aquifer.*\" In accordance with the above considerations, it accuses the contested agreement of being arbitrary and illegal, and requests that it be declared as such, so that the following pronouncements are made: \"*a) That the Concejo Municipal of the canton of Belén immediately recognize the use order for well AB-1571 issued by the Water Department of MINAET; b) That the Concejo Municipal of the canton of Belén immediately recognize that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados provides the potable water supply service to this residential project; and c) That the respective procedures and pertinent actions be carried out to determine whether or not in the case at hand there is civil, administrative, and potentially criminal liability (abuse of authority) of the Council Members who ordered the denial of the human right of access to potable water.*\" (Folios 102 front to 105 verso to 151 to 155).\n\n**IV.- ON THE ABSENCE OF NULLITY DUE TO THE ALLEGED DEFENSELESSNESS.-** In accordance with the provisions of Article 245 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, the notification of the decision must contain not only the full text of the act but also the indication of the remedies available against it, the body before which they must be filed, the body that will resolve them, and the deadline to file them. Indeed, despite the foregoing, the communication made by the Municipality of Belén of the contested agreement – Article 29 of the ordinary session 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, to the representative of the appellant company – Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima – did not comply with such guarantees, which are integral to due process. However, in the opinion of this Court, this omission does not result in the nullity of the agreement in question, since it did not prevent the interested party from filing the statutory remedies, both of reconsideration and appeal before the respective body (Concejo) and within the period provided in the legal system (five days), such that by virtue of the challenge it formulated, this instance hears the case, in the capacity of an improper two-phase hierarchic superior, in accordance with Articles 173 of the Constitución Política, 156 of the Código Municipal, and 190 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. Furthermore, it should be remembered that in matters of nullity of administrative acts, the **principles of conservation** govern: \"*In case of doubt regarding the existence or classification and importance of the defect, the consequence most favorable to the conservation of the act shall be preferred*\" (Article 168 of the Ley General de Administración Pública that provides); and that of **transcendence**, by virtue of which, **there is no nullity without prejudice**, since the declaration of nullity constitutes a sanction to restore the violated right and repair the damage caused.\n\nIn this case, as has been indicated, the nullity sought in and of itself does not represent any procedural advantage for the appellant company, since it became evident that no defenselessness has occurred that would have prevented it from exercising the corresponding actions to verify the legality control of the challenged decision.\n\n**V.- ON THE CONTENT OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.-** The municipal agreement challenged in this matter—Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September 8, two thousand nine—by a vote of three council members in favor and two against, ordered the acceptance of the proposal put forward by council members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso, to the effect of ***denying in all its aspects the request for water availability (disponibilidad de agua) made by the legal representative of the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad AnónimO, both with respect to the connection to the municipal aqueduct and the authorization for the service to be provided by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados.***  In this regard, it warns that the action of the municipal Administration, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is capable of generating administrative and criminal liability—both under the Law Against Corruption and environmental regulations—for the officials involved, a permit having been granted in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as misuse of power (desviación de poder). The serious infractions it considered are the following:\n\n**a.)** The impossibility of deriving any legal effect from construction permit number 7604, pursuant to the provisions of numerals 166, 169, and 170 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, given the evident seriousness and the large number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which \"***clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to the absence of valid constitutive elements, meaning its execution would entail the civil liability of the Administration (i.e., the municipality as such), and civil, administrative, and potentially criminal liability of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.***\" Such infractions are the following:\n\n**1.-** The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipalidad de Belén; since neither the current Plan Maestro nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplate the supply of water for new urban development projects, which does not guarantee its supply; whereby, a construction permit was approved that does not meet all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in infraction of the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for in accordance with the urban planning regulations of the canton, in contravention of the Urban Growth Policy (Política de Crecimiento Urbano) and the respective regulation on Minimum Requirements for the Assessment of Water Availability for Housing Developments or Stages Thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of June 24 and July 28, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n**2.-** The construction permit is granted by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Council, as required by the urban regulations of the canton regarding housing projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Development Unit, with the approval of an official  not legitimized from the Technical Operational and Urban Development Area, not being affiliated with the respective Professional Association and not being the Department Coordinator;\n\n**3.-** Knowingly,  authorization is given to install part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) within the protection area of well AB-1571;  thus disregarding the technical criteria, opinions, and advisory judgments of the Nombre2449 issued in official letters ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07, and GE-049-09 related to the duty to preserve the protection area of well AB-1571, as follows from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, of eleven hours and forty-five minutes on October 17, two thousand eight;\n\n**4.-**  The permit was granted under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined term; which, besides being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipalidad de Belén - in ***official letter ASP-327-2007-***;\n\n**5.-** The permit was granted without attending to technical criteria that recommended another decision: namely, the ***Official Letter ASP-327-2007 from the Directorate of the Public Service Area of the Municipalidad de Belén*** -Luis Carlos Cháves-, which pointed out that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the allocated flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen authorized hours of pumping; which makes it evident that there is a deficit in the water allocation (water shortage); ***official letter UA-204-2007 from the Environmental Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén*** which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, streets, and parking lots were within the well's protection zone; ***official letter UO 276-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén***, that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the need for accessibility that could be generated on the road; ***official letter O-023-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipalidad de Belén***, regarding the road impact on the access route to the process known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of rainwater runoff due to the lack of a collector, channeling, and storm drainage discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the Santa Ana radial highway; drainage system, road width.\n\n**6.-** Due process was not followed in its granting, as the rejection reports from the Environmental Unit (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008, and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for correction.\n\n**b.)** That ***the Municipalities are in charge of the full administration of the potable water supply systems that fall under their competence***; exclusive competence that derives from the following regulations: 169 of the Constitución Política; 4 and 113 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública; 58 subsection 6) of the Ley de Planificación Urbana; 3 and 4  subsection c) of the Código Municipal; the Ley de Aguas, 5 of the Ley General de Agua Potable, number 1634, of nineteen fifty-three, the Ley General de Salud; the Reglamento para la calidad de Agua Potable, 4, 5, and 11 of the Reglamento para la Operación y Administración del Acueducto Municipal, and the Policies on minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, to be accounted for in urbanizaciones, condominium affiliates, and residential complexes, issued by the Belén corporation; and that finds broad support in the jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional. It warns that to resolve the required availability, an integral assessment must be made in accordance with the Urban Growth Policy of the local entity and the regulations for the municipal aqueduct; and in this sense, \"***In no case may water supply from the municipal aqueduct be authorized, as a main or subsidiary source, minimizing or sacrificing the supply to the rest of the surrounding population. The urban development cost of the project must not be borne by the majority, but by the developer himself, who must provide the project from its inception with reliable and sustainable sources***\". Thus, the control of the availability of the water resource it administers as a public service within its sphere of competence is exercised according to its plans and budgets, given that currently there are neither plans nor a budget in the municipality for the execution of works required to supply the sector where the Condominios San Vicente project is located, as priorities are being addressed for real needs established in the current Plan Maestro, according to density and coverage criteria (population margin and housing growth of the canton) contained in the Plan Regulador and urban regulations of its jurisdiction; and given that the Mayor's Office is negotiating the creation of a new Plan Maestro for the aqueduct. The foregoing implies that the water availability management is assessed in accordance with the Urban Growth Policy of the Municipalidad de Belén and the regulations of the municipal aqueduct.\n\n**c.)** That the Council would be wrong to adopt agreements that are not aimed at protecting the sphere of interests of the people of Belén, as the origin of its own existence, its authority, and ultimately its autonomy, instituted by the constituent power precisely to guarantee that independence of action for the protection of such local interests. Therefore, in its view, autonomy in the administration of potable water within the Cantón de Belén must be maintained, considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meets the necessary conditions for human consumption for the entire population of Belén and some adjacent sectors.\n\n**d.)** That it is obvious this is a large-scale urban development project, which requires potable water service, efficiently, permanently, continuously, sustainably, without interruptions, alterations, or any diminution; which, from the beginning, was not sustained solely by the exploitation of the concession for well AB-1561. This situation demonstrates the vulnerability of the development, which lacks an alternative source of potable water supply —contingency plan—, in the event of equipment failure or well collapse. In this regard, it considers that water availability is a ***prerequisite*** that is processed before the construction permit is handled, and which does not generate any right to the construction permit; availability that, in any case,  is not granted partially, as this calls into question the  fundamental right to health (articles 21 of the Constitución Política and 16 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública) of potential buyers.\n\n**V.- ON MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE REGARDING URBAN PLANNING OF THE CANTON. NORMATIVE REGULATION FROM WHICH IT DERIVES.-** ***Urban planning regulation has traditionally been entrusted, and without any discussion, to the municipalities***, insofar as it has been considered that\n\n\"(...) ***urban planning competence has been a genuine municipal competence, perhaps the foremost among all***\" (GARCÍA DE ENTERRÍA, Eduardo and PAREJO ALFONSO, Luciano, Lecciones de Derecho Urbanístico. Editorial Civitas, Madrid, Spain, S.N.E., 1981. p. 116.);\n\nso it has been configured as a tradition of Urban Planning Law, especially in those moments when its content has been expressed through \"***construction and urban police ordinances***\", under the competence of local governments, on the understanding that public urban planning competence is characteristic of the city, and consequently, of the municipalities.  Indeed, urbanism initially was an exclusively municipal competence. Subsequently, as it ceased to be a function specific to the urban sphere and sought to encompass the planning of the entire territory, other higher Administrations became responsible for it, thus modifying the competence level for urban planning matters, by including other instances, in our legal system, such as the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo —a decentralized entity—, and the Ministries of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications, with the Secretaría Técnica Ambiental (a deconcentrated body) and the Ministerio de Planificación Nacional. But with respect strictly to local urban planning, it is worth remembering that it is in the Ley de Construcciones, approved by Decreto-Ley number 833, of November 4, nineteen forty-nine —a pre-constitutional norm, having been enacted by the de facto Government of the Founding Junta of the Second Republic, led by José Figueres Ferrer—, where it is established that ***the Municipalities are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public thoroughfares and in the buildings and constructions erected on lands thereof***, without prejudice to the powers that the laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies (Article 1), as well as that no building may be erected in the country that contravenes its provisions (Article 74). And despite the fact that our current Constitución Política —of November 7, nineteen forty-nine— is somewhat sparing in the definition of the proper and essential functions of the municipalities, constitutional jurisprudence —specifically in rulings number 5097-93, 5303-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, and 2003-3656— has interpreted that based on the provisions of its Articles 169 and the first paragraph of Article 170, ***primary ownership in matters of local urban planning corresponds to the municipalities, to the exclusion of any other public entity***. In this sense, in the Código Municipal, number 4574, of May 4, nineteen seventy, —in force until nineteen ninety-eight—, the matter of urbanism was expressly recognized as a municipal competence, in its Article 4. In accordance with the previous provision, and ***as a derivative of the constitutional norms, Articles 15 and 19 of the Ley de Planificación Urbana, number 4240, of November 15, nineteen sixty-eight, are concordant***, insofar as they literally provide:\n\n\"***Article 15.-*** *Pursuant to the precept of Article 169 of the Constitución Política,* ***the competence and authority of municipal governments to plan and control urban development, within the limits of their jurisdictional territory, is recognized***. *Consequently,* ***each of them shall provide what is appropriate to implement a Plan Regulador, and the related urban development regulations,*** *in the areas where they must govern, without prejudice to extending all or some of their effects to other sectors, where qualified reasons prevail for establishing a specific controlling regime.*\" (The highlighting is not from the original.)\n\n\"***Article 19.-*** ***Each Municipalidad shall issue and promulgate the procedural rules necessary for the due observance of the Plan Regulador and for the protection of the interests of the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the community***.\" (The highlighting is not from the original.)\n\n**VI.- ON MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE IN VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH URBAN PLANNING REGULATIONS.-**  The scope of municipal competence in local urban planning is not limited solely to the promulgation of the respective regulations —planes reguladores and related regulations—, but also extends to the control it exercises over compliance with local urban planning regulations. In this sense, as this Court has pointed out in various rulings (among them, numbers 175-2009, of fifteen hours forty minutes, and 176-2009, of fifteen hours fifty minutes, both of January 30, two thousand nine),  \"***local governments must act in a timely manner in the exercise of police power (poder de policía), using the powers that the legal system has granted them to achieve their objectives***\" (the underlining is not from the original); which, in the matter of urbanism, is realized in the control of urbanization and subdivision (fraccionamiento) processes, and which is concretely specified in Article 1 of the Ley de Construcciones, insofar as it literally provides:\n\n\"*The Municipalidades of the Republic are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public thoroughfares, in buildings and constructions erected on lands thereof, without prejudice to the powers that laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies.*\"\n\n\"***Police power (poder de policía)***\" is the competence recognized to the Administration, so that, based on a law, it may regulate and govern an activity, in order to ensure ***public order, public health, tranquility, the safety of persons, as well as the moral, political, and economic organization of society***; an attribution by virtue of which the imposition of restrictions on the enjoyment of fundamental rights is reasonable, insofar as its justification lies precisely in the consideration that fundamental rights are limited by those of other persons, since they must coexist with each and every one of the other fundamental rights. Thereby, the measures that the State adopts for the purpose of protecting safety, health, and tranquility, are of public social interest, which are manifested through police power, understood as the regulatory faculty over the enjoyment of rights and the fulfillment of constitutional duties. (In this sense, rulings number 401-91, of fourteen hours on February 20, and 619-91, of fourteen hours forty-five minutes on March 22, both resolutions of nineteen ninety-one, and 2003-2864, of fifteen hours twenty minutes on April 9, two thousand three, of the Sala Constitucional, can be consulted.)\n\n**VII.- ON THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUBDIVISION (FRACCIONAMIENTO) AND URBANIZATION PROCESSES.-** Due to the importance derived from the legal implications entailed by subdivision and urbanization processes, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of both concepts. Thus,\n\n\"***The subdivision (fraccionamiento)*** *, is the division of a property with the purpose of introducing it into the commerce of men, which presupposes, as each local government must verify when granting the corresponding approval, that it conforms, in terms of size and characteristics, to the urban planning provisions in force, especially to the Plan Regulador of the local land —if one exists— as well as to development regulations and other special laws of public order. The subdivision that the law calls* ***“simple”*** *, does not include an urban habilitation process for the use and enjoyment of the parcels resulting from that subdivision, and this is so because the legislator assumes that in these cases, the properties already have access routes and green areas resulting from a previous urban development. It is for this reason that Article 40 of the Ley de Planificación Urbana provides:*\n\n\"*(…) Likewise, excludes from the obligation to cede areas for parks and community facilities* ***simple subdivisions of parcels*** *in* ***previously*** *urbanized* ***areas*** *…\" (the emphasis is not from the original).*\n\n*When a specific area is previously urbanized, the purchasers of the subdivided parcels have access to properties, parks, and community facilities, and it should not be overlooked that this is part of their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (Article 50 of the Constitution). For this reason —it is reiterated— the legislator has not deemed it necessary to require additional land allocations for reasons of social interest in the case of a “simple” subdivision with prior urban development. The approval for simple subdivisions, due to their limited significance, is usually granted to an official (e.g.*\n\nMunicipal Engineer) different from the one entrusted with “complex” approvals (e.g., Municipal Council, urban planning commissions, etc.), with the former lacking the competence to authorize a different approval; this in the event that urban planning regulations make such a distinction. However, the subdivision that forms part of the urbanization process and that entails, for the first time, the enabling of the parcels for urban purposes, must be provided with streets, green areas, and parks, as well as the services necessary for their use and enjoyment. In this second scenario, we are dealing with a complex process of subdivision and urbanization that introduces limitations on private property on urban planning grounds (Article 22 of the Urban Planning Law), which the Constitutional Court has indicated are fully in accordance with Constitutional Law (Voto N° 5097-93 of 10:24 hrs on October 15, 1993). The residential or subdivision project that we will call “complex” is provided for in numeral 40 of the Urban Planning Law, which, in relevant part, provides:\n\n“Every subdivider of land (…) and every developer shall cede free of charge for public use both the areas designated for roads and those corresponding to parks and community facilities; the amount to be set aside for the latter two concepts shall be determined in the respective regulation, by establishing percentages of the total area to be subdivided or urbanized, which may fluctuate between five percent and twenty percent, depending on the average size of the lots, the intended use of the land, and the applicable rules. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sum of the land to be ceded for public roads, parks, and community facilities shall not exceed forty-five percent of the total area of the land to be subdivided or urbanized. (…)\nThe developer’s obligation to provide the subdivided parcels with access points, green zones, parks, and public roads compels them to comply with urban provisions that establish minimum standards regarding space, quality, quantity, and other requirements demanded by law and development regulations for those areas. The local government must exercise its police power in a timely manner, guaranteeing to the residents of the canton that the works will be carried out in the manner that urban planning regulations indicate and with the conditions those regulations stipulate. The mere fact that a parceling requires works to enable access and provide various services to some of those parcels is sufficient to maintain that a “simple subdivision” does not exist, but rather a residential project that must, consequently, comply with all the indicated requirements. Urban residential projects can only enable access to the parcels through public roads that must have the dimensions and requirements of the General Law of Public Roads and the Regulation for the National Control of Subdivisions and Urbanizations, in the absence—in the latter case—of concrete provisions in local regulations. No municipal body has the competence to authorize a project in which the enabling of parcels is done through “cobblestone agricultural easements (servidumbres agrícolas adoquinadas)”, “agricultural easements (servidumbres agrícolas)”, or “simple easements (simples servidumbres)”, since these are figures typical of Private Law and not of the residential urban regime governed by the rules and principles of Public Law.\" (Resolutions number 175-2009 and 176-2009, cited above.)\n\nIn accordance with this, the control that the local government—in this case, the responsibility of the deliberative body (Council)—must verify is of special interest when it comes to the approval of construction permits for urbanizations (urbanizaciones), since it must corroborate that it fully complies with the requirements of the law, namely the provision of public roads, green and community areas, and especially—of relevance for resolving this matter—the enabling and implementation, at the developer's expense, of public services, such as electricity, telephony, potable water, aqueducts, and sewerage, the latter in case the infrastructure for it exists. Consequently, the failure of urban projects to conform to the requirements established in the urban legal order obligates—per se—the rejection of the proceedings initiated, in application of the principle of legality, which binds the entire state apparatus, of which the municipalities form a part. In this regard, it is relevant to remember that the body of legality is composed not only of written sources, starting from the Political Constitution, not only regarding its text, but also the values and principles emanating from it, international treaties, with special significance given to those related to fundamental rights, laws, and regulatory provisions, as mandated by numeral 6 of the General Law of Public Administration; but also, and in particular, the unequivocal rules of science and technique, as they also constitute a delimiting parameter of administrative discretion, in accordance with Article 16 of the cited legal body, as it obligates the Administration to ensure its actions are duly motivated by the theoretical knowledge acquired from the different methodologies and disciplines of science and technique, when the matter so warrants—as in the case of urban planning matters—, so that the will of public institutions does not depend on their free will (or choice), but on the objective evaluations obtained in accordance with the technical rules applicable to the case. In this sense, the objectivity of technical criteria is highlighted, since \"... if a technique is scientific and, therefore, by definition, certain, objective, universal, subject to uniform rules that do not depend on the personal appreciation of an individual subject, it is obvious that one cannot speak in this regard of 'complete discretion,' but rather, on the contrary, one must speak of little less than 'regulation' (subjection to rules, in the case of technique)\" (MARTÍN GONZÁLEZ, M., in his work El grado de determinación legal de los conceptos jurídicos. RAP, number 54, 1967, p. 239), cited by DESDENTADO DAROCA, Eva. Los problemas del control judicial de la discrecionalidad técnica. (Un estudio crítico de la jurisprudencia. Editorial Civitas, S. A. Madrid. Spain. 1997. p. 43.) In agreement, Eduardo ORTIZ ORTIZ stated before the Legislative Commission that discussed the draft law of the General Law of Public Administration to include the unequivocal rules of science and technique as a parameter of administrative discretion, considering that \"... in cases where the Administration acts in technical matters that have a clear and precise meaning in the case, the technical rules will be, in this case, like laws; the violation of the technical aspects of an administrative act of a public service will naturally be an illegality exactly as if a legal precept were being violated.\" (QUIRÓS CORONADO, Roberto. Ley General de Administración Pública, Concordada y Anotada con el Debate Legislativo y la Jurisprudencia Constitucional. Editorial Aselex, S. A. San José, Costa Rica. 1996. p. 99.)\n\nVII.- ON THE REASONING (MOTIVACIÓN) AS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE FORMAL ACTION OF THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.- Given that one of the objections raised in this appeal is precisely the lack of reasoning (motivación) of the challenged agreement, precisely because it is supported neither by the evidence provided in the case file nor by the regulations governing the matter, it is important to make a brief reflection on this point, based on the doctrine and regulations governing it. The existence and validity of every administrative act depends on the concurrence of several essential elements, imposed by the legal system, which, for better understanding, can be classified as material, relating to the subjective elements (competence, standing, and investiture), objective elements (purpose, content, and grounds – Articles 131, 132, and 133 of the General Law of Public Administration and 49 of the Political Constitution), and formal elements, comprising the form in which the act is adopted, that is, the means of expression or manifestation (instrumentation), the reasoning (motivación) or statement of grounds (Article 136 of the cited General Law), and the procedure followed for its adoption (Articles 214 and 308 of the General Law of Public Administration and 39 and 41 of the Constitution). The reasoning (motivación) consists of\n\n\"... a declaration of the factual and legal circumstances that have led the respective public administration to issue or emanate the administrative act. The reasoning (motivación) is the formal expression of the grounds and, normally, in any administrative resolution, it is contained in what are called 'recitals (considerandos)' – the reasoning part. The reasoning (motivación), by consisting of an enunciation of the facts and the legal basis that the public administration took into account to issue its decision or will, constitutes a means of proof of its intentionality and an indispensable guideline for interpreting and applying the respective administrative act.\" (JINESTA LOBO, Ernesto. Tratado de Derecho Administrativo. Volume I. (Parte General). Biblioteca Jurídica Dike. First edition. Medellín, Colombia. 2002. p. 388.)\n\nThus, the reasoning (motivación) must determine the application of a concept to the specific factual circumstances in question (according to the development of Spanish jurisprudence, specifically in the judgment of May 18, 1991, RA 4120, accepting the recital of the appealed decision, which cites SSTS of September 23, 1969, RA 6078, and October 7, 1970, RA 4251, cited by the author Marcos M. Nombre60531, in his work La motivación del acto administrativo. (Editorial Tecnos, S. A. Madrid. 1993, page 190); that is, it involves a concrete decision that links the facts with the normative support; such that when there is a brief allusion to general rules and non-specific facts, it can be concluded that there is an insufficient contribution of justification, insofar as it is not possible to deduce from them the elements assessed by the governmental authority to make the decision, which acquires the greatest significance when dealing with acts that limit or restrict subjective rights or those in which a sanction is imposed on the administered party. By its content, it constitutes a determining factor of due process and the right of defense, which has full application in the administrative sphere, as indicated by the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) starting from judgment 15-90, of sixteen hours forty-five minutes on the fifth of January, nineteen ninety, when enunciating the minimum elements of this constitutional principle\n\n\"(...) a) Notification to the interested party of the nature and purposes of the procedure; b) right to be heard, and the opportunity for the interested party to present arguments and produce the evidence they deem pertinent; c) opportunity for the administered party to prepare their allegation, which necessarily includes access to information and administrative records linked to the matter in question; d) adequate notification of the decision issued by the administration and of the grounds on which it is based; and e) right of the interested party to appeal the decision issued ...\" (Highlighting is not from the original.)\n\nIt is for this reason that, pursuant to Article 136 of the General Law of Public Administration, the Administration is required to provide reasoning (motivación) for acts that impose obligations; limit, suppress, or deny subjective rights; resolve appeals; those issued in departure from the criterion followed in preceding actions or from the opinion of advisory bodies; those that maintain the execution of an act that is challenged; those of a general normative nature (regulations); and those that are discretionary and of a general nature. Thus, if there is no reasoning (motivación), a formal defect is incurred that seriously affects the act, vitiating it with absolute nullity.\n\nVIII.- ON THE ANALYSIS OF THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.- It is in light of the foregoing considerations that the legality control of the challenged municipal agreement will be exercised, with respect to its content, regarding the scope of competence of the municipal government, as has been requested. This Tribunal considers that the challenged municipal agreement—Article 29 of ordinary session 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, of the Municipality of Belén—conforms to the legal order. To this effect, the following reflections must be made.