Amparo against quarry and warehouses near residential area in Santa AnaAmparo contra tajo y bodegas cerca de zona residencial en Santa Ana

Res. No. 2010-011946 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at eleven hours and twenty-six minutes on July ninth, two thousand ten.

Amparo action filed by Minor Jiménez Guevara, of legal age, single, designer, identity card number 1-0948-0235; Rolando Pérez Alpízar, of legal age, single, planner, identity card number 1-0892-0422; Jorge Cordero Chacón, of legal age, single, accountant, identity card number 1-1019-0604; Mayobeth Gutiérrez Avalos, of legal age, married, homemaker, identity card number 7-0092-0582; María Josefa Gómez Aguirre, of legal age, married once, nurse, identity card number 9-0072-0985; Priscilla López Santiesteban, of legal age, dental technician, divorced, identity card number 1-0636-0814; Marcela Luna Tortós, of legal age, married once, teacher, identity card number 1-0903-0879; Hilda Hermencia Choque Flores, of legal age, married once, homemaker, of Colombian nationality, residency card number 117000309401; Ruth Marina Mahechea Martínez, of legal age, married once, homemaker, of Colombian nationality, residency card number 117000886420; Cecilia Quesada Villalobos, of legal age, divorced, professor, identity card number 6-0124-0984; Martha Barrantes García, of legal age, single, public accountant, identity card number 2-0574-0444; Rosaura Fregui Sequeira, of legal age, single, artisan, identity card number 1-0588-0098; Silvia Natalia Silesky Cháves, of legal age, single, pharmacist, identity card number 1-0995-0196; Edgar Antonio Pérez Rojas, of legal age, married once, computer engineer, identity card number 1-0787-0602; Hortencia Elizondo Fernández, of legal age, married once, homemaker, identity card number 9-0098-0663; Luis Montiel Araya, of legal age, contractor, married once, identity card number 5-0218-0829; Meibol Salazar Elizondo, of legal age, married once, secretary, identity card number 1-0678-0764; Bernard Silesky Meneses, of legal age, married once, retiree, identity card number 9-0012-0141; Jairo Leal Cabalceta, of legal age