\n\nFirst: It was issued precisely in exercise of the functions that the legal order—constitutional and legal—has delegated to municipal governments, concerning not only local urban planning but particularly the control (police power) in that area. And it is issued on the occasion of a procedure concerning the availability of potable water for a previously approved urban project. As indicated previously, the urban planning authority exercised by municipalities is not restricted to issuing the regulations for the matter within their canton, but extends to the verification, case by case, according to the requests and procedures of the residents and business owners, of compliance with that regulation; an area in which the issue of water availability is obviously included; which it is the exclusive purview of the local government to determine, as stated, pursuant to the constitutional competence assigned to these corporations under numeral 169, and legally in the Urban Planning Law (Articles 32 to 41) and the Construction Law (Articles 1 and 74, cited above), as it is undoubtedly a local service; as emphatically considered by the Constitutional Chamber in various pronouncements. Indeed, in judgment number 6706-93, of fifteen hours twenty-one minutes on the following December twenty-first, it indicated:\n\n\"II).- This Chamber considers that the authority attributed to local governments to plan urban development within the limits of their territory does integrate the constitutional concept of «interests and local services» referred to in Article 169 of the Constitution, a competence that was recognized by the Urban Planning Law (# 4240 of November 15, 1968, amended by Laws # 6575 of April 27, 1981 and # 6595 of August 6 of that same year), specifically in Articles 15 and 19 challenged here, (...)\nIII).- (...) Urban planning, that is, the elaboration and implementation of regulatory plans, is a function inherent to municipalities to the exclusion of any other public entity, except as stated regarding the general steering authorities attributed to the Ministry of Planning and the Urban Planning Directorate.-\"\n\nFinally, in judgment number 4205-96, of fourteen hours thirty-three minutes on August twentieth, nineteen ninety-six, it authorized the existence of other regulations distinct from those of the municipalities—by such, meaning those of the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism (INVU)—, but conditioned on two fundamental assumptions: that no municipal regulation on the matter existed, and that the Municipality makes that regulation its own through an express municipal agreement:\n\n\"(...) the thesis is reiterated that the competence for urban planning regulation remains the exclusive attribution of municipal governments, and only exceptionally and residually, in the absence of regulation issued for that purpose by the municipalities, is INVU assigned the task of proposing regulatory plans, but on the condition that they are previously approved by the local entity; so that the provisions issued by this autonomous institution regarding urban planning must always be considered transitory, and in default of the use of municipal competencies\"\n\nIn accordance with this, it can be concluded that municipal competence in the field of local urban planning is exclusive, and that of national bodies—which is concurrent—is supplementary, in order to guarantee municipal autonomy. For these reasons, it cannot be claimed that another public agency, as in this case, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), can intervene in decisions proper to the urban planning of a specific canton, such as the determination of whether or not water availability exists for a specific urbanization (urbanización) project, and even less so when alleging—as is done—a national competence regarding the function of direction and intervention in the face of problems of supplying this liquid. Note that this is the prior construction phase of an urban project, a phase in which the preventive and supervisory action of the municipality is absolutely legitimate; so that the infringement of the fundamental right to water supply cannot be alleged, as is claimed in this case, which, it is worth clarifying, has as its sole rights-holders the users themselves and not the entrepreneurs or developers of urban projects; hence, the petition being analyzed is circumscribed within the scope of the exercise of the freedom of enterprise and the right to build, in accordance with the permits and actions emanating from the local entity itself. It is worth reiterating that the urban control function incumbent on municipalities is essential to guarantee the safety and respect for the fundamental rights of the residents and future inhabitants of the canton.\n\nSecond: It is also not legitimate to claim to defend the supremacy of the Costa Rican Institute in the provision of the public water service over local governments, based on a law nationalizing the same, as the appellant alleges, based on a pronouncement from the Legal Department of the indicated autonomous institution.\n\nBoth this Court (of legality) and the Constitutional Court have defended the competence assigned to municipalities with respect to matters that are \"eminently\" **local**, that is, the \"administration of local services and interests\" pursuant to the mandate of Article 169 of the Political Constitution itself, under the following considerations:\n\n\"[...] since the constituent power included an undefined legal concept in Article 169, by stating that the Municipality of each canton is responsible for administering '**local**' services and interests, it is necessary, to specify this concept, to be in contact with the reality to which it is intended, so that the only way to define or distinguish what is local from what is not, is through a legal text, meaning that it is the law that must do so, or failing that, and as the case may be, it must be done through the jurisprudential interpretation that jurisdictional control makes of those contents. And it can be said that the use of undefined concepts by the Constitution means, above all, a mandate directed to the Judge so that he - not the legislator - determines them, as the best national doctrine on the subject rightly affirms. [...], **the local has such a connotation that defining its scope by the legislator or the judge must lead to maintaining the integrity of local interests and services, so that the legislator could not even enact regulations that tend to dismember the Municipality (territorial element), without doing so by observing the procedures previously established in the Political Constitution; nor enact one that places its inhabitants (population) in clear conditions of inferiority in relation to the rest of the country; nor one that affects the very essence of the local (government), so as to turn the Corporation into a simple empty container from which only the nomination subsists, but deactivating the entire regime as it was conceived by the National Constituent Assembly**. In another turn, there will be tasks that by their nature are municipal - local - and cannot be removed from that sphere of competence to turn them into national services or interests, because doing so would imply dismantling the Municipality, or better yet, emptying it of constitutional content, and therefore, it is not possible to dictate in advance the insurmountable limits of the local, but rather, to unravel what does or does not correspond to the communal government, it must be extracted from the examination made in each specific case [...] Consequently, not only by express legal norm (the Municipal Code, the Ley de Licores), but, and this is the most important, **by express constitutional content (Article 169), no functions of any public entity that dispute their primacy with the municipalities can subsist, when it comes to matters that integrate the local.**\" (Underlining is not from the original.) (Judgment number 6469-97, at sixteen hours twenty minutes on October eighth, nineteen ninety-seven, reiterated in judgment number 5445-99, at fourteen hours thirty minutes on July fourteenth, nineteen ninety-nine.)\n\nThis jurisdictional assignment is developed in the secondary (legal) regulations, specifically in Articles 13 subsection b), 17 subsections a), 68, and 74 of the Municipal Code, which empower the Municipal Council to regulate the provision of municipal services, the Mayor to organize and administer them, and, consequently, the establishment of municipal tax rates (tasas). In this regard, in the aforementioned constitutional ruling 5445-99, the Constitutional Court warned:\n\n\"[...] by express will of our Fundamental Charter, a specific competence is assigned to local governments, an attribution that is also **exclusive to them; that is, it is an original competence of the municipality** and only through a nationalization or regionalization law can it be displaced, totally or partially. In this order of ideas, the institutional problem must not be set aside, as it must be determined, for the transfer in question to proceed, whether or not the municipality has the real and technical capacity to fulfill the public services under its purview, preferring the transfer of the service to institutions of a regional or national character; and likewise, when the problem overflows the territorial circumscription to which local governments are subject, that competence may be transferred to the corresponding national or regional State institutions; in both cases, it is insisted, a nationalization or regionalization law is required, as the case may be.\"\n\nIn light of the foregoing considerations, the assertion made by the legal advisor of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), that the potable water service was nationalized, such that it was transferred to that institution, leaving a residual competence to the municipalities, is neither legitimate nor true. Quite the contrary, as indicated, the original or primary competence in the provision of local services, among which the supply of potable water is included, belongs to the local corporations, according to the constitutional mandate, and specifically, pursuant to the provisions of Article 5 of the Ley de Agua Potable, number 1634, of September eighteenth, nineteen fifty-three, which literally states:\n\n\"The Municipalities shall be in charge of the full administration of the potable water supply systems under their competence\";\n\nand it is in numeral 2 subsection g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), number 2726, of April fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one and its reforms, that the competence to administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems throughout the country was assigned, but in the case of those in the hands of the municipalities, only if the provision of service is deficient. This conclusion is reached after meticulously reviewing the legislative record of the indicated law (number 2726), since, in effect, the initial intention of the legislators of the time was to **entirely remove the supply of potable water in the country from the local sphere, endorsing this task to a technical and specialized body**, but the reaction of the municipal governments of that date (San José, La Unión, Jiménez, Buenos Aires, Turrialba, Siquirres, Escazú, Osa, Limón, Pacayas, Golfito, Santa Cruz, Mora, Heredia, Desamparados, Santo Domingo de Heredia, Bagaces, Curridabat, Juan Viñas, Alajuelita, Pérez Zeledón, Tres Ríos, Tarrazú, El Guarco, Poás, Goicoechea, Grecia, Pococí, San Mateo, San Ramón, Alvarado, Puerto Cortés, San Pedro de Poás, at folios 72 to 107, 179, 180, 113, 193 to 204, 215 to 213, 244 to 255, 298, 299, 302 to 305, 342, 367, 373, 400 and 501), was not long in coming, who strongly opposed the project in question, considering not only the municipal autonomy, conferred by constitutional mandate (170), to be tarnished, but also the scope of competence (169) and the municipal finances, product of the provision of the service; to such an extent that it was alleged:\n\n\"Regarding the discussion of the bill that creates the Dirección de Aguas y Alcantarillados, it is necessary to clarify concepts--\n\nIt is not necessary to split hairs to conclude that if the Municipalities of the Country (sic) are stripped of the attribution they currently have to administer water and sewer services, they are being deprived of such important attributions that it would be debatable whether the activities that would thereafter remain under their purview would merit their subsistence.\n\nInsisting that the Municipalities are not harmed by taking away the administration of such important services is to deny the reality of the facts.\n\nArticle 169 of the Political Constitution is categorical in establishing that the administration of local services in each canton shall be in charge of the Municipal Government. On the other hand, the current legislation points to the aforementioned water supply services as municipal. Where will the municipal autonomy that Article 170 of the Constitution enshrines be, if through laws, non-local organisms are created for the attention of the services in the care of the municipalities? Will this not be a direct way to end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, circumventing what the aforementioned Article 169 establishes, ignoring 170, and mocking the popular election, since the elected Regidores will be left to administer local interests and services, without functions or attributions?\n\nNo one can deny that if the bill under study becomes a law of the Republic, in Costa Rica the first step will have been taken to end the Municipal Regime.-\n\nIf what is desired is to technify, centralize, or delegate the provision of public services, through the creation of a special organism and not, as seems to be inferred from the aforementioned project, to end the municipalities by leaving them no important services to administer, the law provides the way.-\n\nArticle 27 of the Ley de Organización Municipal No. 131 of November 9, 1909, amended by Law No. 1401 of December 6, 1951, foresees the case that to better provide a communal service, the creation of a delegated organism of the Municipalities may be necessary, *without harming the statute of municipal autonomy*. Said article in its relevant part reads:\n\n'Article 27.- The administration of the interests and services of the cantonal communities corresponds to the Municipalities in their power of autonomous municipal governments ...'\n\nThe statute of municipal autonomy does not prevent, however, two or more Municipalities from concluding agreements, covenants, or provincial or regional unions, when, for general interest, administrative economy, or better common service, they consider it useful and necessary to technify, centralize, or delegate the execution of certain works or PUBLIC SERVICES. Such agreements, covenants, or unions require, for their legal perfection, special legislative approval when they imply a variation of the administrative territorial division or the CREATION OF A DELEGATED ORGANISM INDEPENDENT OF THE DELEGATORS. The delegated entity, corporation, or establishment must always preserve its essentially local or municipal character.\n\nIf following what the cited article provides can achieve better service, why the insistence on approving a project that will end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, and that will be enacted against the will of the people's representatives in the cantons?\" (Note from the Municipality of San José, dated January twelfth, nineteen sixty, to the Legislative Assembly, at folios 298 and 299. The underlining is from the original.)\n\nIt is illustrative that the Asociación Democrática de Juntas Progresistas, expressed its agreement with the project, provided that the organism created was \"an organism of direction and technical coordination, exclusively\" (folio 397), to respect the autonomy and competence of the municipalities, \"when it should be everyone's concern to strengthen it\" (folios 397, 402 and 403). A consequence of the conflict raised is the regulation finally approved, which created the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillado, not as the body in charge of \"operating, directing, planning, designing, constructing, maintaining, setting and resolving everything related to the supply of potable water for domiciliary, industrial, and any other nature uses to all the inhabitants of the Republic\", as Article 1 of the bill advocated; but rather **with a directive competence in this matter**, as deduced from the current text of the cited numeral, \"In order to direct, set policies, establish and apply standards and promote the planning, financing and development and to resolve everything related to the supply of potable water and collection and evacuation of black water, liquid industrial waste, as well as the normative aspect of storm sewer systems in urban areas, for the entire national territory, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is created, as an autonomous institution of the State.\" Thus, the competence that the law of its creation -indicated above-, and its reforms, assigns to the indicated entity, which is to act as the governing body in water matters at the national level, must not be confused; this translates into the obligation to maintain strict control over the operation system of rural and municipal aqueducts, so that they adjust to the guidelines emanating from the institute, to guarantee the quality of the service, as it involves public health; whence, **only by way of exception**, in the cases where that service is not adequately provided, under conditions of quality, quantity, and efficient development, or adequate social economic conditions do not exist for its administration under the responsibility of municipal entities or the administrative associations (Asadas), it may assume the administration, operation and maintenance of the aqueduct and sewer systems. (In this sense, among others, judgments number 2003-1367, at nine hours forty-nine minutes on February twenty-first, two thousand three, and 2009-18311, at thirteen hours forty-four minutes on December second, two thousand nine, both from the Constitutional Chamber, can be consulted.) Nevertheless, it is insisted that in this case, the assumptions that legitimize the intervention of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers to provide water to the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project are not met, given that the project is in the construction phase, in which the municipality's action occurs within the competence sphere of urban development control (control urbanístico), as previously explained.\n\n**Third**: Contrary to what the appellant alleges, **the challenged act is sufficiently reasoned**, both in the regulations governing urban development matters and the municipality's competence, and in the multiple pieces of evidence, consisting mostly of technical criteria, from various departments of the local corporation as well as from the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones) and the National Service of SENARA; from which it is evident that the Condominios San Vicente project was planned with a water shortage problem, a condition that, far from improving, has worsened, to the point that it motivates the procedure whose decision is the subject of this challenge. Indeed, in official communication **Oficio ASP-327-2007, the Director of the Public Service Area of the Municipality of Belén** -Luis Carlos Cháves-, indicated that according to the concession granted by MINAET for the well AB-1571, the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, the tanks could not be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a shortfall in the water supply. Likewise, it is on the occasion of the amparo judgment number 2008-15657, at eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight, that the developing company itself requested the temporary closure of the well from the respective Ministry, which was carried out on December seventeenth, two thousand eight, in the presence of municipal officials; **without the opening of the same having been authorized to date**; which makes it evident that the shortfall in the water to be supplied to the indicated project continues to exist. Note that, as indicated in official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009 of May fourth, two thousand nine (from the Head of the Water Department of MINAET), in consideration of the technical criteria expressed in official communications GR-276-09, from the General Manager of SENARA, DIGH-145-2009 from the Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica of SENARA, the Hydrogeological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of the well AB-1571 given the threat of its contamination and the Map of Hydrogeological Vulnerability of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, \"considers that the well can be opened and the water can be utilized in accordance with the provisions of the concession resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET\", prior to the fulfillment of several technical recommendations, whose compliance must be reported to the Water Department \"in order to verify its effective fulfillment, prior to the opening\" (folios 13 verso to 15 verso.) Thus, despite the indicated requirements having been met, **no order for the opening of well AB-1571 emanating from the competent body (understood to be MINAET) is on record**; therefore, there is no cause to \"recognize\" - as requested before this instance - a situation that has materially not occurred. The foregoing demonstrates that the appellant's statement that the closure of well AB-1571 was conditioned solely on the Municipality approving the availability of water through its aqueduct or through connection to the network of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, with the provision of service of sufficient quality, quantity, and continuity, is also not true; because, it is repeated, its closure was due to the implementation of the cited constitutional ruling. It is clear that, pursuant to the amendment of the **Política de regulación anual del crecimiento urbano** (approved in ordinary session number 37-2004, on June eighth, two thousand four by the Belén Council, published in La Gaceta number 147, on the following July twenty-eighth), it is the obligation of the developer (urbanizador) to fully guarantee the water supply for the project, as a prerequisite for its approval by the Council, which evidently did not occur in the case under study. Said urban development regulations establish the requirements and procedure for the approval and processing of new urban development projects, namely:\n\n\"Procedure:\na) Control of urban growth and authorizations for new residential developments shall be established through the authorization of the availability of water fees (pagas de agua) for each project or stage thereof, until the Municipality of Belén establishes more variables in its Regulating Plan Regulations.\nb) The Municipality shall issue water availability for residential developments whose demand is less than or equal to 40 (forty) water fees annually.\nc) Authorizations for residential developments or stages thereof, that exceed more than 40 (forty) housing units to be counted in subdivisions (urbanizaciones) and condominium branches (filiales de condominios), must be proposed to the Municipal Council by the Developer, indicating the works that guarantee minimal urban environmental impact. The proposals must guarantee the water supply to the current and future users of the sector, treatment of black and greywater, stormwater conveyance and detention systems before being discharged into watercourses causing downstream flooding, actions regarding road widening and signaling, as well as other structural actions that ensure orderly and proportionate urban development; a set of matters that must be endorsed by the Municipal Council.\"\n\nThe above regulation is consistent with that established in the **Minimum requirements for assessing water availability for residential developments or stages thereof to be counted in subdivisions, condominium branches and housing complexes (Requisitos mínimos para valoración de disponibilidad de agua para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos a contabilizar en urbanizaciones, filiales de condominios y complejos habitacionales)**, approved by the Municipal Council of Belén in ordinary session number 44-2004, on July thirteenth, two thousand four, in which, point B subsection vii) requires for the approval of water availability in projects whose demand exceeds more than forty housing units, the presentation, by the developer, of the \"Proposal for water supply for current and future users of the sector, planned for a minimum period of 10 years, after consulting the Master Plan for the Cantonal Aqueduct and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system.\" Likewise, it should be noted that, given the request for water availability made by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, prior to the adoption of its decision, the Director of the Public Services Area of the corporation was required to determine the viability of the proposal, and it was in official communication **ASP-064-2009, of February twentieth, two thousand nine** (at folios 86 verso and 87 recto), which is consistent with the one issued by the same municipal department in **Memorandum ASP-045-09**, of the previous January fourth (at folios 177 to 179), in which the possibility of providing the service is indicated, but conditioned on making improvements to the municipal aqueduct, with a high economic cost -approximately two hundred thousand dollars in United States currency-, to guarantee effective and efficient provision, given that at that time, there are no plans or budget to carry them out, as other needs and priorities of the canton are being addressed; in any case, the current Master Plan must be modified or restructured. Consequently, it is materially impossible for the municipality to assume the provision of the service.\n\nIn this regard, the Municipal Council acted correctly in assessing this situation, insofar as the approval of the water availability requested by the appellant cannot call into question the service it already provides to the community of Belén, which would translate into a weakening of the municipal aqueduct; it being unfeasible at this time for the local corporation—as was explained—to assume the costs of the infrastructure required to provide water to a project, the only way to do so being with the contribution of the developing company. It is noted that water availability is a prerequisite for the authorization of any construction permit, and its granting does not, in turn, translate into the granting of the construction license, since it is a requirement—one among others—that developers must fulfill to obtain it. In the case under study, it is on the occasion of the temporary closure of well AB-1571—at the voluntary request of the developer itself—that the intervention of the municipality is required, and failing that, of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, to provide potable water service to the project. This demonstrates, once again, the non-compliance that occurs in this highly sensitive area, which is the guarantee, on the part of the developer, of the provision and supply of water.\n\n**Fourth**: Furthermore, the considerations made by the appellant regarding the possibility of continuing works on the protection area of well AB-1571, under the protection of the non-existence of contamination and because the technical works recommended by the Head of the Water Department of MINAET—José Miguel Zeledón Calderón—in official communication IMN-1347-2009, dated May fourth, two thousand nine, were carried out, are also not acceptable to this Panel. The appellant forgets that it is on the occasion of constitutional judgment number 2008-15657, at eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight, that the competent authorities, meaning both the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications and the Municipality of Belén, were obligated to delineate and respect the protected area indicated in the legal framework, in accordance with the warning that Nombre2449 had made. The technical consideration—the Hydrological Study to delineate the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571, the Hydrogeological Vulnerability Map of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and official communications DIGH-145-2009, from the Directorate of Water Research and Management of Nombre2449, and IMN-DA-1347-2009, dated May fourth, two thousand nine, from the Head of the Water Department of MINAET—that there is no risk of contamination, neither of the groundwater nor of the well, does not lift the restriction established in the legal framework; a provision that in any case is supported by the preventive principle in environmental matters, which is applicable in urban planning matters.\n\n**Fifth**: Finally, the reasoning made by the Council of the Municipality of Belén is also legitimate, that given the material impossibility of being able to provide water service through its aqueduct—due to the current state of the infrastructure—this does not authorize the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados to assume it, as it estimates there is a legal impossibility of deriving legal effects from an absolutely null act, in accordance with numerals 166, 169, and 170 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), since it is demonstrated, as indicated, the seriousness and a large number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which, it is affirmed, \"clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta), due to the absence of valid constitutive elements, such that its execution would imply 'the civil liability of the Administration (that is, the municipality as such), and civil, administrative, and potentially criminal [liability]' of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.\" In this sense, the local entity warns that the action of the municipal Administration, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is susceptible to generating administrative and criminal liability—both under the Anti-Corruption Law and environmental regulations—for the officials involved, a permit having been granted in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as deviation of power (desviación de poder). Indeed, in supporting that absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) of construction permit number 7604-2008, in favor of Nombre16224—because the property is held in a trust (fideicomiso)—for the construction of eleven compressive towers of one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571 as the sole source of potable water supply, the town council enunciates the following serious infractions of the legal framework:\n\n**1.-** The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipality of Belén; it being the case that neither the current Master Plan nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplate the supply of water for new urban development projects, which does not guarantee its supply; whereby, a construction permit was approved that does not have all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in violation of the principle of legality (principio de legalidad), by omitting the formalities provided for in accordance with the canton's urban planning regulations, in contravention of the Urban Growth Policy and the respective regulation on Minimum Requirements for the Assessment of Water Availability for Housing Developments or Stages Thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of June twenty-fourth and July twenty-eighth, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n**2.-** The construction permit was given by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Council, as required by the canton's urban regulations regarding housing projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Development Unit, with the approval of an unauthorized official from the Operational Technical and Urban Development Area, since he was not affiliated with the respective Professional Association and was not the Coordinator of the Department. It reasons that this action is also contrary to Legal Opinion C-235-99 of the Office of the Attorney General (Procuraduría General de la República), which indicates that it is the Council that corresponds to the final act of approval or rejection of the construction of a development in a canton, the municipal engineering department being a consultative body to the Council;\n\n**3.-** Knowingly, the installation of part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) was authorized within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, findings, and consultative opinions of Nombre2449 issued in official communications ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07, and GE-049-09 concerning the duty to observe the protection area of well AB-1571, as follows from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, at eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight; which in its opinion constitutes the non-application of the binding jurisprudence of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) regarding the precautionary principle (principio precautorio) with respect to groundwater (specifically in judgment number 2007-1923 of that Court), in relation to the protection of groundwater;\n\n**4.-** The permit was granted under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined term; which explained, in addition to being insufficient for this project according to the technical criteria of the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén—in official communication ASP-327-2007—, is a condition incompatible with an urban development project, since water must be inherent to the project itself, being such an essential as well as permanent point, which implies it must not have interruptions or alterations of any kind;\n\n**5.-** The permit was granted without attending to technical criteria that recommended another decision: namely, Official Communication ASP-327-2007 from the Directorate of the Public Service Area of the Municipality of Belén—Luis Carlos Cháves—, which indicated that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a deficit in the water provision (water deficit); official communication UA-204-2007 from the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén, which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, streets, and parking were in the protection zone of the well; official communication UO 276-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén, that the proposal only partially resolved the road capacity problems, without addressing the need for accessibility that could be generated on the road; official communication O-023-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén, regarding the road impact on the access road to the process known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of rainwater runoff due to the lack of a collector, channeling, and stormwater discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the radial of Santa Ana; drainage system, road width;\n\n**6.-** That due process was not followed in its granting, as the rejection reports from the Environmental Unit (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008, and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for their proper correction.\n\nWithout this Court assessing the previous elements concretely, and without endorsing the absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) of the act in question—construction permit 7604-2008 of the Municipality of Belén—, as it has not been declared as such in an ordinary administrative proceeding, after prior opinions from the Office of the Attorney General (Procuraduría General de la República), in accordance with article 183 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), or deriving from a lesivity proceeding (procedimiento de lesividad)—article 173 of the cited Law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Contentious Administrative Procedure Code (Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo); it is deemed that the rejection it makes of the action instituted by Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 is sufficiently motivated by the nullity alleged. In this sense, an absolutely null act is not presumed valid, as expressly provided for in numeral 169 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), such that, in principle, no legal effect can be derived from it, once it has been declared—but which may well be the cause or motive for precautionary measures (medidas precautorias), as will be indicated below—, and consequently, it cannot be executed either, which is a logical consequence of its flagrant illegitimacy and intrinsic ineffectiveness; and therefore, due to the seriousness of its defects, in essential elements of the act, it cannot be cured or validated (article 172 of the same legal body); and numeral 170 of the cited Law itself makes the Administration and the official incur civil liability for the execution of an act of such a nature.\n\n**IX.- FINAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED RESOLUTION.-** For this Collegiate Body, the decision by the Municipal Council of Belén is in accordance with the law and must be confirmed, insofar as the dismissal, in all its aspects, of the request for water availability made by the developing company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, must be regarded, as it effectively is, as a precautionary measure (medida precautoria), issued by the deliberative body upon evidencing the lack of one of the essential elements of the project—the provision of water—; and precisely, in safeguarding its own sustainability, in protection of the safety and rights of future inhabitants; which in turn is supported by the suspension of works agreed upon by the Urban Development Unit in official communications ODU-022-2009 and ODU-13-2009 of May eleventh and thirteenth, two thousand nine (folios 166 to 169), which are motivated by the lack of provision for water availability for the planned works. Likewise, it is in accordance with the transitory amendment introduced to the canton's regulatory plan (plan regulador), by resolution taken in article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteenth, two thousand seven, with the approval of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (in ordinary session of the Board of Directors number 23-2006, of April twenty-fifth, two thousand six, in which it took cognizance of official communication 1535 from the Director of Urbanism) and of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) (in judgments number 2005-8915 and 2005-6399), by virtue of which, \"the granting of water availability and construction permits, to housing, commercial, and industrial development projects, in condominiums or developments (urbanización), was temporarily suspended, for the time necessary to update and put into execution the new Regulatory Plan for the Canton of Belén, in light of the new known elements. ...\" The abrogation of such regulation does not appear in the case record or in the electronic records. Notwithstanding the foregoing considerations, this Court deems that the situation raised in this matter cannot remain in the terms resolved by the Council in the challenged resolution; since it cannot be maintained indefinitely over time, the foregoing, because a rights-declaratory act is in force—construction permit 7604-2008 of the Municipality of Belén—, which, it is repeated, has not been annulled as of this date in accordance with the mechanisms provided for that purpose by the legal framework; and which serves as its basis, since otherwise it would cease to have the characteristic of instrumentality that is proper to it, becoming an autonomous and improper sanction of the Rule of Law. Indeed, in municipal matters, the declaration of nullity of a firm administrative act that has granted a right to the administered party can occur in several ways: a) upon the instance of a third \"interested\" party, \"anyone\", in the terms of article 173 of the Political Constitution, through the filing of an extraordinary remedy of review (recurso extraordinario de revisión); in the terms permitted by numerals 157 and 163 of the Municipal Code; or b) the local government turning against that previous act of its own, declaratory of subjective rights, either through the ordinary administrative proceeding, within the administrative venue itself, in cases of evident and manifest absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta evidente y manifiesta), as authorized by article 183 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), after a favorable opinion from the Office of the Attorney General (Procuraduría General de la República), or through the filing of a lesivity process (proceso de lesividad) before the contentious venue, in cases of absolute nullity that is not evident and not manifest, which is regulated in numerals 173 of the indicated law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Contentious Administrative Procedure Code (Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo). The foregoing finds support in the theory or doctrine of one's own acts (doctrina de los actos propios), which the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) has developed, and which has stated:\n\n\"[...] there exists in law a general principle according to which no one can go back on their own acts, however, with respect to acts emanating from the Administration in the exercise of its functions, the general principle operates that administrative acts are essentially revocable, there existing, however, an exception, which is that administrative acts are not revocable when they create, declare, or recognize rights in favor of third parties, provided that those acts have been issued in full compliance with the essential requirements for their validity, which are the object, competence, will, and form, since in the event that they do not meet such requirements, precisely because they are acts that create, declare, or recognize rights, they could engender absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) or relative nullity (nulidad relativa), which is declared through procedures previously established by law [...]\" (judgment of the Constitutional Chamber number 5808-93, of sixteen hours forty-two minutes on November tenth, nineteen hundred ninety-three).\n\nThis is not disregarding the Public Administration's power to revoke and modify its own decisions; but it is known that this power is not totally free, but must be subject to the limits—already indicated—expressly established by the legislator, and which, by interpretation of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), constitute a guarantee of the legitimacy of the Administration's action, and a right for the administered party.\n\nIt is noted that the ex officio review or annulment in breach of the legal requirements as indicated, \"whether by omission of the provided formalities or because the absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) is not evident and manifest\" (e.g., the opinion is unfavorable, the opinion was not obtained, or an ordinary administrative proceeding was not opened) is absolutely null and makes both the public administration and the official liable for the damages and losses caused (article 173, paragraph 6, ibidem).\n\n**X.-** As a corollary to the foregoing, the challenged resolution must be confirmed. In accordance with what was indicated in Considering IX.- above, immediately upon notification of this resolution, the Municipal Council, as the supreme head of the local government, and the municipal Mayor as the executor of its resolutions, must proceed immediately to seek the elimination from the legal framework of construction permit 7604-2008 that the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén granted to Improsa, for the construction of the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project, developed by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, in accordance with the provisions of article 174.1 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), which literally states:\n\n\"1. The Administration shall be obligated to annul ex officio the absolutely null act, within the limitations of this law.\"\n\nSince no further remedy lies against what is ordered in this resolution, the administrative venue is deemed exhausted.\n\n**XI.- THE INAPPROPRIATENESS OF THE REQUEST FOR LIABILITY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.-** Finally, the request made before this instance to carry out the respective procedures to determine the administrative and civil liability of the council member officials who participated in the adoption of the challenged resolution must be rejected as inappropriate. It is recalled to this effect that this Court exercises a reviewing competence, as an improper two-phase superior (jerarca impropio bifásico), in accordance with the provisions of numerals 173 of the Political Constitution, and as developed by article 156 of the Municipal Code and 189 and 190 of the Contentious Administrative Procedure Code (Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo). Consequently, it performs an eminently administrative function, despite being a Court of Justice, inserted into the organization of the Judicial Branch, insofar as the ultimate control of the legality of specific administrative decisions of municipal decisions, prior to jurisdictional control, has been delegated to it. Thus, it acts as a mechanism of administrative oversight (tutela administrativa), which must be inserted within the organizational sphere of the Administration—in this case, of the municipalities; which, in accordance with the provisions of article 181 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), may review only the legality of the act by virtue of an administrative appeal and must decide within the limit of the claims and questions of fact raised by the appellant, being able to apply a rule not invoked in the appeal. Since what is sought involves no pronouncement from the Council, this prevents cognizance by this Court.\n\n**THEREFORE:**\n\nAs inappropriate, the request to establish liabilities against municipal officials is rejected. In all other respects, with the considerations provided, the challenged resolution is confirmed. The administrative venue is hereby deemed exhausted. Let the Municipality of Belén take special note of the reasons set forth in Considerings IX.- and X.- of this resolution.\n\n**Hubert Fernández Argüello**\n\nRocío Rojas Morales                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Silvia Consuelo Fernández Brenes\n\nExp. No. Placa16782\nMunicipal Proceeding. Improper Hierarchy.\nCondominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 v. the Municipality of Belén\n\n**\"V.- CONTENT OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.-** The municipal agreement challenged in this matter —Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of the eighth of September, two thousand nine—, with the vote of three council members in favor and two against, ordered, to accept the proposal raised by council members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso, in the sense of **denying in all its aspects the request for water availability (disponibilidad de agua) submitted by the legal representative of the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, both with respect to the connection to the municipal aqueduct and the authorization for the service to be provided by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados**. In this sense, it warns that the action of the municipal Administration, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is likely to generate administrative and criminal liability —both under the Ley Contra la Corrupción, and environmental regulations— of the officials involved, having granted a permit in an openly illegal manner, which it qualifies as a deviation of power. The serious infractions it considered are the following:\n\n**a.)** The impossibility of deriving any legal effect from the construction permit (permiso de construcción) number 7604, pursuant to the provisions of numerals 166, 169 and 170 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, as the seriousness and great number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project are evident, which \"***clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to the absence of valid constituent elements, so its execution would imply 'the civil liability of the Administration (i.e., the municipality as such), and administrative civil and eventually criminal liability' of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.***\" Such infractions are the following:\n\n**1.-** The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipality of Belén; given that neither the current Master Plan (Plan Maestro) nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplate water supply for new urban development projects, which does not guarantee its supply; thereby, a construction permit was approved that does not have all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in violation of the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for in accordance with the canton's urban planning regulations, in contravention of the Política de Crecimiento Urbano and the respective regulation of minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of the twenty-fourth of June and the twenty-eighth of July, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n**2.-** The construction permit is given by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Council, as required by the canton's urban regulations regarding housing projects of more than forty units, but rather the Development Unit (Unidad de Desarrollo), with the approval of an unauthorized official of the Operational Technical and Urban Development Area (Área Técnica Operativa y de Desarrollo Urbano) since they are not affiliated with the respective Professional Association and are not the Coordinator of the Department;\n\n**3.-** Knowingly, authorization is given to install part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, findings, and advisory opinions of SENARA issued in official letters ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07 and GE-049-09 regarding the duty to maintain the protection area of well AB-1571, as derived from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on the seventeenth of October, two thousand eight;\n\n**4.-** The permit was granted under the protection of the existence and exploitation of concession for well AB-1571, as the only source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined term; which, in addition to being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Public Services Area (Área de Servicios Públicos) of the Municipality of Belén — in **official letter ASP-327-2007**;\n\n**5.-** The permit was granted without heeding technical criteria that recommended another decision: namely, ***Official Letter ASP-327-2007 from the Directorate of the Public Service Area of the Municipality of Belén*** —Luis Carlos Cháves—, which indicated that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen authorized pumping hours; which makes it evident that there is a shortfall in water allocation; ***official letter UA-204-2007 from the Environmental Unit (Unidad Ambiental) of the Municipality of Belén*** which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, roads, and parking lots were within the well's protection zone; ***official letter UO 276-2007 from the Works Unit (Unidad de Obras) of the Municipality of Belén***, that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the accessibility need that could be generated on the road; ***official letter O-023-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén***, regarding the road impact on the access road to the process known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of rainwater runoff due to the lack of a collector, channeling, and stormwater discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the Santa Ana radial; drainage system, road width.\n\n**6.-** Due process was not followed in its granting, as the interested party was not given the rejection reports from the Environmental Unit (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008 and UA 36-2008) for their correction.\n\n**b.)** That the ***Municipalities are in charge of the full administration of potable water supply systems that are under their competence***; an exclusive competence derived from the following regulations: 169 of the Constitución Política; 4 and 113 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública; 58 subsection 6) of the Ley de Planificación Urbana; 3 and 4 subsection c) of the Código Municipal; the Ley de Aguas, 5 of the Ley General de Agua Potable, number 1634, of nineteen fifty-three, the Ley General de Salud; the Regulations for the Quality of Potable Water, 4, 5 and 11 of the Regulations for the Operation and Administration of the Municipal Aqueduct and the Policies of minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, to be accounted for in housing developments (urbanizaciones), condominium wards, and residential complexes, issued by the Belén corporation; and which finds broad support in the jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional. It warns that to resolve the required availability, an integral assessment must be made in accordance with the Política de Crecimiento Urbano of the local entity and the regulations for the municipal aqueduct; and in this sense, \"*Under no circumstances can water supply from the municipal aqueduct be authorized, as a main or subsidiary source, minimizing or sacrificing the supply to the rest of the surrounding population. The urban planning cost of the project must not be borne by the majority, but by the developer themselves, who must provide the project from its inception with reliable and sustainable sources*\". Thus, control of the water resource availability that it administers as a public service within its sphere of competence is exercised in accordance with its plans and budgets, with the understanding that currently, there are neither plans nor budget in the municipality for the execution of works required to supply the sector where the Condominios San Vicente project is located, because priorities of real needs established in the current Master Plan are being addressed, according to density and coverage criteria (margin of population and housing growth of the canton) contained in the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador) and urban regulations of its jurisdiction; and given that the Mayor's Office is in negotiation for the preparation of a new Master Plan for the aqueduct. The foregoing implies that the management of water availability is assessed in accordance with the Política de Crecimiento Urbano of the Municipality of Belén and the municipal aqueduct regulations.\n\n**c.)** That the Council would be wrong to adopt agreements that are not oriented toward protecting the sphere of interests of the people of Belén (pueblo belemita), as the origin of its own existence, its authority, and ultimately its autonomy, instituted by the constituent precisely to guarantee that independence of action for the protection of such local interests; for which, in its judgment, autonomy must be maintained in the administration of potable water within the Canton of Belén, considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meets the necessary conditions for human consumption for the entire population of Belén and some surrounding sectors.\n\n**d.)** That it is obvious that this is a large-scale urban development project, which requires potable water service in an efficient, permanent, continuous, sustainable manner, without interruptions, alteration, or any reduction; that, from the beginning, it was not sustainable solely with the exploitation of the concession for well AB-1561. This situation evidences the vulnerability of the development, which does not have an alternative source of potable water supply —contingency plan— in the event of equipment failure or well collapse. In this regard, it considers that water availability is a ***pre-requisite*** that is processed before starting the construction permit procedure, and that it does not generate any right to the construction permit, an availability that, in any case, is not granted partially, as it jeopardizes the fundamental right to health (articles 21 of the Constitución Política and 16 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública) of potential buyers.\n\n**V.- ON MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE IN MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE URBAN PLANNING OF THE CANTON. NORMATIVE REGULATION FROM WHICH IT DERIVES.-** ***Urban planning regulation has been entrusted traditionally, and without any discussion, to the municipalities***, insofar as it has been considered that\n\n\"(...) *urban planning competence has been a genuine municipal competence, perhaps the first among all*\" (GARCÍA DE ENTERRÍA, Eduardo and PAREJO ALFONSO, Luciano, **Lecciones de Derecho Urbanístico**. Editorial Civitas, Madrid, Spain, S.N.E., 1981.\n\np. 116.); thus it has taken shape, as a tradition of Urban Planning Law (Derecho Urbanístico), especially in those moments when its content has been expressed through \"building and urban police ordinances\" (ordenanzas de construcción y policía urbana), within the competence of local governments, under the understanding that public urban planning competence is inherent to the city, and consequently, to the municipalities. In effect, urban planning (urbanismo) begins as an exclusively municipal competence. Later, as it ceases to be a function solely of the urban sphere and seeks to encompass the planning of the entire territory, other higher Administrations become responsible for it, thereby modifying the level of competence in urban planning matters, by including other instances, in our legal system, such as the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism (Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo) —a decentralized entity—, and the Ministries of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications, with the Technical Environmental Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Ambiental) (a deconcentrated body) and the Ministry of National Planning. But regarding strictly local urban planning, it is worth remembering that it is in the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones), approved by Decree-Law number 833, of November fourth, nineteen hundred forty-nine —a pre-constitutional norm, having been promulgated by the De Facto Government of the Founding Junta of the Second Republic (Junta Fundadora de la Segunda República), led by José Figueres Ferrer—, where it is established that the Municipalities are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort and beauty in their public thoroughfares and in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers that the laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies (article 1), as well as that no building may be erected in the country that contravenes its provisions (article 74). And despite the fact that our current Political Constitution (Constitución Política) —of November seventh, nineteen hundred forty-nine— is somewhat sparse in defining the proper and essential functions of the municipalities, constitutional jurisprudence —specifically in rulings number 5097-93, 5303-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, and 2003-3656—, has interpreted that based on the provisions of its articles 169 and the first paragraph of article 170, primary ownership (titularidad primaria) in matters of local urban planning corresponds to the municipalities, to the exclusion of any other public entity. In this regard, in the Municipal Code (Código Municipal), number 4574, of May fourth, nineteen hundred seventy, —in force until nineteen hundred ninety-eight—, urban planning matters were expressly recognized as a municipal competence, in its article 4. In accordance with the foregoing provision, and as a derivative of the constitutional norms, articles 15 and 19 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana), number 4240, of November fifteenth, nineteen hundred sixty-eight, are concordant, as they textually provide:\n\n\"Article 15.- Pursuant to the precept of article 169 of the Political Constitution (Constitución Política), the competence and authority of municipal governments to plan and control urban development, within the limits of their jurisdictional territory, is recognized. Consequently, each one of them shall provide what is appropriate to implement a regulatory plan (plan regulador), and the related urban development regulations, in the areas where it must govern, without prejudice to extending all or some of its effects to other sectors, where qualified reasons prevail to establish a specific controlling regime.\" (Highlighting is not from the original.)\n\n\"Article 19.- Each Municipality shall issue and promulgate the procedural rules necessary for the due observance of the regulatory plan (plan regulador) and for the protection of the interests of the health, safety, comfort and well-being of the community.\" (Highlighting is not from the original.)\n\nVI.- OF MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE IN THE VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH URBAN PLANNING NORMS.- The scope of municipal competence in local urban planning is not limited solely to the promulgation of the respective regulations —regulatory plans (planes reguladores) and related regulations—, but also extends to the control exercised regarding compliance with local urban planning regulations. In this regard, as this Tribunal has indicated in various pronouncements (among them, numbers 175-2009, at fifteen hours forty minutes, and 176-2009, at fifteen hours fifty minutes, both of January thirtieth, two thousand nine), \"local governments must act in a timely manner in the exercise of police power (poder de policía), using the powers that the legal system has granted them to achieve their purposes\" (the underlining is not from the original); which, in the matter of urban planning, is realized in the control of urbanization and subdivision (fraccionamiento) processes, and which is exhaustively specified in article 1 of the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones), as it literally provides:\n\n\"The Municipalities of the Republic are responsible for ensuring that the cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public thoroughfares, in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers that the laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies.\"\n\nThe \"police power (poder de policía)\" is the competence recognized to the Administration, so that, based on a law, it regulates and governs an activity, in order to ensure public order, health, tranquility; the safety of persons, as well as the moral, political and economic organization of society; an attribution by virtue of which, the imposition of restrictions on the enjoyment of fundamental rights is reasonable, as its justification lies precisely in the consideration that fundamental rights are limited by those of other persons, since they must coexist with each and every one of the other fundamental rights. Thereby, the measures that the State adopts with the purpose of protecting safety, health and tranquility, are of public social interest, which are manifested through the police power (poder de policía), understood as the regulatory faculty of the enjoyment of rights and the fulfillment of constitutional duties. (In this sense, one may consult rulings number 401-91, at fourteen hours on February twentieth, and 619-91, at fourteen hours forty-five minutes on March twenty-second, both resolutions of nineteen hundred ninety-one, and 2003-2864, at fifteen hours twenty minutes on April ninth, two thousand three, of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional).)\n\nVII.- OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUBDIVISION (FRACCIONAMIENTO) AND URBANIZATION PROCESSES.- Due to the importance derived from the legal implications entailed by subdivision (fraccionamiento) and urbanization processes, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of both concepts. Thus,\n\n\"The subdivision (fraccionamiento) is the division of a property with the purpose of introducing it into commerce, which implies, as each local government must verify when granting the corresponding approval (visado), that it conforms, in terms of size and characteristics, to the current urban planning provisions, especially to the local land Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador) —if one exists— as well as to the development regulations and other special laws of public order. The subdivision (fraccionamiento) that the law designates as 'simple', does not include an urban habilitation process for the use and enjoyment of the parcels resulting from that subdivision (fraccionamiento), and this is so because the legislator assumes that in these cases, the properties have access and green areas resulting from a previous urban development. It is for this reason that article 40 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) provides:\n\n'(…) Likewise, the obligation to cede areas for parks and community facilities is excepted for simple parcel subdivisions (fraccionamientos) in previously urbanized areas…' (the emphasis is not from the original).\n\nWhen a given area is previously urbanized, the buyers of the subdivided parcels have access to the properties, parks, and community facilities, and it must not be overlooked that this forms part of their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (article 50 of the Constitution). For this reason —it is reiterated— the legislator has not deemed it necessary to require, in the case of a 'simple' subdivision (fraccionamiento) with prior urban development, greater land endowments for reasons of social interest. The approval (visado) for simple subdivisions (fraccionamientos), due to its limited significance, is usually granted by an official (e.g., Municipal Engineer) different from the one entrusted with the 'complex' approvals (visados) (e.g., Municipal Council, urban planning commissions, etc.), with the former lacking competence to authorize a different type of approval (visado); this in the case that urban planning norms make such a distinction. Now then, the subdivision (fraccionamiento) that forms part of the urbanization process and which entails a habilitation of the properties, for the first time, for urban purposes, must be provided with streets, green areas and parks, as well as the necessary services for their use and enjoyment. In this second case, we are dealing with a complex process of subdivision and urbanization (fraccionamiento y urbanización) that introduces limitations on private property for reasons of urban planning (article 22 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana)), which the Constitutional Tribunal has indicated are fully compliant with the Law of the Constitution (Derecho de la Constitución) (vote Voto N° 5097-93 at 10:24 hrs on October 15, 1993). The residential or subdivision (fraccionamiento) project that we will call 'complex' is provided for in article 40 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) which, as pertinent, provides:\n\n'Every land subdivider (fraccionador) (…) and every developer (urbanizador) shall cede free of charge to the public use both the areas destined for roads and those corresponding to parks and community facilities; what is fixed for the latter two concepts shall be determined in the respective regulation, by setting percentages, of the total area to be subdivided or urbanized, which may fluctuate between five percent and twenty percent, according to the average size of the lots, the intended use of the land, and the norms in this regard. Notwithstanding the above, the sum of the lands that must be ceded for public roads, parks and community facilities shall not exceed forty-five percent of the total surface area of the land to be subdivided or urbanized. (…)\n\nThe developer's (urbanizador) obligation to endow the subdivided parcels with access, green zones, parks, public roads, obliges them to comply with the urban provisions that establish minimum standards regarding space, quality, quantity and other requirements demanded by law and the development regulations regarding those areas. The local government must exercise its police power (poder de policía) in a timely manner, guaranteeing to the residents of the canton, that the works will be carried out in the manner that the urban planning norms indicate and with the conditions that those provisions stipulate. It is sufficient that a parceling (parcelamiento) requires works to enable access and provide various services to some of those properties, to assert that a 'simple subdivision (fraccionamiento)' does not exist, but rather a residential project that must, consequently, comply with all the indicated requirements. Urban residential projects can only enable access to properties through public roads which must have the dimensions and requirements of the General Law of Public Roads (Ley General de Caminos Públicos) and the Regulation for the National Control of Subdivisions and Urbanizations (Reglamento para el Control Nacional de Fraccionamientos y Urbanizaciones), in the absence —in this latter case— of specific provisions in local norms. None of the municipal bodies has the competence to authorize a project in which the habilitations to the properties are made by means of 'paved agricultural easements (servidumbres agrícolas adoquinadas)', 'agricultural easements' or 'simple easements (simples servidumbres)', since they are figures proper to Private Law and not to the residential urban planning regime which is governed by the norms and principles of Public Law.\" (Resolutions number 175-2009 and 176-2009, cited above.)\n\nIn light of which, the control that the local government is responsible for verifying, in this case entrusted to the deliberative body (Council), regarding the approval of construction permits for urbanizations, is of special interest, since it must corroborate that it fully complies with the legal requirements, namely the provision of public roads, green and communal areas, and especially —of relevance for the resolution of this matter— the habilitation and implementation, at the charge of the developer (urbanizador), of public services, such as electricity, telephony, potable water and aqueducts and sewers, the latter, in case the infrastructure exists for it. Thereby, the non-conformity of urban development projects with the requirements established in the urban planning system obliges —per se—, in application of the principle of legality, which subjects the entire state apparatus, of which the municipalities form part, the rejection of the initiated procedures. In this respect, it is of relevance to remember that the block of legality is formed not only by written sources, beginning with the Political Constitution (Constitución Política), not only with regard to its text, but also to the values and principles emanating from it, international treaties, especially those relating to fundamental rights, laws and regulatory provisions, as ordered by article 6 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública); but also, and in particular, by the unequivocal rules of science and technique, insofar as they also constitute a delimiting parameter of administrative discretion, in accordance with article 16 of the cited legal body, as it obliges the Administration to ensure that its actions are duly motivated in the theoretical knowledge acquired from the different methodologies and disciplines of science and technique, when the situation merits it —as in the case of urban planning matters—, so that the will of public institutions does not depend on their free will (or choice), but on the objective assessments obtained in accordance with the technical rules applicable to the case. In this sense, the objectivity of technical criteria is highlighted, because \"... if a technique is scientific and, therefore, by definition, certain, objective, universal, subject to uniform rules that do not depend on the personal appreciation of an individual subject, it is obvious that in this aspect one cannot speak of 'complete discretion,' but rather it corresponds, on the contrary, to speak of little less than 'regulation' (subjection to norms, in the case of technique)'\" (MARTÍN GONZÁLEZ, M., in his work El grado de determinación legal de los conceptos jurídicos. RAP, number 54, 1967, p.239), cited by DESDENTADO DAROCA, Eva. Los problemas del control judicial de la discrecionalidad técnica. (Un estudio crítico de la jurisprudencia. Editorial Civitas, S. A. Madrid. Spain. 1997. p. 43.) In a concordant manner, Eduardo ORTIZ ORTIZ spoke before the Legislative Commission that discussed the bill for the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de Administración Pública) to include the unequivocal rules of science and technique as a parameter of administrative discretion, when considering \"... in cases where the Administration acts in technical matters that have a clear and precise meaning in the case, the technical rules will be, in this case, like laws, the violation of the technical aspects of an administrative act of a public service, naturally will be an illegality exactly as if a legal precept were being violated.\" (QUIRÓS CORONADO, Roberto. Ley General de Administración Pública, Concordada y Anotada con el Debate Legislativo y la Jurisprudencia Constitucional. Editorial Aselex, S. A. San José, Costa Rica. 1996. p. 99.)\n\nVII.- OF STATEMENT OF REASONS (MOTIVACIÓN) AS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE FORMAL ACTION OF THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.- Given that one of the objections raised in this appeal is precisely the lack of adequate statement of reasons (motivación) for the challenged agreement, precisely because it is supported neither by the evidence provided in the case file nor by the regulations governing the matter, it is important to make a brief reflection on the point, based on the doctrine and regulations that govern it. The existence and validity of any administrative act depends on the concurrence of several essential elements, imposed by the legal system, which, for a better understanding, can be classified into material elements, related to the subjective elements (competence, standing and investiture), objective elements (purpose, content and cause (motivo) —articles 131, 132 and 133 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) and 49 of the Political Constitution (Constitución Política)) and formal elements, comprising the form in which the act is adopted, that is, the means of expression or manifestation (instrumentation), the statement of reasons (motivación) or foundation (article 136 of the cited General Law) and the procedure followed for its adoption (articles 214 and 308 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) and 39 and 41 of the Constitution). The statement of reasons (motivación) consists of\n\n\"... a declaration of what the circumstances of fact and law are that have led the respective public administration to the issuance or emanation of the administrative act. The statement of reasons (motivación) is the formal expression of the cause (motivo) and, normally, in any administrative resolution, it is contained in the so-called 'whereas clauses' (considerandos) —the recital part—. The statement of reasons (motivación), consisting of an enunciation of the facts and the legal foundation that the public administration took into account to issue its decision or will, constitutes a means of proof of its intentionality and an indispensable guideline for interpreting and applying the respective administrative act.\" (JINESTA LOBO, Ernesto. Tratado de Derecho Administrativo. Tomo I. (Parte General). Biblioteca Jurídica Dike. First edition. Medellín, Colombia. 2002. p. 388.)\n\nThus, the statement of reasons (motivación) must determine the application of a concept to the specific factual circumstances in question (according to the development of Spanish jurisprudence, specifically in the ruling of May 18, 1991, RA 4120, accepting a whereas clause of the appealed ruling, which cites SSTS of September 23, 1969, RA 6078, and October 7, 1970, RA 4251, cited by the author Marcos M. Fernando Pablo, in his work La motivación del acto administrativo. (Editorial Tecnos, S. A. Madrid. 1993, page 190); that is, it is a specific decision that links the facts with the normative support; so that when there is a brief allusion to general norms and unspecific facts, one can conclude that there is no sufficient contribution of justification, to the extent that it is not possible to deduce from them the elements assessed by the governing authority to make the decision, which acquires the greatest importance when dealing with acts that limit or restrict subjective rights or in which a sanction is imposed on the individual. By its content, it constitutes a determining factor of due process and the right of defense, which has full application in the administrative sphere, as indicated by the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) in ruling 15-90, at sixteen hours forty-five minutes on January fifth, nineteen hundred ninety, by enunciating the minimum elements of this constitutional principle\n\n\"(...) a) Notification to the interested party of the nature and purposes of the procedure; b) right to be heard, and opportunity for the interested party to present the arguments and produce the evidence they deem pertinent; c) opportunity for the administered party to prepare their allegation, which necessarily includes access to the information and administrative records, connected to the matter in question; ch) right of the administered party to be represented and advised by lawyers, technicians and other qualified persons; d) adequate notification of the decision issued by the administration and of the reasons on which it is founded and e) right of the interested party to appeal the decision issued ...\" (The highlighting is not from the original.)\n\nIt is for this reason that, under the terms of article 136 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública), the Administration is required to provide a statement of reasons (motivación) for acts that impose obligations; limit, suppress or deny subjective rights; resolve appeals; those issued in departure from the criteria followed in previous proceedings or from the opinion of consultative bodies; those that maintain the execution of an act under appeal; those of a general normative nature (regulations) and those of a general discretionary nature. Thus, if there is no statement of reasons (motivación), a defect of form is incurred that seriously affects the act, rendering it absolutely null.\n\n**VIII.- ANALYSIS OF THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.-** It is in light of the foregoing considerations that the legality review of the challenged municipal agreement will be exercised with respect to its content, regarding the jurisdictional scope of the municipal government, as has been requested. This Court considers that the challenged municipal agreement—article 29 of ordinary session 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, of the Municipality of Belén—is in accordance with the legal system. To this end, the following reflections must be made.\n\n**First**: **It was issued precisely in exercise of the functions that the legal system—constitutional and statutory—has delegated to municipal governments, concerning not only urban-local planning, but particularly control (police power) in that sphere**. And it was issued on the occasion of a procedure regarding the availability of potable water for an urban development project, previously approved. As previously indicated, the urban planning authority exercised by municipalities is not restricted to issuing regulations for their canton, but also includes verifying, on a case-by-case basis, according to the applications and procedures of residents and business owners, compliance with those regulations; an area in which, obviously, the matter of water availability is included; which **is the exclusive purview of the local government to determine**, as stated, under the constitutional competence assigned to these corporations pursuant to article 169, and statutory competence under the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) (articles 32 to 41) and the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones) (articles 1 and 74, cited supra), since it is undoubtedly a local service; as emphatically considered by the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) in various pronouncements. Indeed, in judgment number 6706-93, at fifteen hours twenty-one minutes of the subsequent December twenty-first, it stated:\n\n\"**II).-** The Chamber deems that **the authority attributed to local governments to plan urban development within the limits of their territory does integrate the constitutional concept of «local interests and services» referred to in article 169 of the Constitution**, a competence that was recognized by the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) (# 4240 of November 15, 1968, reformed by Laws # 6575 of April 27, 1981 and # 6595 of August 6 of that same year), specifically in articles 15 and 19 challenged here, (...)\"\n\n**III).-** (...) **Urban planning, that is, the preparation and implementation of regulatory plans (planes reguladores), is a function inherent to municipalities to the exclusion of all other public entities, except as stated regarding the general directive powers attributed to the Ministry of Planning and the Urban Planning Directorate (Dirección de Urbanismo).-**\" (The highlighting is not from the original.)\n\nFinally, in judgment number 4205-96, at fourteen hours thirty-three minutes of August twentieth, nineteen hundred ninety-six, it recognized the existence of other regulations distinct from those of the municipalities—understood as such, from the Institute of Housing and Urbanism (INVU)—but **conditioned on two fundamental assumptions, that there be no municipal rule on the matter, and that the Municipality adopt that regulation through an express municipal agreement**:\n\n\"(...) *it reiterates the thesis that the competence for urban planning remains the exclusive attribution of municipal governments, and only exceptionally and residually, in the absence of regulation issued for this purpose by the municipalities, is INVU assigned the task of proposing regulatory plans (planes reguladores), but subject to their prior approval by the local entity; so that the provisions issued in this regard by this autonomous institution concerning urban planning must always be considered transitory, and in default of the use of municipal competences*\"\n\nAccordingly, it must be concluded that municipal competence in the area of **local urban planning** is exclusive, and that of the national bodies—which may be concurrent—is supplementary, in order to guarantee municipal autonomy. For these reasons, **it cannot be claimed that another public agency, as in this case, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), may intervene in decisions inherent to the urban planning of a specific canton**, such as determining whether or not water availability exists for a specific urbanization project, and even less so, by alleging—as is done—a national competence concerning the function of direction and intervention faced with problems of supplying this liquid. Note that this is at the preliminary phase of constructing an urban development project, a phase in which the preventive and supervisory action of the municipality is absolutely legitimate; so that the violation of the fundamental right to water supply cannot be alleged, as is claimed in this case, which must be clarified, the holders of which are exclusively the users themselves and not the entrepreneurs or developers of urban projects; hence, the petition being analyzed is circumscribed within the scope of exercising the freedom of enterprise and the right to build, in accordance with the permits and actions emanating from the local entity itself. It is worth reiterating that the urban control function incumbent upon municipalities is essential to guarantee the safety and respect of the fundamental rights of the canton's residents and future inhabitants.\n\n**Second**: **Neither is it legitimate to try to defend the supremacy of the Costa Rican Institute in the provision of the public drinking water service over local governments, based on a law nationalizing said service**, as the appellant alleges, based on a pronouncement from the Legal Department of the indicated autonomous institution. Both this Court (of legality) and the Constitutional Chamber have defended the competence assigned to municipalities regarding matters that are \"*eminently*\" **local**, that is, the \"*administration of local services and interests*\" in accordance with the mandate of article 169 of the Political Constitution itself, under the following considerations:\n\n\"[...] *since the constituent included an indeterminate legal concept in article 169, by stating that the Municipality of each canton is responsible for administering «local» services and interests, it is required, to define this concept, to be in contact with the reality to which it is destined so that the only way to define or distinguish what is local from what is not, is through a legal text, that is, it is the law that must do so, or failing that, and as the case may be, it must be done through the jurisprudential interpretation that the jurisdictional control makes of these contents. And it can be said that the use of indeterminate concepts by the Constitution means, first of all, a mandate directed to the Judge so that he—not the legislator—determines them, as the best national doctrine on the subject rightly affirms.* [...]*, the local has such a connotation that defining its scope by the legislator or the judge must lead to maintaining the integrity of local interests and services, so that not even the legislator could dictate regulations tending to dismember the Municipality (territorial element), unless done so observing the procedures previously established in the Political Constitution; nor could they promulgate those that place its inhabitants (population) in clear conditions of inferiority relative to the rest of the country; nor those that affect the very essence of the local (government), in such a way that the Corporation is turned into a simple empty container of which only the nomination subsists, but deactivating the entire regime as it was conceived by the National Constituent Assembly. In another vein, there will be tasks that by their nature are municipal—local—and cannot be removed from that sphere of competence to convert them into national services or interests, because doing so would imply disarticulating the Municipality, or better yet, emptying it of constitutional content, and therefore, it is not possible to dictate in advance the insurmountable limits of the local, but rather to decipher what does or does not correspond to the communal government, it must be extracted from the examination conducted in each specific case* [...] *Consequently, not only by express legal provision (the Municipal Code, the Liquor Law), but, and this is most important, by express constitutional content (article 169), there cannot subsist functions of any public entity that dispute their primacy with the municipalities, when dealing with matters that constitute the local.*\" (The underlining is not from the original.) (Judgment number 6469-97, at sixteen hours twenty minutes of October eighth, nineteen hundred ninety-seven, reiterated in number 5445-99, at fourteen hours thirty minutes of July fourteenth, nineteen hundred ninety-nine.)\n\nThis allocation of competence is developed in the secondary (statutory) regulations, specifically in articles 13 subsection b), 17 subsections a), 68, and 74 of the Municipal Code, which empower the Municipal Council to regulate the provision of municipal services, and the Mayor to organize and administer them, and, consequently, to establish the tax rates (fees). In this sense, in the aforementioned constitutional ruling 5445-99 the Constitutional Court warned\n\n\"[...] *by express will of our Fundamental Charter, a specific competence is assigned to local governments, an attribution that, moreover, is exclusive to them; that is, it is a matter of original competence of the municipality* and only through a nationalization or regionalization law can it be displaced, totally or partially. In this line of thought, the institutional problem must not be overlooked, as it must be determined, for the transfer in question to proceed, whether or not the municipality has the real and technical capacity to fulfill the public services incumbent upon it, preferring the transfer of the service to institutions of a regional or national character; and likewise, when the problem overflows the territorial circumscription to which local governments are subject, that competence may be transferred to the corresponding national or regional State institutions; in both cases, it is insisted, a nationalization or regionalization law is required, as the case may be.\"\n\nUnder the tenor of the foregoing considerations, the assertion made by the legal advisor of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, that the drinking water service was nationalized, such that it was transferred to that institution, leaving a residual competence to the municipalities, is neither legitimate nor true. Quite the contrary, as indicated, the primeval or original competence in the provision of local services, among which the supply of potable water is included, belongs to local corporations, by constitutional mandate, and specifically, under the terms of article 5 of the Potable Water Law (Ley de Agua Potable), number 1634, of September eighteenth, nineteen hundred fifty-three, which literally provides:\n\n\"*Municipalities shall be in charge of the full administration of the potable water supply systems under their competence*\";\n\nand it is in article 2 subsection g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), number 2726, of April fourteenth, nineteen hundred sixty-one and its reforms, that the competence to administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems of the entire country was assigned to it, but in the case of those in the hands of the municipalities, only if the provision of the service is deficient. This conclusion is reached after meticulously reviewing the legislative record of the indicated law (number 2726), in that, indeed, the initial intention of the legislators of the time was **to completely remove the supply of potable water in the country from the local sphere, entrusting this task to a technical and specialized body**, but the reaction of the municipal governments of that time (San José, La Unión, Jiménez, Buenos Aires, Turrialba, Siquirres, Escazú, Osa, Limón, Pacayas, Golfito, Santa Cruz, Mora, Heredia, Desamparados, Santo Domingo de Heredia, Bagaces, Curridabat, Juan Viñas, Alajuelita, Pérez Zeledón, Tres Ríos, Tarrazú, El Guarco, Poás, Goicoechea, Grecia, Pococí, San Mateo, San Ramón, Alvarado, Puerto Cortés, San Pedro de Poás, on folios 72 to 107, 179, 180, 113, 193 to 204, 215 to 213, 244 to 255, 298, 299, 302 to 305, 342, 367, 373, 400 and 501), was not long in coming, who strongly opposed the project in question, considering it sullied not only municipal autonomy, conferred by constitutional mandate (170), but also the sphere of competence (169) and municipal finances, product of the service provision; to such an extent that it came to be alleged:\n\n\"*On the occasion of the discussion of the bill creating the Water and Sewer Directorate, it becomes necessary to clarify concepts--*\n\n*It is unnecessary to split hairs to conclude that if the Municipalities of the Country* (sic) *are stripped of the attribution they currently have to administer water and sewer services, they are being deprived of such important attributions that it would be debatable whether the activities that would thereafter remain under their care would merit their subsistence.*\n\n*To insist that the Municipalities are not harmed by removing the administration of such important services is to deny the reality of the facts.*\n\n*Article 169 of the Political Constitution is emphatic in establishing that the administration of local services in each canton shall be the responsibility of the Municipal Government. Moreover, current legislation points to the aforementioned pipeline services as municipal. Where will the municipal autonomy that article 170 of the Constitution enshrines remain, if through laws, non-local bodies are created for the attention of services under the care of the municipalities? Will this not be a direct way to end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, circumventing what the cited article 169 establishes, ignoring 170, and mocking popular election, since regidores elected to administer local interests and services will be left without functions or attributions?*\n\n*No one can deny that if the bill under study becomes a law of the Republic, the first step will have been taken in Costa Rica to end the Municipal Regime.-*\n\n*If what is wanted is to technify, centralize, or delegate the attention of public services, through the creation of a special body and not, as seems to emerge from the alluded bill, to end the municipalities by leaving them without important services to administer, the way is provided by law.-*\n\n*Article 27 of the Municipal Organization Law No. 131 of November 9, 1909, reformed by Law No. 1401 of December 6, 1951, provides for the case where, to better provide a communal service, the creation of a delegated body of the Municipalities is necessary, without harming the statute of municipal autonomy. Said article, in what is relevant, says:*\n\n*\"Article 27.- The administration of the interests and services of the cantonal communities corresponds to the Municipalities in their authority of autonomous municipal governments ...\"*\n\n*The statute of municipal autonomy does not prevent, however, that two or more Municipalities may agree on accords, conventions, or provincial or regional unions, when due to general interest, administrative economy, or better common service, they consider it useful and necessary to technify, centralize, or delegate the execution of certain works or PUBLIC SERVICES. Such accords, conventions, or unions require, for their legal perfection, special legislative approval when they imply a variation of the administrative territorial division or CREATION OF AN INDEPENDENT DELEGATED BODY FROM THE DELEGATORS. The delegated entity, corporation, or establishment must always retain its essentially local or municipal character.*\n\n*If, following what the cited article provides, a better service can be achieved, why the insistence on approving a project that will end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, and which will be enacted against the will of the people's representatives in the cantons?*\" (Note from the Municipality of San José, of January twelfth, nineteen hundred sixty, to the Legislative Assembly, on folios 298 and 299. The underlining is from the original.)\n\nIt is illustrative that the Democratic Association of Progressive Boards (Asociación Democrática de Juntas Progresistas) expressed agreement with the project, provided that the body to be created was \"*a body of direction and technical coordination, exclusively*\" (folio 397), to respect the autonomy and competence of the municipalities, \"*when it should be everyone's concern to strengthen it*\" (folios 397, 402, and 403). A consequence of the conflict that arose is the regulation finally approved which created the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, not as the body responsible for \"*operating, directing, planning, designing, constructing, maintaining, fixing, and resolving everything related to the supply of potable water for domestic, industrial, and any other uses to all the inhabitants of the Republic*\", as article 1 of the bill advocated; but rather **with a directive competence in this matter**, as is deduced from the current text of the cited article, \"*With the purpose of directing, setting policies, establishing and applying norms and promoting the planning, financing, and development and of resolving everything related to the supply of potable water and the collection and evacuation of black water, liquid industrial residues, as well as the normative aspect of stormwater drainage systems in urban areas, for the entire national territory, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is created, as an autonomous institution of the State*.\" Thus, the competence that, by its law of creation—indicated supra—and its reforms, assigns to the indicated entity, which is to act as the governing body in the matter of water at the national level, must not be confused, which translates into the obligation to maintain strict control over the operating system of rural and municipal aqueducts, so that they conform to the guidelines emanating from the institute, to guarantee the quality of the service, as it involves public health; whence, **only by way of exception**, in cases where that service is not adequately provided, under conditions of quality, quantity, and efficient development, or adequate social economic conditions do not exist for its administration by municipal entities or administrative associations (Asadas), may it assume the administration, operation, and maintenance of the aqueduct and sewer systems.\n\n(In this regard, among others, one may consult judgments numbers 2003-1367, of nine hours forty-nine minutes of twenty-one February two thousand three and 2009-18311, of thirteen hours forty-four minutes of two December two thousand nine, both of the Constitutional Chamber.)\n\nNow then, it is reiterated that in this case the prerequisites that legitimize the intervention of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados to provide water to the Condominios o Apartamentos San Vicente project are not met, given that the project is in the construction phase, in which the municipality's action occurs within the sphere of competence of urban control, as explained previously.\n\n**Third**: Contrary to what was alleged by the appellant, **the challenged act is sufficiently reasoned**, both in the regulations governing urban matters and the municipality's competence, and in the numerous pieces of evidence, consisting mostly of technical criteria, from various departments of the local corporation as well as from the Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones and the Servicio Nacional de SENARA; from which it is evident that the Condominios San Vicente project was planned with a water shortage problem, a condition that, far from improving, has worsened, to such an extent that it motivates the proceeding whose decision is the object of this challenge. Indeed, in official communication **Oficio ASP-327-2007, the Director of the Public Service Area of the Municipalidad de Belén** -Luis Carlos Cháves-, indicated that pursuant to the concession granted by the MINAET for well AB-1571, the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, the tanks could not be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that a shortage exists in the water supply (water shortage). Likewise, it is on the occasion of amparo judgment number 2008-15657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes of seventeen October two thousand eight, that the developing company itself requested the temporary closure of the well from the respective Ministry, which was carried out on seventeen December two thousand eight, in the presence of municipal officials; **without the opening of the same having been authorized to date**; which makes it evident that the water shortage to supply the indicated project continues to exist. It should be noted that as indicated in official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009 of four May two thousand nine (from the Head of the Department of Waters of MINAET), in response to the technical criteria set forth in official communications GR-276-09, from the General Manager of SENARA, DIGH-145-2009 from the Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica of SENARA, the Hydrogeological Study to delineate the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571 in the face of the threat of its contamination, and the Map of Hydrogeological Vulnerability of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, \"*considers that the well can be opened and the water utilized in accordance with the provisions of concession resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET*\", prior to the fulfillment of several technical recommendations, whose compliance had to be reported to the Department of Waters \"***in order to verify its effective fulfillment, prior to the opening***\" (folios 13 verso to 15 verso). Thus, notwithstanding that the indicated requirements were met, **the case file contains no order for the opening of well AB-1571 emanating from the competent body (meaning MINAET)**; therefore, there is no cause *to \"recognize\"* —as requested before this instance— a situation that has not materially occurred. The foregoing demonstrates that the appellant's assertion that the closure of well AB-1571 was conditioned solely on the Municipalidad approving the availability of water through its aqueduct or connection to the network of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, with the provision of a service of sufficient quality, quantity, and continuity, is also untrue; because, it is repeated, its closure was due to the implementation of the cited constitutional ruling. It is clear that, pursuant to the amendment of the Policy for annual regulation of urban growth (approved in ordinary session number 37-2004, of eight June two thousand four by the Concejo de Belén, published in La Gaceta number 147, of twenty-eight July following), it is the obligation of the urbanizer (developer) to guarantee —fully— the water supply for the project, as a prerequisite for its approval by the Concejo, which evidently did not occur in the case under study. Said urban regulations establish the requirements and procedure for the approval and processing of new urban projects, namely:\n\n\"*Procedure:*\n\n*a) The Control of urban growth and authorizations for new residential developments shall be established through the authorization of water availability for each project or stage thereof, until the Municipalidad de Belén establishes more variables in its Regulatory Plan Regulations.*\n\n*b) The Municipalidad shall issue water availability for residential developments whose demand is less than or equal to 40 (forty) water units annually.*\n\n*c) Authorizations for residential developments or stages thereof exceeding more than 40 (forty) housing units to be counted in urbanizations and condominium branches must be proposed to the Concejo Municipal by the Developer, indicating the works that guarantee minimal urban environmental impact. The proposals must guarantee the supply of water to current and future users of the sector, treatment of black and gray water, systems for the conveyance and buffering of stormwater before being discharged into channels that cause flooding downstream, actions regarding road widening and signage, as well as other structural actions that ensure orderly and proportionate urban development; all of which matters must be endorsed by the Concejo Municipal.*\"\n\nThe foregoing regulation is consistent with that established in the ***Minimum requirements for assessing water availability for residential developments or stages thereof to be counted in urbanizations, condominium branches, and residential complexes***, approved by the Concejo Municipal de Belén in ordinary session number 44-2004, of thirteen July two thousand four, in which, point B subsection vii) requires, for the approval of water availability in projects whose demand exceeds forty housing units, the presentation by the developer of the \"*Proposal for water supply for current and future users of the sector, planned for a minimum period of 10 years, after consulting the Canton Aqueduct Master Plan and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system.*\" Likewise, it should be noted that, before the request for water availability made by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, prior to the adoption of its decision, the Director of the Public Services Area of the corporation was requested to determine the viability of the proposal, and it was in official communication ***ASP-064-2009, of twenty February two thousand nine*** (at folios 86 verso and 87 front), which is consistent with the one issued by the same municipal department in ***Memorando ASP-045-09***, of four January prior (at folios 177 to 179), in which the possibility of providing the service is indicated, but conditioned on making improvements to the municipal aqueduct, at a high economic cost —approximately two hundred thousand US dollars—, to guarantee effective and efficient provision, given that at that time, there are no plans or budget to carry them out, as other needs and priorities of the canton are being addressed; in any case, the current Master Plan must be modified or restructured. With which, it is materially impossible for the municipality to assume the provision of the service. In this regard, the Concejo municipal did well in evaluating this situation, as the approval of the water availability requested by the appellant cannot jeopardize the service it already provides to the community of Belén, which would translate into a weakening of the municipal aqueduct; it being unfeasible at this time for the local corporation —as explained— to assume the costs of the infrastructure required to supply water to a project, the only way to do so being with the contribution of the developing company. It is cautioned that water availability is a prerequisite for the authorization of any construction permit, and its granting does not translate into the granting of the building permit either, since it is a requirement —one more among others— that developers must fulfill to obtain it. In the case under study, it is on the occasion of the temporary closure of well AB-1571 —at the voluntary request of the developer itself— that the intervention of the municipality, and failing that, of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, is required to provide the potable water supply service to the project. This demonstrates, once again, the non-compliance that occurs in this very sensitive area, which is the guarantee, on the part of the urbanizer, of the provision and supply of water.\n\n**Fourth**: On the other hand, **the considerations made by the appellant regarding the possibility of continuing the works on the protection area of well AB-1571 are also not acceptable to this Tribunal**, under the protection of the non-existence of contamination and because the technical works recommended by the Head of the Department of Waters of MINAET -José Miguel Zeledón Calderón- in official communication IMN-1347-2009, of four May two thousand nine, were carried out. The appellant forgets that it is on the occasion of the constitutional judgment number 2008-15657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes of seventeen October two thousand eight, that the **competent authorities were obliged**, meaning both the Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones and the Municipalidad de Belén, to delineate and respect the protected area indicated in the legal order, according to the warning that SENARA had made. The technical consideration —Hydrogeological Study to delineate the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571, the Map of Hydrogeological Vulnerability of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and official communications DIGH-145-2009, from the Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica of SENARA and IMN-DA-1347-2009, of four May two thousand nine, from the Head of the Department of Waters of MINAET—, that there is no risk of contamination, either of the groundwater or the well, ***does not lift the restriction established in the legal order***; a provision that in any case finds support in the preventive principle in environmental matters, which is applicable in urban matters.\n\n**Fifth**: Finally, **the reasoning made by the Concejo de la Municipalidad de Belén is also legitimate**, that given the material impossibility of being able to provide water service through its aqueduct —due to the current state of the infrastructure— it ***does not authorize the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados to assume it, deeming that there is a legal impossibility of deriving legal effects from an absolutely null act***, pursuant to articles 166, 169, and 170 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, upon revealing, as indicated, the gravity and a large number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which, it is affirmed, \"***clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to the absence of valid constituent elements, so its execution would entail \"the civil liability of the Administration (that is, the municipality as such), and civil administrative and eventually criminal\" liability of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.***\" In this regard, the local entity warns that the action of the municipal Administration, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is capable of generating administrative and criminal liability —both under the Ley Contra la Corrupción and environmental regulations— of the involved officials, for having granted a permit in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as a deviation of power. Indeed, in substantiating that absolute nullity of construction permit number 7604-2008, in favor of Improsa —as the property is in trust— for the construction of eleven comprehensive towers of one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571 as the sole source of potable water supply, the town council sets forth the following serious infractions of the legal order:\n\n**1.-** The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipalidad de Belén; being that neither the current Master Plan nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplate the water supply for new urban projects, which does not guarantee its supply; thereby, a construction permit was approved that does not meet all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in violation of the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for under the urban regulations of the canton, in contravention of the Urban Growth Policy and the respective regulation on Minimum Requirements for the assessment of water availability for residential developments or stages thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of twenty-four June and twenty-eight July, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n**2.-** The construction permit was given by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Concejo, as required by the urban regulations of the canton regarding residential projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Development Unit, with the approval of a non-authorized official of the Technical Operative and Urban Development Area, as they were not affiliated with the respective Professional Association and were not the Department Coordinator. It reasons that this action is also contrary to Opinion C-235-99 of the Procuraduría General de la República, which indicates that it is the Concejo that corresponds to the final act of approval or disapproval of the construction of a subdivision of a canton, the municipal engineering department being an advisory body to the Concejo;\n\n**3.-** Knowingly, part of the residential project was authorized to be installed (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, rulings, and advisory opinions of SENARA issued in official communications ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07, and GE-049-09 concerning the duty to preserve the protection area of well AB-1571, as is clear from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes of seventeen October two thousand eight; which in its opinion constitutes the non-application of the binding jurisprudence of the Constitutional Chamber regarding the precautionary principle with respect to groundwater (specifically in judgment number 2007-1923 of that Tribunal), in relation to the protection of groundwater;\n\n**4.-** The permit was given under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a certain and specific term; which explains, in addition to being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipalidad de Belén - in **official communication *Oficio ASP-327-2007-***, it is a condition incompatible with an urban project, since water must be inherent to the project itself, being a matter so essential as it is permanent, which implies that it must not have interruptions or alterations of any kind;\n\n**5.-** The permit was granted without heeding technical criteria that recommended a different decision: namely, the ***Oficio ASP-327-2007 from the Dirección del Área de Servicio Público of the Municipalidad de Belén*** -Luis Carlos Cháves-, which indicated that pursuant to the concession granted by the MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that a shortage exists in the water supply (water shortage); the ***oficio UA-204-2007 from the Unidad Ambiental of the Municipalidad de Belén*** which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, roads, and parking were located in the protection zone of the well; the ***oficio UO 276-2007 from the Unidad de Obras of the Municipalidad de Belén***, that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the need for accessibility that could be generated on the road; ***oficio O-023-2007 from the Unidad de Obras of the Municipalidad de Belén***, regarding the road impact on the access road to the project known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of stormwater runoff due to the lack of a collector, channeling, and storm discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the Santa Ana radial; drainage system, road width;\n\n**6.-** That due process was not followed in its granting, as the rejection reports from the Unidad Ambiental (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008 and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for its proper correction.\n\nWithout this Tribunal entering to specifically assess the foregoing elements, and without endorsing the absolute nullity of the act in question —construction permit 7604-2008 of the municipality of Belén—, as it has not been declared as such in an ordinary administrative procedure, upon prior opinions of the Procuraduría General de la República, pursuant to article 183 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, nor derived from an injuriousness proceeding —article 173 of the cited Law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 Code of Contentious Administrative Procedure; **it is considered that the rejection it makes of the proceeding initiated by Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima is sufficiently reasoned in the alleged nullity**. In this regard, an absolutely null act is not presumed valid, as expressly provided in article 169 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, such that, in principle, no legal effect can be derived from it once it has been declared —although it may well be the cause or reason for precautionary measures, as will be indicated below—, and consequently, it cannot be executed either, which is a logical consequence of its flagrant illegitimacy and intrinsic ineffectiveness; and therefore, due to the seriousness of its defects, in essential elements of the act, it cannot be cured or validated (article 172 of the same legal body); and article 170 of the cited Law itself incurs the civil liability of the Administration and the official for the execution of an act of such a nature.\n\n**IX.- FINAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.-** For this Collegiate Body, the decision of the Belén Municipal Council is in accordance with the law and must be confirmed insofar as the rejection, in all aspects, of the water availability (disponibilidad de agua) request made by the developer company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, must be considered, as it indeed is, a precautionary measure, issued by the deliberative body upon evidencing the lack of one of the project's essential elements—water supply (dotación de agua)—and precisely, to safeguard its own sustainability, in protection of the safety and rights of future inhabitants; which in turn is based on the suspension of works agreed upon by the Urban Development Unit in official letters (oficios) ODU-022-2009 and ODU-13-2009 of May eleventh and thirteenth, two thousand nine (folios 166 to 169), which are motivated by the lack of provision for the water availability (disponibilidad del agua) of the projected works. Likewise, it is in accordance with the transitory reform introduced to the canton's regulatory plan (plan regulador), by agreement taken in article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteenth, two thousand seven, with the approval of the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism (INVU) (in ordinary session of the Board of Directors number 23-2006, of April twenty-fifth, two thousand six, in which it considered official letter 1535 from the Director of Urbanism) and of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) (in judgments number 2005-8915 and 2005-6399), by virtue of which, it was temporarily suspended \"*the granting of water availability (disponibilidad de agua) and construction permits, for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects, in condominiums or developments (urbanización), for the time necessary to update and implement the new Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador) for the Canton of Belén, in light of the new known elements. ...*\" There is no record in the case file or in the electronic records of any repeal of such regulation. Notwithstanding the foregoing considerations, ***this Tribunal deems that the situation raised in this matter cannot remain in the terms resolved by the Council in the challenged agreement;*** since it cannot be maintained indefinitely over time, ***the foregoing, because a declaratory act of rights is in force —construction permit (permiso de construcción) 7604-2008 from the Municipality of Belén—, which it is repeated, has not been annulled to date in accordance with the mechanisms provided for that purpose by the legal system***; and which serves as its basis, since otherwise it would cease to have the characteristic of instrumentality that is proper to it, becoming an autonomous and improper sanction of the rule of law. Indeed, in municipal matters, the declaration of nullity of a final administrative act that has granted a right to the administered party can occur in several ways: **a)** ***at the instance of a third party*** ****interested party****, \"**anyone**\", under the terms of article 173 of the Political Constitution, through the filing of the extraordinary motion for review (recurso extraordinario de revisión); under the terms permitted by numerals 157 and 163 of the Municipal Code; or **b)** ***by the local government turning against its own prior act, declaratory of subjective rights***, either through the ordinary administrative procedure, in the administrative venue itself, in cases of evident and manifest absolute nullity, as authorized by article 183 of the General Law of Public Administration, after a favorable opinion from the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic (Procuraduría General de la República), or by filing a lesivity (lesividad) process in the contentious-administrative venue, in cases of non-evident and non-manifest absolute nullity, which is regulated in numerals 173 of the indicated law, and 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Contentious-Administrative Procedural Code. The foregoing finds support in the theory or doctrine of one's own acts (actos propios), which has been developed by the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), which has stated:\n\n\"[...] *there exists in law a general principle according to which no one may go back on their own acts, however, with respect to acts issued by the Administration in the exercise of its functions, the general principle that administrative acts are essentially revocable operates, there being, however, an exception, which is that administrative acts are not revocable when they create, declare, or recognize rights in favor of third parties, provided that those acts have been issued in full compliance with the essential requirements for their validity, which are the object, competence, will, and form, because in the event that they do not meet such requirements, precisely because they are acts that create, declare, or recognize rights, they could engender absolute or relative nullity, which is declared through procedures previously established by law* [...]\" (judgment of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) number 5808-93, at sixteen hours forty-two minutes of November tenth, nineteen ninety-three).\n\nThis does not disregard the Public Administration's power to revoke and modify its own decisions; but it is known that this power is not totally free, but rather must be subject to the limits —already indicated— expressly established by the legislator, and which, by interpretation of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), constitute a guarantee of the legitimacy of the Administration's actions, and a right for the administered party.\n\nIt is warned that the ex officio review or annulment in breach of the legal requirements as indicated, \"*whether by omission of the required formalities or because the absolute nullity is not evident and manifest*\" (e.g., the opinion is unfavorable, the opinion was not obtained, or an ordinary administrative procedure was not opened) is absolutely null and makes both the public administration and the official liable for the damages and losses caused (article 173, paragraph 6°, ibid.).\n\n**X.-** As a corollary to the foregoing, the challenged agreement must be confirmed. Pursuant to what is indicated in Considerando IX.- above, immediately upon notification of this decision, the Municipal Council, as the supreme head of the local government, and the Municipal Mayor as executor of its agreements, must immediately proceed to seek the removal from the legal system of construction permit 7604-2008 that the Environmental Unit (Unidad Ambiental) of the Municipality of Belén granted to Improsa, for the construction of the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project, which is being developed by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, in accordance with the provisions of article 174.1 of the General Law of Public Administration, which literally states:\n\n\"*1. The Administration **shall be obligated to annul ex officio** the absolutely null act, within the limitations of this law.*\"\n\nGiven that no further appeal lies against the provisions of this decision, the administrative venue is deemed exhausted.\"\n\nSaid permit corresponds to number </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">7604-2008 </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">(folios 7, by reference from amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> and 85 recto,</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\"> </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">by reference from the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">12.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That the Concejo learned of the foregoing </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">in ordinary session 19-2008, of March 25, 2009</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, through official communication AM-A-141-2008 from the Mayor (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), as communicated to him by memorandum DU-019-2008 (folio 85 recto,</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\"> </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">by reference from the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">13.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">by official communication DU-019-2008, of March seventeenth, two thousand eight, from the Development Unit</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, with endorsement by memorandum AM-A-134-2008 of the same day, issued by graduate Esteban Ávila Fuentes of the Environmental Unit of that corporation and the Technical Operational and Urban Development Area, a construction permit was granted to Nombre16224, as the property is held in a real estate trust, for the construction of eleven towers, comprising one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply. Said permit corresponds to number </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">7604-2008 </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">(folios 7, by reference from amparo judgment number 2008-1557, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight, of the Sala Constitucional</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> and 85 recto,</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\"> </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">by reference from the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">14.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That the Concejo learned of the foregoing </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">in ordinary session 19-2008, of March 25, 2009</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, through official communication AM-A-141-2008 from the Mayor (Horacio Alvarado Bogantes), as communicated to him by memorandum DU-019-2008 (folio 85 recto,</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\"> </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">by reference from the Agreement given in article 29 of ordinary session number 53-3009, an uncontested fact); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">15.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That the amparo appeal filed by Nombre101961</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; -aw-import:spaces\\\">&#xa0;&#xa0; </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">against the Ministry of Environment and Energy and the Municipality of Belén for the non-application of the criterion of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento set forth in official communication GE-049-08 regarding the respect of the protection area of well AB-1571, allowing the development of the Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 project, </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">was granted by the Sala Constitucional in judgment number 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, clarified by judgment number 2008-18934, of fourteen hours twenty-four minutes on December nineteenth, two thousand eight, a Court that ordered the Minister of Environment and Energy, the Mayor of the Municipality of Belén, and the President of the Concejo, to take the necessary measures to ensure that the protection distance between well AB-1571 and the construction project is respected, according to official communications GE-049-08, SL-232-2007, and ASUB-452-07, all from the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (folios 3 to 11 verso and the Judicial Branch management system); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">16.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That in response to the request for water availability filed by the representative of the Condominio San Vicente project on </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">October twenty-ninth, two thousand eight</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> before the New Services and Developments Unit of the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, that unit replied by memorandum dated </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">December second of that same year</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, stating that, according to the update of official communication UNSD-GAM-1755-2008-01628, \\\"</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Potable water service can indeed be provided as per Technical Report DAM-2008-659 and Official Communication SB-2008-1272 from the Subgerencia General, which are attached. All of the foregoing provided that the municipality accepts that Nombre5630 provide the service.</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> Therefore, </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">THERE IS potable water feasibility and THERE IS NO wastewater service</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> in this area. To enjoy the services at the front of your property, you must assume the cost (at no charge to Nombre5630) and execution of the works indicated: ...</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">\\\" (Emphasis is from the original). It warns that this document does not imply any obligation on the part of the respective Municipality to approve the project (folio 174); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">17.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That by written submission of </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">December ninth, two thousand eight</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, the legal representative of the developer project informed the Municipality of Belén that they decided to close well AB-1571 preventively and temporarily, to carry out studies in execution of amparo judgment 2008-015657, which was brought to the attention of the respective Ministry in a memorandum of December third of the same year. It also indicates that, given the rejection of water availability by the Belén corporation, they requested and were granted water availability from the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (folios 172 and 173); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">18.)</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> That on </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">December fifteenth, two thousand eight</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, the legal representative of the San Vicente project informed the Municipality of Belén that on the following seventeenth, at ten o'clock, the closure of well AB-1571 would proceed, so that they could be present; which was indeed carried out on that date, with the presence of municipal officials (folio 118 verso, by reference in agreement 61-2009); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">19.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That in </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">Memorandum ASP-045-09, of January fourth, two thousand nine, the Acting Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> expands the technical criterion for the case of the Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima project, in the following terms: \\\"</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">System</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">: San Antonio. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Supply Source</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">: Zamora Spring. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Extraction Flow</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">: Belén I</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> 34.631/sec. and Belén II 19.9 l/sec. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Conduction Network Conditions</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">: the conduction network starts at the outlet of the spring to the pumping tank, from which water is extracted </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">(sic) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">by two 50 HP centrifugal pumps. The water transferred by the pumps is carried through high-density polyethylene pipe in a diameter of 640 mm (25\\\"), to the settled tank. And from this tank to the distribution network the diameter is 797 mm (31\\\"). </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Storage Capacity</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">: 1,000 m3.</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\"> Distribution Network Conditions in front of the property:</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> PVC pipe, SDR-26, is cemented and with gaskets. Sections have been observed where the pipe's transfer capacity is less than the demand. Depth and location according to current regulations in some sections. Significant loss due to diameter reductions. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Population Supplied:</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> covers from the project to the end of Dirección2022</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; -aw-import:spaces\\\">&#xa0; </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">in San Rafael de Alajuela. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">Conclusions:</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> 1. The sector where the project is located is considered the lower part of the San Antonio system (this statement is due to topographical aspects and the form of supply). Therefore, the effects caused in this area impact the entire system up to the supply tank. 2. The pipes currently installed are not of the ideal diameter to meet the needs of the project and the neighboring population; it is clarified that there are significant stretches that can be improved to increase supply capacity. 3. The Municipality </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">(sic) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">application of the Urban Planning Law, may receive system improvement works to be able to grant the potable water service in this area; the improvements are proposed by the developer and must have the approval of the Acueducto Process. In this particular case, the distribution pipes in several sectors must be improved, the water production source of this district must be maximized</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">, and pressures at some points of the system must be improved so as not to deprive the project's neighbors of supply. 4. The Urban Development policy of the Municipality of Belén determines that the \\\"</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline\\\">Water supply proposal for current and future users of the sector, planned for a 10-year period, after consulting the Master Plan of the cantonal Acueducto and the Public Services area regarding the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system\\\".</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> Therefore, the Services Directorate is fully available to review the proposal(s) to be able to grant water availability for the project. 5. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline\\\">The water resource to supply potable water to the Project, which is the object of this document, exists potentially; however, the necessary infrastructure to meet its needs does not exist, since the existing diameters are insufficient to achieve the minimum pressures required to provide adequate service.</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> 6. </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline\\\">It is the criterion of this Directorate that autonomy in the administration of potable water within the canton of Belén should be maintained. The foregoing considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meet the necessary conditions for human consumption, for the entire population of Belén and some surrounding sectors, inclusive. And that what is required is to make improvements to the system</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">\\\" (the emphasis is from the original) (folios 177 to 179); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">20.)</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> That in </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">resolution IMN-DA-0077-2009, of nine o'clock on January ninth, two thousand nine</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, the Chief of the Water Department of MINAE, ordered well AB-1571 to remain closed, pursuant to numeral 26 of the Water Law (folios 118 verso to 119 recto, by reference in agreement 61-2009); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">21.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That by </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">official communication DU-01-2009, of January sixth, two thousand nine, the Urban Development Unit</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, in application of the constitutional ruling and article 26 of the Water Law, and due to MINAE's approval of the temporary closure of well AB-1571, required the developer to</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> determine the institution that would be responsible for supplying water to the project (folio 118 verso, by reference in agreement 61-2009); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">22.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That on </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">February eleventh, two thousand nine</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, the representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 filed a petition before the Concejo for approval of water availability, with connection to Nombre5630 or from the municipal aqueduct; a petition that was reiterated on </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">August ninth</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> of the same year (folio 175 for the first and 28 recto and verso for the second); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">23.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">in ordinary session 11-2009, of February seventeenth, two thousand nine</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, the</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> Concejo heard proceeding 579-2009, filed by a representative of the developer, requesting water availability for the Condominios San Vicente project, with two proposals: a.- approval of water availability so that the service would be provided by the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, considering that a potable water pipe belonging to that institution runs in front of the property, with service availability existing according to the official communication</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> from the New Services and Developments Unit of that institution, with the costs of the necessary improvements to be borne by the developer; and b.- provision of service with connection to the municipal aqueduct, with the costs of the necessary improvements to be borne by the developer. In response to said request, the Concejo agreed: 1.- to request from the Public Service Area, a report on the current technical conditions of the municipal aqueduct in order to respond to the petition, addressing the following points: \\\"</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">a) If it is possible for the municipal aqueduct to provide the water availability service requested in proceeding number 579-2009. b) If not possible, that the reasons and technical considerations be stated expressly and in detail. c) If it is possible to grant availability, that it be indicated and clarified whether there is aqueduct infrastructure</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> capable of supplying the required availability; d) if there is a sufficient quantity of water</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> to provide the service and e) if granting this availability does not affect the current users of the municipal aqueduct. f) If improvements or investments are required to better the infrastructure, the quantity of liquid, or to guarantee that current users will not be affected, that the following be expressly clarified: f.1) Specifically, what those improvements consist of. f.2) What is the projected cost of such improvements (preferably in indexable values, such as providing the estimate in dollars). f.3) The time it could take to carry out the improvements. f.4) And a proposal for supervision by</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\"> the municipal officials responsible for the administration and maintenance of the aqueduct, so that there is a municipal counterpart that at a technical level supervises, guarantees, and receives to satisfaction, the improvements made</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">\\\" (folios 180 to 183); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">24.)</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> That in response to the aforementioned request from the Concejo, </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">the</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\"> Director of the Public Services Area, Engineer Luis Carlos Cháves, submits Report ASP-064-2009, of February twentieth, two thousand nine</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, stating: “</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">* Characteristics of the San Antonio System: Supply source: Zamora Spring with a storage capacity of 1,000 m3 and an extraction flow in Belén I of 34.63 l/sec. and Belén II of 19.9 l/sec., with a conduction network that starts at the outlet to the pumping tank, from which water is extracted by means of two 50 HP centrifugal pumps. The water transferred by the pumps is carried through high-density polyethylene pipe in a diameter of 640 mm (25”), to the settled tank and from this tank to the distribution network in a diameter of 797 mm (31”). * That the conditions of the distribution network in front of the requesting property are PVC pipe, SDR-26, varied diameters, which are cemented and with gaskets, with sections where the pipe's transfer capacity is less than the demand, with depth and location that is in accordance with current regulations in some sections and significant loss due to diameter reductions, for a population supplied by the system that comprises: the dwellings located in the San Antonio district, including Dirección11462</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; -aw-import:spaces\\\">&#xa0; </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">, Potrerillos, and Antiguas Bodegas de Abonos Agro. * That regarding the query about the possibility of the municipal aqueduct providing the water availability service requested in proceeding number 579-2009, they indicate that it is possible provided that improvement works are carried out on the distribution network, given that currently the budget for carrying out system improvements that increase the transfer and distribution capacity of water in the area is not planned, and the diameters of some of the pipes that supply the surroundings and the area itself are not sufficient to provide the necessary flow when the project is completed. * That the infrastructure at the production source covers the needs of the project, but clarifies that the infrastructure installed in the area in question must be improved in terms of how the water is brought to the area, the diameter of the pipes, and control of water consumption and use in the project must be maintained once it is completed to avoid water waste. * That the sector where the project is located is considered the lower part of the San Antonio system; this statement is supported by topographical aspects, the location of the spring, and the gravity-fed supply method, so the effects caused in the area will impact the entire system, up to the storage tank. * That after reviewing the current master plan and studies carried out by other parties interested in developing on the site, they consider that a pressure zone must be created to supply water in the area with standardized pressures, an action that must be carried out with hydraulic valves that regulate the downstream water pressure and sustain the upstream pressure, for which the pipe diameters must be improved in sectors where demand is almost equal to supply, and they emphasize that the Urban Development policy of the Municipality of Belén determines that the “Water supply proposal for current and future users of the sector, planned for a 10-year period, after consulting the Master Plan of the cantonal Acueducto and the Public Services Area regarding the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system”; therefore, they are fully technically prepared to review the proposal(s) to grant water availability for the project. * That the cost of the works must conform to the proposal that the developer must present, and that the investment is approximately $200,000.00 dollars, without this meaning that the amount could not increase after the study that the developer must carry out. To which must be added, that currently there are no plans or budget in the Municipality of Belén for the execution of works in the sector, since, as already indicated, the priorities established in the current Master Plan are being addressed, and the negotiation by the Municipal Mayor's Office for the creation of a new Master Plan for the Belén aqueduct is underway</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">” (folios 86 verso and 87 recto, by reference in Agreement Art. 29 of ordinary session 53-2009); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">25.)</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> That upon the Concejo hearing proceeding number 579-2009, concerning the request for water availability by Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 for the Condominios o Apartamentos San Vicente project, in </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">ordinary session number 18-2009, of March twenty-fourth, two thousand nine, in article 19 of Chapter IV</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, under the consideration that this deliberative body did not intervene in the approval process of the construction permit nor in the construction control process of the work, and applying the precautionary principle that governs environmental matters, it ordered \\\"... </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">not to resolve the petition filed ..., until the Sala Constitucional rules on the merits of compliance or non-compliance with vote 2008-15657, since if it is determined by that Court that said resolution has not been complied with, there could be liability in relation to the construction permit, and even its continuity over the protection area, especially considering that the issue related to this vote is precisely a matter regarding the fundamental rights to health and to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment by the users and inhabitants of the project in question</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">\\\" (folios 184 to 203);</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\"> 26.) </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">That by </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">official communication IMN-DA-0674-009, from the Water Department of MINAET</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">, it was warned that while well AB-1571 is closed, the water resource cannot be used; and also that until the pertinent studies are approved, the water resource from that source cannot be opened or used (folio 12 verso, by reference</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">&#xa0;</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> in official communication DIGJ-145-145-2009- SENARA); </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\">27.)</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\"> That by </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic\\\">official communication GE-276-09, of April seventeenth, two thousand nine, the General Manager of Nombre2449</span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold\\\"> </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial\\\">indicated: \\\"... </span><span style=\\\"font-family:Arial; font-style:italic\\\">Endorses and approves the protection perimeter of 15 meters between well AB-1571 and the construction project. Consequently, this Management has corroborated that there is not and has not been any risk of contamination of well AB-1571 or the groundwater, whether by bacteriological contamination, organic compounds, or any other type of contaminating agent.\n\n/Por lo tanto, this General Management considers that the studies and reports carried out have been conducted in accordance with unequivocal rules and the exact application of science and technique, thereby allowing for a state of absolute scientific certainty regarding the environmental innocuousness of the project\" (folios 16 front and 17 front and back); 28.) That by official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May fourth, two thousand nine, the Head of the Department of Waters of MINAET –José Miguel Zeledón Calderón-, based on the Hydrogeological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571, given the threat of its contamination, the Map of Hydrogeological Vulnerability of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and official communications GR-276-09 from the General Manager of Nombre2449 and official communication DIGH-145-2009 from the Directorate of Water Research and Management of Nombre2449 which endorses and approves the protection perimeter of fifteen meters between well AB-1571 and the construction project, all being conclusive that there is no risk of contamination of the source or of the groundwater, neither from bacteriological contamination nor organic compounds nor any other type of contaminating agents, considers that the indicated well may be opened and utilized, in accordance with resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET, but subject to the following prior conditions: \"Topographically delimit in the field the protection established as instructed by Geologist Roberto Ramírez of the Directorate of Water Research and Management in his official communication DIGH-145-2009 and must place impermeable geotextile mesh on the internal road and parking areas to prevent any risk of spillage of contaminating substances on the traffic surface that could potentially move towards the well and install a concrete upper slab over the well and above ground level to prevent the ingress of water from runoff, this according to the recommendation issued in the acknowledged Hydrogeological Study endorsed by Nombre2449 and the Department of Waters of MINAET. The Department of Waters must be informed about this to verify its effective compliance, prior to the opening\" (Highlighting is not from the original) (folios 13 back to 15 back); 29.) That by note of May fifth, two thousand nine, addressed to Architect Luis Bogantes Miranda, of the Urban Development Unit of the Municipality of Belén, the representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, communicates that pursuant to official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009 from the Department of Waters of MINAET, he invites municipal personnel to the reopening of well AB-1571, to be carried out on May eighth following, which results in the recommencement of works, starting from the 11th of the same month (folios 206 and 207);\n\n30.) That by official communications ODU-022-2009 and DU-013-2009, from the Urban Development Unit of the Municipality of Belén dated May eleventh and thirteenth, respectively, in application of the precautionary principles, ruling number 2008-15657 of the Constitutional Chamber, and the temporary and preventive closure of well AB-1571, the halt of works was requested from the representative of Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, as there was no certainty regarding the water supply for the project that would house families in that place (folios 208 and 209 the first and 204 and 205 the second); 31.) That by official communication IMN-DA-1425-2009, of May 13, 2009, engineers Andrés Phillips Ureña and José Manuel Zeledón Calderón of the Department of Waters of MINAET communicated to the developer that they conducted a technical visit to the site where delimitation and protection around well AB-1571 was carried out, work that complied with what was ordered with the study by topographical engineer Alexander Arce Alfaro -since three layers of geotextile membrane were placed to waterproof the area- and consequently, also with official communication IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May fourth, two thousand nine (folio 18 front); 32.) That in official communication UAA-045-2009, of June 15, 2009, Esteban Ávila Fuentes, of the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén, communicated to the developer that it respects the technical criteria issued by Nombre2449 and the Department of Waters of MINAET regarding the determination of the protected area of well AB-1571; it does not find aspects that need to be clarified or added; and it deems the hydrogeological report presented by hydrogeologist Mauricio Vásquez Fernández as submitted, and accepts its scope, insofar as other entities support it (folios 18 back to 19 back); 33.) That by resolution number 2946-2009 of the Urban Development Unit, architect Luis Bogantes Miranda rejected the construction permit application for a part of the area of the Eco-residencial San Vicente project, based on Article 14 of the Regulation for the granting of construction permits of the canton of Belén, published in Gazette number 133, of July 11, 2006; official communication ODU-013-2009; the application of the precautionary principle; and the lack of a drinking water supply source for the project (folios 23 to 27, by reference of the appeal brief filed by the developer against this decision); 34.) That on August eighteenth, two thousand nine, the representative of Condominio La Rivera Belemita, Sociedad Nombre101960 filed ordinary appeals (for reconsideration and subsidiary appeal against the previous decision, and requests: a.) to annul the total work suspension order and to order the immediate resumption of the works; b.) to approve the water availability granted by AYA, as it is the most sustainable option from an environmental perspective, to satisfy the water demand of the housing project. c.) to order that the construction permit application number 2946-2009, related to the construction of a recreational part of the Eco-residencial San Vicente project, be heard (folios 23 to 27); 35.) That in resolution 1711-09, at three fifty-eight p.m. on August twentieth, two thousand nine, in a proceeding for an anticipatory precautionary measure, filed by Condominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, S.A. against the Municipality of Belén, processed in case file 09-1541-1027-CA, the Administrative Contentious Trial Court ordered the Municipality to return the administrative file, so that within five business days it would be placed in chronological order, indicating the elements that comprise it; it rejected the requested precautionary measures (a.- that the effects of official communications DU-013-2009, of March thirteenth, two thousand nine, ODU-022-2009, of May eleventh, two thousand nine, ODU-024-2009, of May twentieth, two thousand nine, all from the Urban Development Unit of the municipality of Belén, be suspended, and the immediate reopening of the Eco-Residencial San Vicente project be ordered; b.- the immediate resumption of works, counting on well AB-1571 and its concession as the source of drinking water supply for that housing project, c.- to enforce its right to access drinking water in sufficient quantity, quality, and continuity); it rejected the water request and ordered the municipality to resolve proceeding 579 within the following fifteen business days, on the understanding that said decision would not apply to towers 4 and 5 (minutes of the hearing, at folios 170 and 171); 36.) That in agreement Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, issued by the Council in compliance with resolution 1711-09, at three fifty-eight p.m. on August twentieth, two thousand nine by the Administrative Contentious Trial Court, in a proceeding for an anticipatory precautionary measure, processed in case file 09-1541-1027-CA, proceeding number 579-2009, filed by Nombre101962, representative of Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, was resolved with the vote of three council members in favor and two against in the following terms: \"FIRST: Accept the proposal put forward by Council Members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso. SECOND: Not grant water availability to the San Vicente Apartments Urban Project for the technical and legal reasons stated. THIRD: Not authorize the supply of water by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados for the technical and legal reasons stated.\" Agreement that became final in the same act. (folios 80 to 97); 37.) That said decision was notified to the representative of the developing company, on September tenth, two thousand nine (certificate of notification, at folio 99); 38.) That on September twenty-first, two thousand nine, the developer filed appeals for reconsideration and subsidiary appeal, in briefs addressed to the Council; in which it requested: 1.- that the Council immediately approve that the Instituto Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados provide the drinking water supply service for the housing project it is undertaking; and, 2.- that a procedure be initiated to determine civil, administrative, and criminal liability for abuse of authority and obstructionism by the council members who denied the fundamental right to drinking water (folios 101 to 105); 39.) That by agreement of Chapter IV, Article 3 of extraordinary session number 61-2009, of October fifteenth, two thousand nine, the Council ordered: \"... no Motion for Reconsideration having been filed and there being no reasons to revoke the appealed agreement, the Appeal is admitted\" (folios 126 to 130); 40.) That by official communication PRE-J-CO-2009-4195, of October seventh, two thousand nine, the Legal Directorate, Commercial Legal Advisory of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados indicated to the developing company that \"... it is not legally viable to include in the drafting of the availability letter UNSD-GAM-2262-2008-01628, the clause that textually states: 'All of the above provided that the municipality accepts that Nombre5630 provide the Service.', given that this Institute, ... is not subject to the authorization of a Municipality for the provision of a service, on the contrary, it has sufficient authority and power in matters of aqueducts and sewers for the granting of the public water service\". This criterion is shared by the Legal Directorate of the same institution in official communication PRE-J-2009-4628, of October twenty-ninth, two thousand nine (folios 144 and 146 to 150); and, 41.) That in a note of November fifth, two thousand nine, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, based on official communications PRE-J-CO-2009-4195 and SUB-G-SGAM-2009-792, responded to the developer's change requests to water availability, for the eventual supply of one hundred twenty-one subsidiary properties, as follows: \"Drinking water service can indeed be provided as indicated in Technical Report DAM-2008-659 and Official Communication SB-2008-1272 from the General Sub-management. Technically, supplying the development in question is feasible, for which a 200mm (8\") branch must be installed covering the front of the property, to be connected to current connections in a concrete box, in front of the development, from the Finca San Antonio and Potrerillos to Puente de Mulas pipeline (in front of the community hall of San Vicente de Belén). The drinking water supply can be provided, through a single 100mm (4\") service connection and a meter of adequate diameter. For this, the developer must prepare the required infrastructure for meter protection. The condominium must have a cistern tank and internal pumping system, as the service pressure is limited. At least one 150 mm (6\") multi-valve hydrant must be installed at the front on the public street.\" Furthermore, it is warned that said note does not imply binding authority for the Municipality to approve this project (folio 145).\n\nII.- UNPROVEN FACTS.- As there is no backing in the case file nor are they derived from it, the following facts are deemed unproven: 1.) That the Ministry of Environment and Energy ordered the reopening of well AB-1571, allowing the use of the water resource to the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima; 2.) That the amendment introduced to the regulatory plan of the Municipality of Belén in Article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteenth, two thousand seven, has been repealed; and, 3.) That the Municipality of Belén has approved the initiation of the annulment or prejudicial declaration of harmfulness procedure for construction permit number 7604-2008, for the construction of Condominio San Vicente.\n\nIII.- REGARDING THE GRIEVANCES OF THE APPEAL.- The representative of the developer Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, files an appeal against Article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, based on the following considerations: a.) That the action of the municipal Administration violates the essential content of public function, which is reflected through norms and principles that make up the administrative system, such as efficiency and speed, for having been issued more than six months after the proceeding was filed, and in a defective manner, by failing to expressly indicate the appeals available against the challenged agreement, the deadline to file them, and the body before which they proceed; which leaves him in clear defenselessness, making it absolutely null, and consequently, it cannot produce legal effects; b.) That totally denying, and in an unfounded manner -due to lack of assessment of evidence and regulations- the water availability proceeding, infringes the human right to access drinking water deriving from Articles 21, 45 and 50 of the Political Constitution, the General Health Law, the Organic Law of the Environment, which the municipal body does not apply, thus mocking legality and science and technique. In this regard, he alleges that given the lack of infrastructure of the municipal aqueduct and the high cost that its implementation would entail, the viable option is to allow supply by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; that the users of the local aqueduct and the future inhabitants of the project are not endangered, as the water service is guaranteed by the indicated entity, whose studies and technical reports demonstrate the feasibility of granting the service, as it has adequate (constructive and operational) infrastructure and only involves a five-meter connection. Thus, the challenged decision openly conflicts with the regulations and jurisprudence, according to which the only reasons for rejecting drinking water availability are: technical viability; that it will be to the detriment of the quality of the service provided; and that infrastructure does not exist; conditions that are not met in relation to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, according to statements by officials of the entity. He warns that both Nombre5630 and the Municipality of Belén determined - with a technical study - that granting the service was totally viable, due to the sufficient existence of the water resource to supply the housing project; and furthermore, his company provided for constructive works necessary for the rational and proportional use of the water resource within the internal network of the project, such as collection tanks, pumps, drive and distribution pipes; c.) That the local entity thus abuses public authority, by not considering that the water supply is duly authorized by Nombre2449 and MINAET, both through self-supply, by means of a well, and through the public service provided by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados; and, d.) That access to drinking water is not a matter of local interest that must be regulated or administered according to the best knowledge and understanding of the Municipality, its Council, or legal advisors, but rather is governed by public order norms, which the Council of the canton of Belén currently disregards, by not applying Article 33 of the Water Law and Articles 1, 5, and 6 of the General Law of Drinking Water, by virtue of which the public service of drinking water supply must be provided efficiently, and empowers the governing body in the matter -Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados- to adopt the necessary measures to guarantee its access to citizens; and, d.) That the Council did not consider that since December two thousand eight there exists a commitment to close well AB-1571 if a service of quality, quantity, and sufficient continuity is guaranteed; from which, if the well is closed -in accordance with the pertinent technical-legal procedure and requirements-, the required protection perimeter would cease to exist, because legally and materially, no well would exist. Thus, he affirms that the Municipal Council makes \"... it being supposed that even if well AB-1571 is definitively closed, a protection perimeter would always exist that must be respected. Nothing would be more contrary to sound logic and the legal system, since, the well being closed, it would no longer exist legally or materially, so its respective protection perimeter disappears and, therefore, evidently the project to be developed could not cause environmental impacts on the aquifer.\" Based on the foregoing considerations, he accuses the challenged agreement of being arbitrary and illegal, and requests that it be declared so, such that the following pronouncements are made: \"a) That the Municipal Council of the canton of Belén immediately recognize the order for the utilization of well AB-1571 issued by the Department of Waters of MINAET; b) That the Municipal Council of the canton of Belén immediately recognize that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados provide the drinking water supply service to this housing project; and c) That the respective procedures and pertinent measures be carried out to determine whether in the case at hand there is or is not civil, administrative, and potentially criminal liability (abuse of authority) of the Council Members who ordered the denial of the human right to access drinking water.\" (Folios 102 front to 105 back to 151 to 155).\n\nIV.- REGARDING THE NONEXISTENCE OF NULLITY DUE TO THE ALLEGED DEFENSELESSNESS.- Pursuant to the provisions of Article 245 of the General Law of Public Administration, the notification of the decision must contain not only the complete text of the act, but also the indication of the appeals available against it, the body before which they must be filed, the one that will resolve them, and the deadline to file them. Indeed, notwithstanding the foregoing, the communication made by the Municipality of Belén of the challenged agreement -Article 29 of ordinary session 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine, to the representative of the appellant company -Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima- did not comply with such guarantees, which are integral parts of due process. However, in the opinion of this Tribunal, this omission does not result in the nullity of the agreement in question, since it did not prevent the interested party from filing the legal appeals, both for reconsideration and appeal before the respective body (Council) and within the deadline provided for in the system (five days), such that by virtue of the challenge he formulated, this instance is hearing the matter, in the capacity of an improper two-phase superior hierarch, in accordance with Articles 173 of the Political Constitution, 156 of the Municipal Code, and 190 of the Administrative Contentious Procedure Code. For the sake of greater thoroughness, it must be remembered that regarding the nullity of administrative acts, the principles of conservation govern: \"In case of doubt about the existence or qualification and importance of the flaw, the consequence most favorable to the conservation of the act shall be followed\" (wording of Article 168 of the General Law of Public Administration); and that of transcendence, by virtue of which, there is no nullity without harm, since the declaration of nullity constitutes a sanction to restore the violated right and repair the damage caused.\n\nIn this case, as has been indicated, the nullity requested in and of itself does not represent any procedural advantage for the appellant company, since it became evident that no defenselessness has occurred that prevented it from exercising the corresponding actions to verify the legality control of the challenged decision.\n\n**V.- THE CONTENT OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.-** The municipal agreement challenged in this matter —article 29 of ordinary session number 53-2009, of September eighth, two thousand nine—, with the vote of three council members in favor and two against, resolved to accept the proposal put forward by council members Juan Carlos Murillo Sánchez and Ana Betty Valenciano Moscoso, in the sense of *denying in all its aspects the request for water availability made by the legal representative of the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, both regarding the connection to the municipal aqueduct and the authorization for the service to be provided by the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados*. In this regard, it warns that the municipal Administration's actions, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is likely to generate administrative and criminal liability —under both the Anti-Corruption Law and environmental regulations— for the officials involved, having granted a permit in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as a deviation of power. The serious infractions it considered are the following:\n\n**a.)** The impossibility of deriving any legal effect from construction permit number 7604, pursuant to the provisions of articles 166, 169, and 170 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, given the evident seriousness and large number of violations in the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which \"*clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to the absence of valid constituent elements, meaning its execution would entail 'the civil liability of the Administration (that is, the municipality as such), and civil-administrative and eventually criminal liability' of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.*\" Such infractions are the following:\n\n**1.-** The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipality of Belén; given that neither the current Master Plan nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplates the water supply for new urban development projects, which does not guarantee its supply; thereby, a construction permit was approved that does not meet all the necessary requirements for its assessment, in violation of the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for under the canton's urban planning regulations, in contravention of the Urban Growth Policy (Política de Crecimiento Urbano) and the respective regulation on Minimum Requirements for the Assessment of Water Availability for Housing Developments or Stages Thereof, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of June twenty-fourth and July twenty-eighth, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n**2.-** The construction permit was issued by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Council, as required by the canton's urban regulations for housing projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Development Unit, with the approval of an unauthorized official from the Operative Technical and Urban Development Area, as he was not affiliated with the respective Professional Association and was not the Department Coordinator;\n\n**3.-** Knowingly, authorization was granted to install part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, opinions, and consultative recommendations of the Nombre2449 issued in official letters ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07, and GE-049-09 regarding the duty to preserve the protection area of well AB-1571, as derived from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeenth, two thousand eight;\n\n**4.-** The permit was granted under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession for well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined term; which, in addition to being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Public Services Area of the Municipality of Belén — in official letter *Oficio ASP-327-2007*—;\n\n**5.-** The permit was granted without heeding technical criteria that recommended a different decision: namely, the *Oficio ASP-327-2007 from the Directorate of the Public Service Area of the Municipality of Belén* —Luis Carlos Cháves—, which pointed out that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the allocated flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a deficit in the water supply (water shortage); the *official letter UA-204-2007 from the Environmental Unit of the Municipality of Belén*, which indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, roads, and parking areas were located within the well's protection zone; the *official letter UO 276-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén*, that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the accessibility need that could be generated on the road; *official letter O-023-2007 from the Works Unit of the Municipality of Belén*, regarding the road impact on the access road to the process known as Potrerillos, which raised serious problems of stormwater runoff due to the lack of a collector, channeling, and stormwater discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the Santa Ana radial road; drainage system, road width.\n\n**6.-** Due process was not followed in its granting, as the rejection reports from the Environmental Unit (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008, and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for correction.\n\n**b.)** That the *Municipalities are in charge of the full administration of the potable water supply systems under their competence*; an exclusive competence derived from the following regulations: 169 of the Constitución Política; 4 and 113 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública; 58 subsection 6) of the Ley de Planificación Urbana; 3 and 4 subsection c) of the Código Municipal; the Ley de Aguas, 5 of the Ley General de Agua Potable, number 1634, of nineteen fifty-three, the Ley General de Salud; the Reglamento para la calidad de Agua Potable, 4, 5, and 11 of the Reglamento para la Operación y Administración del Acueducto Municipal, and the Policies on minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof, to be accounted for in urbanizations, condominium affiliates, and residential complexes, issued by the corporation of Belén; and which finds broad support in the jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional. It warns that to resolve the required availability, an integral assessment must be made in accordance with the Urban Growth Policy (Política de Crecimiento Urbano) of the local entity and the regulations for the municipal aqueduct; and in this sense, \"*Under no circumstances can water supply from the municipal aqueduct be authorized, as a main or subsidiary source, minimizing or sacrificing the supply for the rest of the surrounding population. The urban development cost of the project must not be borne by the majority, but by the developer itself, who must provide the project from its inception with reliable and sustainable sources*\". Thus, the control of the availability of the water resource it administers as a public service within its sphere of competence is exercised according to its plans and budgets, given that currently there are neither plans nor budget in the municipality for the execution of works required to supply the sector where the Condominios San Vicente project is located, as priorities of real needs established in the current Master Plan are being addressed, according to density and coverage criteria (population margin and housing growth of the canton) contained in the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador) and urban regulations of its jurisdiction; and given that the Mayor's Office is in the process of negotiating the creation of a new Master Plan for the aqueduct. The foregoing implies that the water availability process is assessed according to the Urban Growth Policy (Política de Crecimiento Urbano) of the Municipality of Belén and the regulations of the municipal aqueduct.\n\n**c.)** That the Council would be wrong to adopt agreements not oriented towards protecting the sphere of interests of the people of Belén, as the origin of its own existence, its authority, and finally its autonomy, instituted by the constituent power precisely to guarantee that independence of action for the protection of such local interests; therefore, in its view, autonomy in the administration of potable water within the Canton of Belén must be maintained, considering that the quality and quantity of water existing in the system meets the necessary conditions for human consumption for the entire population of Belén and some surrounding sectors.\n\n**d.)** That it is obvious this is a large-scale urban development project, which requires potable water service in an efficient, permanent, continuous, sustainable manner, without interruptions, alterations, or any reduction; a service that, from the very beginning, was not sustained solely by the exploitation of the concession for well AB-1561. This situation demonstrates the vulnerability of the development, which does not have an alternative source of potable water supply —a contingency plan—, in the event of equipment failure or well collapse. In this regard, it considers that water availability is a *pre-requisite* that is processed before submitting the construction permit, and which does not generate any right to the construction permit; an availability that, in any case, is not granted partially, as it calls into question the fundamental right to health (articles 21 of the Constitución Política and 16 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública) of potential buyers.\n\n**V.- MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE REGARDING THE URBAN PLANNING OF THE CANTON. NORMATIVE REGULATION FROM WHICH IT DERIVES.-** *Urban planning regulation has traditionally been entrusted, and without any discussion, to the municipalities*, as it has been deemed that\n\n\"(...) *urban planning competence has been a genuine municipal competence, perhaps the foremost among all*\" (GARCÍA DE ENTERRÍA, Eduardo and PAREJO ALFONSO, Luciano, Lecciones de Derecho Urbanístico. Editorial Civitas, Madrid, España, S.N.E., 1981. p. 116.);\n\nsuch that it has been configured as a tradition of Urban Planning Law, especially at those times when its content has been expressed through \"*building and urban police ordinances*\", under the competence of local governments, on the understanding that public urban planning competence is proper to the city, and consequently, to the municipalities. Indeed, urban planning began as an exclusively municipal competence. Subsequently, as it gradually ceased to be a function specific to the urban sphere and sought to encompass the planning of the entire territory, other higher Administrations became responsible for it, thereby modifying the competency level of urban planning matters, by including other instances in our legal system, such as the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo —a decentralized entity—, and the Ministries of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications, with the Secretaría Técnica Ambiental (a deconcentrated body), and the Ministry of National Planning. But regarding local urban planning itself, it is worth remembering that it is in the Ley de Construcciones, approved by Decree-Law number 833, of November fourth, nineteen forty-nine —a pre-constitutional norm, having been enacted by the De Facto Government of the Founding Junta of the Second Republic, led by José Figueres Ferrer—, where it is established that *the Municipalities are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public roads and in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands*, without prejudice to the powers granted by laws on these matters to other administrative bodies (article 1), as well as that no construction may be built in the country that contravenes its provisions (article 74). And notwithstanding that our current Constitución Política —of November seventh, nineteen forty-nine— is somewhat terse in defining the proper and essential functions of municipalities, constitutional jurisprudence —specifically in rulings number 5097-93, 5303-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, and 2003-3656—, has interpreted that based on the provisions of its articles 169 and the first paragraph of article 170, *primary ownership in matters of local urban planning corresponds to the municipalities, to the exclusion of any other public entity*. In this sense, the Código Municipal, number 4574, of May fourth, nineteen seventy, —in force until nineteen ninety-eight—, expressly recognized urban planning as a municipal competence in its article 4. In accordance with the foregoing provision, and *as a derivative of constitutional norms, articles 15 and 19 of the Ley de Planificación Urbana, number 4240, of November fifteenth, nineteen sixty-eight are concordant*, as they textually state:\n\n\"*Article 15.- Pursuant to the precept of article 169 of the Constitución Política, the competence and authority of municipal governments to plan and control urban development, within the limits of their jurisdictional territory, is recognized. Consequently, each of them shall take the necessary measures to implement a regulatory plan, and the related urban development regulations, in the areas where it must apply, without prejudice to extending all or some of its effects to other sectors, where qualified reasons prevail for establishing a specific control regime.*\" (The highlights are not from the original.)\n\n\"*Article 19.- Each Municipality shall issue and promulgate the necessary procedural rules for the due observance of the regulatory plan and for the protection of the interests of health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the community.*\" (The highlights are not from the original.)\n\n**VI.- MUNICIPAL COMPETENCE IN VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH URBAN PLANNING RULES.-** The scope of municipal competence in local urban planning is not limited solely to the enactment of the respective regulations —regulatory plans and related regulations—, but also extends to the control it exercises over compliance with local urban planning rules. In this sense, as this Court has pointed out in various pronouncements (among them, numbers 175-2009, of fifteen hours forty minutes, and 176-2009, of fifteen hours fifty minutes, both of January thirtieth, two thousand nine), \"*local governments must act in a timely manner in the exercise of police power (poder de policía), using the powers that the legal system has granted them to achieve their objectives*\" (the underline is not from the original); which, in the area of urban planning, is materialized in the control of urbanization and subdivision (fraccionamiento) processes, and which is exhaustively specified in article 1 of the Ley de Construcciones, as it literally states:\n\n\"*The Municipalities of the Republic are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, comfort, and beauty in their public roads, and in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers granted by laws on these matters to other administrative bodies.*\"\n\nThe \"*police power*\" is the competence recognized to the Administration, so that, based on a law, it regulates and oversees an activity, in order to ensure *public order, health, tranquility; the safety of persons, as well as the moral, political, and economic organization of society*; an attribution by virtue of which the imposition of restrictions on the enjoyment of fundamental rights is reasonable, as its justification lies precisely in the consideration that fundamental rights are limited by those of other persons, since they must coexist with each and every one of the other fundamental rights. Therefore, the measures adopted by the State for the purpose of protecting safety, health, and tranquility are of public social interest, manifested through the police power, understood as the regulatory faculty over the enjoyment of rights and the fulfillment of constitutional duties. (In this sense, rulings number 401-91, of fourteen hours on February twentieth, and 619-91, of fourteen hours forty-five minutes on March twenty-second, both resolutions of nineteen ninety-one, and 2003-2864, of fifteen hours twenty minutes on April ninth, two thousand three, from the Sala Constitucional, can be consulted.)\n\n**VII.- THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUBDIVISION AND URBANIZATION PROCESSES.-** Due to the significance derived from the legal implications that subdivision (fraccionamiento) and urbanization processes entail, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of both concepts. Thus,\n\n\"*The subdivision (fraccionamiento), is the division of a property with the purpose of introducing it into commerce, which implies, as each local government must verify when granting the corresponding approval, that it conforms, in terms of size and characteristics, to the current urban planning provisions, especially to the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador) of the local land —if one exists— as well as to the development regulations and other special public order laws. The subdivision that the law calls “simple”, does not include an urban habilitation process for the use and enjoyment of the parcels resulting from that subdivision, and this is so because the legislator assumes that in these cases, the properties already have access and green areas resulting from prior urban development. It is for this reason that article 40 of the Ley de Planificación Urbana provides:*\n\n\"*(…) Likewise, simple subdivisions of parcels in previously urbanized areas are exempted from the obligation to cede areas for parks and community facilities…*” (the emphasis is not from the original).\n\n*When a specific area is previously urbanized, the acquirers of the subdivided parcels have access to the properties, parks, and community facilities, and it must not be lost sight of that this is part of their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (article 50 of the Constitution). For this reason —it is reiterated— the legislator has not deemed it necessary to require, in the case of a “simple” subdivision with urban development, further land allocations for reasons of social interest. The approval for simple subdivisions, due to their low significance, is usually granted to an official (e.g.*\n\nMunicipal Engineer) different from the one entrusted with \"complex\" approvals (e.g., Municipal Council, urban planning commissions, etc.), with the former lacking the competence to authorize a different type of approval; this in the event that urban planning regulations make such a distinction. However, a subdivision that forms part of the urbanization process and that entails, for the first time, the enabling of parcels for urban purposes must be provided with streets, green areas, and parks, as well as the necessary services for their use and enjoyment. In this second scenario, we are dealing with a complex subdivision and urbanization process that introduces limitations on private property for urban planning reasons (Article 22 of the Urban Planning Law), which the Constitutional Chamber has stated are entirely consistent with Constitutional Law (vote N° 5097-93 of 10:24 hrs on October 15, 1993). The residential or subdivision project which we shall call \"complex\" is provided for in section 40 of the Urban Planning Law, which, in relevant part, provides:\n\n\"Every land subdivider (…) and every developer shall gratuitously cede to public use both the areas designated for thoroughfares and those corresponding to parks and community facilities; the latter two concepts shall be determined in the respective regulation, by setting percentages of the total area to be subdivided or developed, which may range from five percent to twenty percent, depending on the average size of the lots, the intended use of the land, and the applicable regulations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sum of the lands to be ceded for public thoroughfares, parks, and community facilities shall not exceed forty-five percent of the total surface area of the land to be subdivided or developed. (…)\n\nThe developer's obligation to provide the subdivided parcels with access, green zones, parks, and public thoroughfares obliges them to comply with urban provisions that establish minimum standards regarding space, quality, quantity, and other requirements demanded by law and development regulations for those areas. The local government must timely exercise its police power, guaranteeing to the residents of the canton that the works will be carried out in the manner indicated by urban planning regulations and with the conditions those regulations stipulate. It is sufficient that a parceling requires works to enable access and provide various services to some of those parcels to maintain that a \"simple subdivision\" does not exist, but rather a residential project that must, consequently, comply with all the stated requirements. Urban residential projects may only enable access to the parcels through public thoroughfares that must have the dimensions and requirements of the General Law of Public Roads and, failing specific provisions in local regulations—in this latter case—the Regulation for the National Control of Subdivisions and Developments. None of the municipal bodies have the competence to authorize a project in which access to the parcels is enabled by means of \"cobbled agricultural easements,\" \"agricultural easements,\" or \"simple easements,\" since these are figures proper to Private Law and not to the residential urban planning regime, which is governed by the rules and principles of Public Law.\" (Resolutions number 175-2009 and 176-2009, cited above.)\n\nIn light of which, the control that the local government is responsible for verifying, in this case by the deliberative body (Council), is of special interest when dealing with the approval of construction permits for developments, since it must corroborate that it fully complies with the legal requirements, namely the provision of public thoroughfares, green and community areas, and especially—of relevance for the resolution of this matter—the enabling and implementation, by the developer, of public services, such as electricity, telephone, potable water, and aqueducts and sewer systems, the latter, in the event that the infrastructure for it exists. Consequently, the non-conformity of urban projects with the requirements established in urban planning regulations obliges—per se—the rejection of the applications filed, in application of the principle of legality, which binds the entire state apparatus, of which the municipalities form part. In this regard, it is relevant to recall that the block of legality is composed not only of written sources, starting with the Political Constitution, not only with respect to its text, but also the values and principles emanating from it, international treaties, with special significance given to those relating to fundamental rights, laws, and regulatory provisions, as ordered by section 6 of the General Law of Public Administration; but also, and in particular, the univocal rules of science and technique, insofar as they also constitute a delimiting parameter of administrative discretion, according to Article 16 of the aforementioned legal body, as it obliges the Administration to base its actions duly on the acquired theoretical knowledge of the different methodologies and disciplines of science and technique, when the matter so warrants—as in the case of urban planning matters—, so that the will of public institutions does not depend on their free discretion (or choice), but on the objective valuations obtained in accordance with the technical rules applicable to the case. In this sense, the objectivity of technical criteria is highlighted, since \"... if a technique is scientific and, therefore, by definition, true, objective, universal, subject to uniform rules that do not depend on the personal appreciation of an individual subject, it is obvious that in this aspect one cannot speak of 'complete discretion,' but rather, on the contrary, one can speak of little less than 'regulation' (subjection to norms, in the case of technique)\" (MARTÍN GONZÁLEZ, M., in his work El grado de determinación legal de los conceptos jurídicos. RAP, number 54, 1967, p.239), cited by DESDENTADO DAROCA, Eva. Los problemas del control judicial de la discrecionalidad técnica. (Un estudio crítico de la jurisprudencia. Editorial Civitas, S. A. Madrid. España. 1997. p. 43.) In concordant form, Eduardo ORTIZ ORTIZ expressed himself in the Legislative Commission that discussed the draft law of the General Law of Public Administration to include the univocal rules of science and technique as a parameter of administrative discretion, considering \"... in cases where the Administration acts in technical matters that have a clear and precise meaning in the case, the technical rules are going to be, in this case, like laws, the violation of the technical aspects of an administrative act of a public service, naturally is going to be an illegality exactly as if a legal precept were being violated.\" (QUIRÓS CORONADO, Roberto. Ley General de Administración Pública, Concordada y Anotada con el Debate Legislativo y la Jurisprudencia Constitucional. Editorial Aselex, S. A. San José, Costa Rica. 1996. p. 99.)\n\nVII.- THE REASONING AS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF FORMAL ACTION BY THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.- Given that one of the objections raised in this appeal is precisely the lack of reasoning in the challenged agreement, precisely because it is not supported by the evidence provided in the record or the regulations governing the matter, it is important to make a brief reflection on this point, based on the doctrine and regulations that govern it. The existence and validity of every administrative act depends on the concurrence of several essential elements, imposed by the legal system, which, for better understanding, can be classified as material, relating to the subjective elements (competence, standing, and investiture), objective elements (purpose, content, and motive -Articles 131, 132, and 133 of the General Law of Public Administration and 49 of the Political Constitution), and formal elements, encompassing the form in which the act is adopted, that is, the means of expression or manifestation (instrumentation), the reasoning or grounding (Article 136 of the cited General Law), and the procedure followed for its adoption (Articles 214 and 308 of the General Law of Public Administration and 39 and 41 of the Constitution). The reasoning consists of\n\n\"... a declaration of what the factual and legal circumstances are that have led the respective public administration to dictate or issue the administrative act. The reasoning is the formal expression of the motive and, normally, in any administrative resolution, it is contained in the so-called 'considerations' - recital part -. The reasoning, consisting of a statement of the facts and the legal basis that the public administration took into account to issue its decision or will, constitutes a means of proof of the intentionality thereof and an indispensable guideline for interpreting and applying the respective administrative act.\" (JINESTA LOBO, Ernesto. Tratado de Derecho Administrativo. Tomo I. (Parte General). Biblioteca Jurídica Dike. First edition. Medellín, Colombia. 2002. p. 388.)\n\nThus, the reasoning must determine the application of a concept to the specific factual circumstances in question (according to the development of Spanish jurisprudence, specifically in the judgment of May 18, 1991, RA 4120, accepting a recital from the appealed decision, which cites the SSTS of September 23, 1969, RA 6078, and October 7, 1970, RA 4251, cited by the author Marcos M. Nombre60531 , in his work La motivación del acto administrativo. (Editorial Tecnos, S. A. Madrid. 1993, page 190); that is, it involves a concrete decision that links the facts with the normative support; so that when there is a brief allusion to general norms and non-specific facts, it can be concluded that there is no sufficient contribution of justification, to the extent that it is not possible to deduce from them the elements evaluated by the governmental authority to make the decision, which acquires the greatest importance when dealing with acts that limit or restrict subjective rights or in which a sanction is imposed on the administered party. By its content, it constitutes a determining factor of due process and the right of defense, which has full application in the administrative sphere, as indicated by the Constitutional Chamber starting from judgment 15-90, of sixteen forty-five hours on January five, nineteen ninety, when stating the minimum elements of this constitutional principle\n\n\"(...) a) Notification to the interested party of the character and purposes of the procedure; b) right to be heard, and opportunity for the interested party to present the arguments and produce the evidence they deem pertinent; c) opportunity for the administered party to prepare their allegation, which necessarily includes access to the information and administrative records linked to the matter in question; d) adequate notification of the decision issued by the administration and of the reasons on which it is based and e) right of the interested party to appeal the decision issued ...\" (The highlighting is not from the original.)\n\nIt is for this reason that, according to Article 136 of the General Law of Public Administration, the Administration is required to provide reasoning for acts that impose obligations; limit, suppress, or deny subjective rights; resolve appeals; those issued in separation from the criterion followed in previous actions or from the opinion of advisory bodies; those that maintain the execution of the one being challenged; general acts of a normative nature (regulations); and discretionary acts of a general nature. Thus, if there is no reasoning, a defect of form is incurred that seriously affects the act, vitiating it with absolute nullity.\n\nVIII.- ANALYSIS OF THE LEGALITY OF THE CHALLENGED AGREEMENT.- It is in light of the foregoing considerations that the legality control of the challenged municipal agreement will be exercised with respect to its content, regarding the competence scope of the municipal government, as has been requested. This Tribunal considers that the challenged municipal agreement—Article 29 of ordinary session 53-2009, of September eight, two thousand nine, of the Municipality of Belén—is in accordance with the legal system. To this effect, the following reflections must be made.\n\nFirst: It was issued precisely in exercise of the functions that the legal system—constitutional and legal—has delegated to municipal governments, concerning not only local urban planning but particularly control (police power) in that area. And it is issued on the occasion of a request regarding potable water availability for an urban development project, previously approved. As stated previously, the urban planning power exercised by the municipalities is not restricted to issuing the regulations for their canton's matter, but also to verifying, on a case-by-case basis, according to the requests and proceedings of residents and business owners, compliance with those regulations; an area in which the issue of water availability is obviously included; which is the exclusive purview of the local government to determine, as has been said, in accordance with the constitutional competence assigned to these corporations under section 169, and legally in the Urban Planning Law (Articles 32 to 41) and Construction Law (Articles 1 and 74, cited above), since it is undoubtedly a local service; as emphatically considered by the Constitutional Chamber in various pronouncements. Indeed, in judgment number 6706-93, of fifteen hours twenty-one minutes on December twenty-first of the following year, it stated:\n\n\"II).- The Chamber considers that the power attributed to local governments to plan urban development within the limits of their territory does integrate the constitutional concept of 'local interests and services' referred to in Article 169 of the Constitution, a competence that was recognized by the Urban Planning Law (# 4240 of November 15, 1968, reformed by Laws # 6575 of April 27, 1981 and # 6595 of August 6 of that same year), specifically in Articles 15 and 19 challenged here, (...)\n\nIII).- (...) Urban planning, that is, the elaboration and implementation of regulatory plans, is a function inherent to the municipalities to the exclusion of all other public entities, except as stated regarding the general direction powers attributed to the Ministry of Planning and the Directorate of Urbanism.-\" (The highlighting is not from the original.)\n\nFinally, in judgment number 4205-96, of fourteen hours thirty-three minutes on August twenty, nineteen ninety-six, it authorized the existence of other regulations distinct from those of the municipalities—understood to be from the Instituto de Vivienda y Urbanismo—but conditioned upon two fundamental assumptions: that no municipal regulation exists on the matter, and that the Municipality adopts that regulation through an express municipal agreement:\n\n\"(...) the thesis is reiterated that the competence of urban planning remains an exclusive attribution of municipal governments, and only exceptionally and residually, in the absence of regulation issued to that effect by the municipalities, is the INVU assigned the task of proposing regulatory plans, but subject to the condition that they be previously approved by the local entity; so that the provisions issued by this autonomous institution regarding urban planning must always be considered transitory, and in default of the use of municipal competencies\"\n\nIn light of which, it can be concluded that the municipal competence in the area of local urban planning is exclusive, and that of national bodies—which may be concurrent—is supplementary, in order to guarantee municipal autonomy. For these reasons, it cannot be claimed that another public agency, as in this case, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, can intervene in decisions specific to the urban planning of a given canton, such as the determination of whether or not water is available for a specific development project, and even less so, alleging—as is done—a national competence concerning the function of direction and intervention in the face of problems supplying this liquid. Note that this is the pre-construction phase of an urban development project, a phase in which the preventive and supervisory action of the municipality is absolutely legitimate; so that the infringement of the fundamental right to water provision cannot be alleged, as is claimed in this case, whose holders—it is worth clarifying—are only the users themselves and not the business owners or developers of urban projects; hence, the analyzed petition is circumscribed in the scope of the exercise of freedom of enterprise and the right to build, according to the permits and actions emanating from the local entity itself. It is worth reiterating that the urban control function that falls to municipalities is essential to guarantee the safety and respect for the fundamental rights of the residents and future inhabitants of the canton.\n\nSecond: Neither is it legitimate to try to defend the supremacy of the Instituto Costarricense in the provision of the public water service over local governments, based on a law nationalizing the same, as the appellant alleges, based on a pronouncement from the Legal Department of the indicated autonomous institution.\n\nBoth this Court (of legality) and the Constitutional Court have defended the competence assigned to the municipalities regarding matters that are \"eminently\" **local**, that is, the \"administration of local services and interests\" pursuant to the mandate of Article 169 of the Political Constitution itself, under the following considerations:\n\n\"[...] *since the constituent power included an indeterminate legal concept in Article 169, by stating that the Municipality of each canton is responsible for administering the services and interests «* **local** *», it is necessary, to clarify this concept, to be in contact with the reality to which it is intended, so the only way to define or distinguish the local from what is not, is through a legal text, meaning that it is the law that must do so, or failing that, and depending on the case, it must be done through the jurisprudential interpretation of those contents made by jurisdictional control. And it can be said that the use of indeterminate concepts by the Constitution means, above all, a mandate addressed to the Judge so that he - not the legislator - determines them, as the best national doctrine on the subject rightly affirms.* [...] *, **the local has such a connotation that defining its scope by the legislator or the judge must lead to maintaining the integrity of local interests and services, so that the legislator could not even enact regulations that tend to dismember the Municipality (territorial element), without doing so observing the procedures previously established in the Political Constitution; nor could it enact legislation that places its inhabitants (population) in clear conditions of inferiority in relation to the rest of the country; nor that which affects the very essence of the local (government), so as to turn the Corporation into a simple empty container from which only the name subsists, but deactivating the entire regime as conceived by the National Constituent Assembly** *.* In another sense, there will be tasks that by their nature are municipal -local- and cannot be removed from that sphere of competence to become national services or interests, because doing so would imply dismantling the Municipality, or better yet, emptying it of constitutional content, and therefore, it is not possible to dictate the insurmountable limits of the local in advance, but rather to unravel what corresponds or not to the communal government, it must be extracted from the examination made in each specific case* [...] *Consequently, not only by express legal norm (the Municipal Code, the Liquor Law), but, and this is most important, **by express constitutional content (Article 169), no functions of any public entity can subsist that dispute their primacy with the municipalities, when dealing with matters that integrate the local.** \"* (The underlining is not from the original.) (Ruling number 6469-97, of sixteen hours twenty minutes of October eight, nineteen ninety-seven, reiterated in number 5445-99, of fourteen hours thirty minutes of July fourteen, nineteen ninety-nine.)\n\nThis allocation of competence is developed in second-order (legal) regulations, specifically in articles 13 subsection b), 17 subsections a), 68, and 74 of the Municipal Code, which empower the Municipal Council to regulate the provision of municipal services, the Mayor to organize and administer them, and, consequently, the establishment of the tariffs for municipal taxes (rates). In this regard, in the aforementioned constitutional ruling 5445-99, the Constitutional Court warned\n\n\"*[...] by express will of our Fundamental Charter, a specific competence is assigned to local governments, an attribution that is also exclusive to them; that is, it is an original competence of the municipality and only through a nationalization or regionalization law can it be displaced, totally or partially. In this order of ideas, the institutional problem must not be set aside, insofar as it must be determined for the respective transfer to proceed, whether the municipality is or is not in real and technical capacity to fulfill the public services within its competence, preferring the transfer of the service to regional or national institutions; and likewise, when the problem goes beyond the territorial circumscription to which local governments are subject, that competence can be transferred to the corresponding national or regional State institutions; in both cases, it is insisted, a nationalization or regionalization law is required, as the case may be.*\"\n\nIn light of the foregoing considerations, the assertion made by the legal advisor of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), that the potable water service was nationalized, in such a way that it was transferred to that institution, leaving a residual competence to the municipalities, is neither legitimate nor true. Quite the contrary, as indicated, the original or primary competence in the provision of local services, among which the supply of potable water is included, belongs to the local corporations, according to constitutional mandate, and specifically, in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 of the Potable Water Law, number 1634, of September eighteen, nineteen fifty-three, which literally states:\n\n\"*The Municipalities shall be in charge of the full administration of the potable water supply systems that are under their competence*\";\n\nand it is in numeral 2 subsection g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, number 2726, of April fourteen, nineteen sixty-one, and its reforms, that the competence to administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems of the entire country was assigned to it, but when dealing with those in the hands of the municipalities, only if the provision of the service is deficient. This conclusion is reached after meticulously reviewing the legislative record of the indicated law (number 2726), insofar as, indeed, the initial intention of the legislators of the time was **to totally remove the supply of potable water in the country from the local sphere, endorsing this task to a technical and specialized body**, but the reaction of the municipal governments of the date (San José, La Unión, Jiménez, Buenos Aires, Turrialba, Siquirres, Escazú, Osa, Limón, Pacayas, Golfito, Santa Cruz, Mora, Heredia, Desamparados, Santo Domingo de Heredia, Bagaces, Curridabat, Juan Viñas, Alajuelita, Pérez Zeledón, Tres Ríos, Tarrazú, El Guarco, Poás, Goicoechea, Grecia, Pococí, San Mateo, San Ramón, Alvarado, Puerto Cortés, San Pedro de Poás, at folios 72 to 107, 179, 180, 113, 193 to 204, 215 to 213, 244 to 255, 298, 299, 302 to 305, 342, 367, 373, 400 and 501), was not long in coming, who strongly opposed the bill in question, considering damaged not only municipal autonomy, conferred by constitutional mandate (170), but also the sphere of competence (169) and municipal finances, a product of the provision of the service; to such an extent that it was alleged:\n\n\"*On the occasion of the discussion of the bill creating the Directorate of Water and Sewers, it is necessary to clarify concepts--*\n\n*It is not necessary to split hairs to conclude that if the Municipalities of the Country (sic) are stripped of the power they currently have to administer water and sewer services, they are being deprived of such important powers that it would be debatable whether the activities that would thereafter remain under their care would warrant their subsistence.*\n\n*To insist that the Municipalities are not harmed by taking away the administration of such important services is to deny the reality of the facts.*\n\n*Article 169 of the Political Constitution is categorical in establishing that the administration of local services in each canton shall be in charge of the Municipal Government. On the other hand, current legislation points to the aforementioned water pipe services as municipal. Where will the municipal autonomy that Article 170 of the Constitution enshrines remain, if through laws non-local organisms are created for the attention of the services under the care of the municipalities? Will this not be a direct way to end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, mocking what the cited Article 169 establishes, ignoring 170, and scoffing at popular election, since the Council Members elected to administer local interests and services will be left without functions or powers?*\n\n*No one can deny that if the bill under study becomes a law of the Republic, in Costa Rica the first step will have been taken to end the Municipal Regime.-*\n\n*If what is desired is to make technical, centralize, or delegate the attention of public services, through the creation of a special organism and not, as seems to emerge from the aforementioned bill, to end the municipalities by leaving them without important services to administer, the path is given by the law.-*\n\n*Article 27 of the Law of Municipal Organization No. 131 of November 9, 1909, reformed by Law No. 1401 of December 6, 1951, foresees the case that to better provide a communal service it is necessary to create a delegated organism of the Municipalities, without damaging the statute of municipal autonomy. Said article in its relevant part states:*\n\n*\"Article 27.- The administration of the interests and services of the cantonal communities corresponds to the Municipalities in their power of autonomous municipal governments ...\"*\n\n*The statute of municipal autonomy does not prevent, however, that two or more Municipalities may enter into agreements, conventions, or provincial or regional unions, when for general interest, administrative economy, or better common service, they consider it useful and necessary to make technical, centralize, or delegate the realization of certain works or PUBLIC SERVICES. Such agreements, conventions, or unions require, for their legal completion, special legislative approval when they imply a variation of the administrative territorial division or CREATION OF AN INDEPENDENT DELEGATED ORGANISM FROM THE DELEGATORS. The delegated entity, corporation, or establishment must always retain its essentially local or municipal character.*\n\n*If by following what the cited article foresees a better service can be achieved, why the insistence on approving a bill that will end the Municipal Regime in Costa Rica, and that will be issued against the will of the representatives of the people in the cantons?*\" (Note from the Municipality of San José, dated January twelve, nineteen sixty, to the Legislative Assembly, at folios 298 and 299. The underlining is from the original.)\n\nIt is illustrative that the Democratic Association of Progressive Boards (Asociación Democrática de Juntas Progresistas) expressed agreement with the bill, provided that the organism to be created was \"*a technical direction and coordination organism, exclusively*\" (folio 397), to respect the autonomy and competence of the municipalities, \"*when it should be everyone's concern to strengthen it*\" (folios 397, 402, and 403). As a consequence of the conflict raised, the regulation finally approved created the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, not as the body in charge of \"*operating, directing, planning, designing, building, maintaining, fixing, and resolving everything related to the supply of potable water for domestic, industrial, and any other nature uses to all inhabitants of the Republic*\", as advocated by Article 1 of the bill; but rather **with a directive competence in this matter**, as deduced from the current text of the cited numeral, \"*With the purpose of directing, fixing policies, establishing and applying norms, and promoting the planning, financing, and development and of resolving everything related to the supply of potable water and collection and evacuation of black water, liquid industrial waste, as well as the normative aspect of stormwater sewer systems in urban areas, for the entire national territory, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is created, as an autonomous institution of the State.*\" Thus, the competence that the law of its creation - supra indicated -, and its reforms, assigns to the indicated entity must not be confused, which is to act as the governing body in water matters at the national level, which translates into the obligation to maintain strict control over the operating system of rural and municipal aqueducts, so that these adhere to the guidelines emanating from the institute, to guarantee the quality of the service, as it involves public health; hence, **only by way of exception**, in cases where that service is not adequately provided, in conditions of quality, quantity, and efficient development, or adequate social economic conditions for its administration by municipal entities or the administrative associations (Asadas) do not exist, can it assume the administration, operation, and maintenance of the aqueduct and sewer systems. (In this regard, among others, rulings numbers 2003-1367, of nine hours forty-nine minutes of February twenty-one, two thousand three, and 2009-18311, of thirteen hours forty-four minutes of December two, two thousand nine, both from the Constitutional Chamber, can be consulted.) Now, it is reiterated that in this case, the conditions that legitimize the intervention of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers to supply water to the Condominios o Apartamentos San Vicente project do not exist, since it is in the construction phase of the project, in which the action of the municipality occurs in the sphere of urban control competence, as explained earlier.\n\n**Third**: Contrary to what the appellant alleged, **the challenged act is sufficiently motivated**, both in the regulations governing urban matters and the competence of the municipality, as well as in the multiple pieces of evidence, consisting mostly of technical criteria, from various departments of the local corporation as well as from the Ministry of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications (Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones) and the National Service of SENARA; from which it is evident that the Condominios San Vicente project was planned with a water shortage (faltante de agua) problem, a condition that, far from improving, has worsened, to such an extent that it motivates the action, the decision of which is the object of this challenge. Indeed, in official letter **Oficio ASP-327-2007, the Director of the Public Service Area of the Municipality of Belén** -Luis Carlos Cháves-, indicated that according to the concession granted by MINAET for well AB-1571, the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow, the tanks could not be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a deficit in the water supply (faltante de agua). Likewise, it is on the occasion of the amparo ruling number 2008-15657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes of October seventeen, two thousand eight, that the developing company itself requested the temporary closure of the well from the respective Ministry, which was carried out on December seventeen, two thousand eight, in the presence of municipal officials; **without the opening of the same having been authorized to date**; which makes it evident that the shortage of water to supply the indicated project continues to exist. Note that as indicated in official letter IMN-DA-1347-2009 of May four, two thousand nine (from the Head of the Water Department of MINAET), in response to the technical criteria expressed in official letters GR-276-09, from the General Manager of SENARA, DIGH-145-2009 from the Directorate of Research and Hydric Management of SENARA, the Hydrogeological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571 in the face of the threat of contamination, and the Hydrogeological Vulnerability Map of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, \"*considers that the well can be opened and the water used in accordance with the provisions of the concession resolution R-0189-2007-AGUAS-MINAET*\", after the fulfillment of several technical recommendations, compliance with which had to be reported to the Water Department \"*in order to verify its effective fulfillment, prior to the opening*\" (folios 13 verso to 15 verso.) Thus, despite the indicated requirements having been met, **there is no record in the proceedings of any order to open well AB-1571 emanating from the competent body (understood as MINAET)**; therefore, there is no cause *to* \"*recognize*\" - as requested before this instance - a situation that has not materially occurred. The foregoing shows that the appellant's statement that the closure of well AB-1571 was conditioned only on the Municipality approving the availability of water through its aqueduct or connection to the network of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is also not true, with the provision of a service of sufficient quality, quantity, and continuity; because it bears repeating, its closure was due to the implementation of the aforementioned constitutional ruling. It is clear that, according to the reform of the **Annual Urban Growth Regulation Policy** (approved in ordinary session number 37-2004, of June eight, two thousand four, by the Council of Belén, published in La Gaceta number 147, of July twenty-eight following), it is the obligation of the developer (urbanizer) to guarantee - fully - the water supply of the project, as a prerequisite for its approval by the Council, which is evident that did not occur in the case under study. Said urban regulation establishes the requirements and procedure for the approval and processing of new urban projects, namely:\n\n\"*Procedure:*\n\n*a) The Control of urban growth and the authorizations for new housing developments shall be established through the authorization of availability of water allowances (pajas de agua) for each project or stage thereof, until the Municipality of Belén establishes more variables in its Regulatory Plan Regulations.*\n\n*b) The Municipality shall issue the availability of water for housing developments whose demand is less than or equal to 40 (forty) water allowances annually.*\n\n*c) Authorizations for housing developments or stages thereof, that exceed more than 40 (forty) dwelling units to be accounted for in subdivisions (urbanizaciones) and condominium branches (filiales de condominios), must be proposed to the Municipal Council by the Developer, indicating the works that guarantee a minimum urban environmental impact. The proposals must guarantee the water supply to current and future users of the sector, treatment of black and wastewater, conduction and detention systems for stormwater before being discharged into watercourses that cause flooding downstream, actions regarding road expansion and signage, as well as other structural actions that ensure an orderly and proportionate urban development; a set of matters that must be endorsed by the Municipal Council.*\"\n\nThe previous regulation is in accordance with that established in the **Minimum requirements for the assessment of water availability for housing developments or stages thereof to be accounted for in subdivisions, condominium branches, and housing complexes**, approved by the Municipal Council of Belén in ordinary session number 44-2004, of July thirteen, two thousand four, in which, point B subsection vii) requires for the approval of water availability in projects whose demand exceeds more than forty dwelling units, the presentation, by the developer, of the \"*P**roposal for water supply for current and future users of the sector, planned for a minimum period of 10 years, after consulting the Master Plan of the Canton Aqueduct and the Public Services Area on the operating conditions of the municipal aqueduct system.** \"* Likewise, it should be noted that, before the requirement for water availability made by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, prior to the adoption of its decision, the Director of the Public Services Area of the corporation was required to determine the viability of the proposal, and it was in official letter **ASP-064-2009, of February twenty, two thousand nine** (at folios 86 verso and 87 front), which is consistent with the one issued by the same municipal department in **Memorando ASP-045-09**, of January four previous (at folios 177 to 179), which indicates the possibility of providing the service, but conditioned on carrying out improvements to the municipal aqueduct, with a high economic cost -approximately two hundred thousand dollars in American currency-, to guarantee effective and efficient provision, it being the case that at that time, there are no plans or budget to carry them out, due to attending to other needs and priorities of the canton; in any case, the current Master Plan must be modified or restructured. With which, it is materially impossible for the municipality to assume the provision of the service.\n\nIn this regard, the Municipal Council correctly assessed this situation, insofar as the approval of the water availability requested by the appellant cannot jeopardize the service it already provides to the community of Belén, which would translate into a weakening of the municipal aqueduct; it being unfeasible at this time for the local corporation—as was explained—to assume the costs of the infrastructure required to provide water to a project, the only way to do so being with the contribution of the developing company. It is noted that water availability is a prerequisite for the authorization of any construction permit, and its granting does not translate into the granting of the construction license, as it is a requirement—one more among others—that developers must meet to obtain it. In the case under study, it is on the occasion of the temporary closure of well AB-1571—at the voluntary request of the developer itself—that the intervention of the municipality is required, and failing that, of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, to provide the service of supplying potable water to the project. This demonstrates, once again, the non-compliance that occurs in this very sensitive area, which is the guarantee, on the part of the developer, of the provision and supply of water.\n\n**Fourth**: On the other hand, **this Chamber also does not accept the considerations made by the appellant regarding the possibility of continuing the works on the protection area of well AB-1571**, under the protection of the non-existence of contamination and because the technical works recommended by the Head of the Water Department of MINAET—José Miguel Zeledón Calderón—in official document IMN-1347-2009, of May four, two thousand nine, were carried out. The appellant forgets that it is on the occasion of constitutional judgment number 2008-15657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight, that **the competent authorities were obliged**, meaning both the Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones and the Municipality of Belén, to delimit and respect the protected area indicated in the legal order, in accordance with the warning that Nombre2449 had made. The technical consideration—Hydrological Study to delimit the capture and protection zone of well AB-1571, the Hydrogeological Vulnerability Map of a part of the Central Valley of Costa Rica, and official documents DIGH-145-2009, from the Dirección de Investigación y Gestión Hídrica of Nombre2449 and IMN-DA-1347-2009, of May four, two thousand nine, from the Head of the Water Department of MINAET—that there is no risk of contamination, neither of the groundwater nor of the well, **does not lift the restriction established in the legal order**; a provision that in any case finds support in the preventive principle in environmental matters, which is applicable in urban planning matters.\n\n**Fifth**: Finally, **the reasoning of the Council of the Municipality of Belén is also legitimate**, that given the material impossibility of being able to provide the water service through its aqueduct—due to the current state of the infrastructure—**it does not authorize the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados to assume it, because it considers that there is a legal impossibility of deriving legal effects from an absolutely null act**, in accordance with numerals 166, 169 and 170 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, given that it is evidenced, as indicated, the gravity and a large number of violations of the administrative act granting the construction permit for the San Vicente project, which, it is stated, \"**clearly typifies a case of absolute nullity, due to the absence of valid constitutive elements, so its execution would imply 'the civil liability of the Administration (that is, the municipality as such), and civil administrative and eventually criminal liability' of its authors and executors, if such execution were to take place.**\" In this sense, the local entity warns that the action of the municipal Administration, endorsing the project in contravention of the regulations governing the matter, is susceptible to generating administrative and criminal liability—both under the Ley Contra la Corrupción and environmental regulations—of the officials involved, since a permit was granted in an openly illegal manner, which qualifies as a deviation of power. Indeed, when sustaining this absolute nullity of construction permit number 7604-2008, in favor of Nombre16224—because the property is in a trust (fideicomiso)—for the construction of eleven compressive towers of one hundred twenty-one apartments, under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571 as the sole source of potable water supply, the town council enunciates the following serious infractions of the legal order:\n\n**1.-** The project did not present the potable water availability granted by the Municipality of Belén; given that neither the current Master Plan nor the contingency plan of said corporation contemplate the water supply for new urban projects, which does not guarantee its supply; thereby, a construction permit was approved that does not have all the necessary requirements for its assessment, infringing the principle of legality, by omitting the formalities provided for in accordance with the urban planning regulations of the canton, in contravention of the Política de Crecimiento Urbano and the respective regulation of Requisitos mínimos para la valoración de disponibilidad de agua para desarrollos habitacionales o etapas de éstos, published in La Gaceta 124 and 147, of June twenty-fourth and July twenty-eighth, both publications, of two thousand four;\n\n**2.-** The construction permit was given by a municipal official without the endorsement of the Council, as required by the urban regulations of the canton regarding housing projects of more than forty units, but rather by the Unidad de Desarrollo, with the approval of an official not legitimized from the Área Técnica Operativa y de Desarrollo Urbano because he was not affiliated with the respective Professional Association and was not the Coordinator of the Department. It reasons that this action is also contrary to Legal Opinion C-235-99 of the Procuraduría General de la República, which indicates that it is the Council that corresponds to the final act of approval or rejection of the construction of a development in a canton, the municipal engineering department being a consultative body of the Council;\n\n**3.-** Knowingly, the installation of part of the housing project (towers 4 and 5 and parking areas, according to approved construction plans) was authorized within the protection area of well AB-1571; thus disregarding the technical criteria, opinions, and consultative determinations of Nombre2449 issued in official documents ASUB-452-2007, SL232-2007, ASUB-520-07 and GE-049-09 relating to the duty to preserve the protection area of well AB-1571, as is evident from constitutional ruling 2008-015657, of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October seventeen, two thousand eight; which in its opinion constitutes the non-application of the binding jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional regarding the precautionary principle with respect to groundwater (specifically in judgment number 2007-1923 of that Court), in relation to the protection of groundwater;\n\n**4.-** The permit was granted under the protection of the existence and exploitation of the concession of well AB-1571, as the sole source of potable water supply, which was subject to a fixed and determined term; which was explained, in addition to being insufficient for this project according to the technical criterion of the Director of the Área de Servicios Públicos of the Municipality of Belén—in official document *Oficio ASP-327-2007*—, to be a condition incompatible with an urban project, since water must be inherent to the project itself because it is as essential a point as it is permanent, which implies that it must not have interruptions or alterations of any kind;\n\n**5.-** The permit was granted without attending to technical criteria that recommended another decision: namely, the ***Oficio ASP-327-2007 from the Dirección del Área de Servicio Público of the Municipality of Belén***—Luis Carlos Cháves—, which pointed out that according to the concession granted by MINAE and the planned storage structure (underground tank) and the assigned flow rate, it cannot be filled during the eighteen hours of authorized pumping; which makes it evident that there is a shortfall in the water supply (faltante de agua); the ***official document UA-204-2007 from the Unidad Ambiental of the Municipality of Belén*** that indicated that the site designs, the existence of two buildings, streets and parking were within the well's protection zone; the ***official document UO 276-2007 from the Unidad de Obras of the Municipality of Belén***, that the proposal only partially solved the road capacity problems, without addressing the need for accessibility that could be generated on the road; the ***official document O-023-2007 from the Unidad de Obras of the Municipality of Belén***, relating to the road impact on the access road to the process known as Potrerillos, which raised the issue of serious stormwater runoff problems due to the lack of a collector, channelization and stormwater discharge, in addition to the collapse of the pavement structure along the road towards the radial of Santa Ana; drainage system, roadway width;\n\n**6.-** That due process was not fulfilled in its granting, insofar as the rejection reports from the Unidad Ambiental (UA-198-2007, UA-207-2007, AM-A132-2008 and UA 36-2008) were not delivered to the interested party for their proper correction.\n\nWithout this Court specifically assessing the previous elements, and without endorsing the absolute nullity of the act in question—construction permit 7604-2008 of the municipality of Belén—, since it has not been declared as such in an ordinary administrative procedure, following prior opinions of the Procuraduría General de la República, in accordance with Article 183 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, nor does it derive from a lesividad (declaration of nullity by the Administration itself) procedure—Article 173 of the cited Law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo; **it is considered that the rejection it makes of the action initiated by Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 is sufficiently motivated by the alleged nullity**. In this sense, an absolutely null act is not presumed valid, as expressly provided for in numeral 169 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, so that, in principle, no legal effect can be derived from it, once it has been declared—but it may well be the cause or motive for precautionary measures, as will be indicated below—, and consequently, it cannot be executed either, which is a logical consequence of its flagrant illegitimacy and intrinsic ineffectiveness; and therefore, due to the seriousness of its defects, in essential elements of the act, it cannot be cured or validated (Article 172 of the same legal body); and numeral 170 of the cited Law itself incurs the civil liability of the Administration and the official for the execution of an act of such nature.\n\n**IX.- FINAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE APPEALED AGREEMENT.-** For this Collegiate Body, the decision of the Municipal Council of Belén is in accordance with the law and must be confirmed insofar as the rejection, in all its aspects, of the request for water availability made by the developing company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, must be considered, as it indeed is, as a precautionary measure, issued by the deliberative body upon evidencing the lack of one of the essential elements of the project—the provision of water—; and precisely, in safeguarding its own sustainability, in protection of the safety and rights of future inhabitants; which in turn is based on the suspension of works agreed upon by the Unidad de Desarrollo Urbano in official documents ODU-022-2009 and ODU-13-2009 of May eleven and thirteen, two thousand nine (folios 166 to 169), which are motivated by the lack of provision of water availability for the projected works. Likewise, it is in accordance with the transitory reform introduced to the cantonal regulatory plan, by agreement taken in Article 5 of ordinary session number 16-2007, of March thirteen, two thousand seven, with the approval of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (in ordinary session of the Board of Directors number 23-2006, of April twenty-fifth, two thousand six, in which it heard official document 1535 from the Director of Urbanism) and of the Sala Constitucional (in judgments number 2005-8915 and 2005-6399), by virtue of which, the \"granting of water availability and construction permits, for housing, commercial and industrial development projects, in condominiums or developments (urbanización), was temporarily suspended, for the time necessary to update and put into execution the new Regulatory Plan for the Canton of Belén, in light of the new known elements...\" No repeal of such regulation is recorded in the case records or electronic registries. Notwithstanding the foregoing considerations, **this Court considers that the situation raised in this matter cannot remain in the terms resolved by the Council in the appealed agreement**; since it cannot be maintained indefinitely over time, **the foregoing, because a declaratory act of rights is in force—construction permit 7604-2008 of the municipality of Belén—, which, it is repeated, to date has not been annulled in accordance with the mechanisms provided for that purpose by the legal order**; and which serves as its basis, as otherwise it would lose the characteristic of instrumentality that is proper to it, becoming an autonomous and improper sanction in the Rule of Law. Indeed, in municipal matters, the declaration of nullity of a final administrative act that has granted a right to the administered party can occur in several ways: **a)** **at the instance of a third party** \"**interested**\", \"anyone\", in the terms of Article 173 of the Constitución Política, through the presentation of the extraordinary appeal for review (recurso extraordinario de revisión); in the terms permitted by numerals 157 and 163 of the Código Municipal; or **b)** **by the local government going back against that prior act of its own, declaratory of subjective rights**, either through the ordinary administrative procedure, in the administrative venue itself, in cases of evident and manifest absolute nullity, as authorized by Article 183 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, prior to a favorable opinion of the Procuraduría General de la República, or by filing a lesividad process in the contentious-administrative venue, in cases of non-evident and non-manifest absolute nullity, which is regulated in numerals 173 of the indicated law, 10 subsection 5) and 34 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. The foregoing finds support in the theory or doctrine of one's own acts (doctrina de los actos propios), which the jurisprudence of the Sala Constitucional has developed, which has indicated:\n\n\"[...] there exists in law a general principle according to which no one can go back on their own acts, however, regarding acts emanating from the Administration in the exercise of its functions, the general principle operates that administrative acts are essentially revocable, there being, however, an exception, which is that administrative acts are not revocable when they create, declare or recognize rights in favor of third parties as long as those acts have been issued in full compliance with the essential requirements for their validity, which are the object, competence, will and form, because if they do not meet such requirements, precisely because they are acts that create, declare or recognize rights, they could engender absolute or relative nullity, which is declared through procedures previously established by law [...]\" (judgment of the Sala Constitucional number 5808-93, of sixteen hours forty-two minutes on November ten, nineteen ninety-three).\n\nThis does not deny the Public Administration the power to revoke and modify its own decisions; but it is known that this power is not entirely free, but must be subject to the limits—already indicated—expressly provided by the legislator, and which, as interpreted by the Sala Constitucional, constitute a guarantee of the legality of the Administration's action, and a right for the administered party.\n\nIt is warned that the ex officio review or annulment with violation of the legal requirements as indicated, \"whether by omission of the required formalities or because the absolute nullity is not evident and manifest\" (e.g., that the opinion is unfavorable, that the opinion was not requested, or that an ordinary administrative procedure was not opened) is absolutely null and makes both the public administration and the official liable for the damages caused (Article 173, paragraph 6°, ibid.).\n\n**X.-** As a corollary of the foregoing, the appealed agreement must be confirmed. Pursuant to what is indicated in Considerando IX.- above, immediately upon notification of this resolution, the Municipal Council, as supreme head of the local government, and the Municipal Mayor as executor of its agreements, must proceed immediately to seek the elimination from the legal order of construction permit 7604-2008 that the Unidad Ambiental of the Municipality of Belén granted to Improsa, for the construction of the Condominios or Apartamentos San Vicente project, which is being developed by the company Condominios La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Anónima, in accordance with the provisions of Article 174.1 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, which literally states:\n\n\"1. The Administration **shall be obligated to annul ex officio** the absolutely null act, within the limitations of this law.\"\n\nSince no further appeal lies against the provisions of this resolution, the administrative channel is deemed exhausted.\n\n**XI.- REGARDING THE INADMISSIBILITY OF THE REQUEST FOR LIABILITY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.-** Finally, the request made to this instance to carry out the respective procedures to determine the administrative and civil liability of the council member officials who participated in the adoption of the appealed agreement must be rejected as inadmissible. It is recalled for this purpose that this Court exercises a reviewing jurisdiction, as an improper biphasic hierarch, in accordance with the provisions of numerals 173 of the Constitución Política, and as developed by Article 156 of the Código Municipal and 189 and 190 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. Thereby, it exercises an eminently administrative function, despite being a Court of Justice, inserted in the organization of the Judicial Branch, insofar as the **ultimate control of the legality of specific administrative decisions of municipal decisions, prior to jurisdictional control**, has been delegated to it. Thus, it acts as a mechanism of administrative oversight, which must be inserted within the organizational sphere of the Administration—in this case, of the municipalities—; which, pursuant to the provisions of Article 181 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, can review, solely, the legality of the act by virtue of an administrative appeal and must decide within the limit of the claims and questions of fact raised by the appellant, being able to apply a norm not invoked in the appeal. As there is no pronouncement by the Council on what is sought, this prevents this Court from reviewing it.\n\n**POR TANTO:**\n\nAs inadmissible, the request to establish liabilities against municipal officials is rejected. In all other respects, with the considerations given, the appealed agreement is confirmed. The administrative channel is deemed exhausted. The Municipality of Belén must take special note of the reasons set forth in Considerandos IX.- and X.- of this resolution.\n\nHubert Fernández Argüello\n\nRocío Rojas Morales                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Silvia Consuelo Fernández Brenes\n\nExp. No. Placa16782\nMunicipal Process. Improper Hierarchy.\nCondominio La Ribera Belemita Cincuenta, Sociedad Nombre101960 against the Municipalidad de Belén"
}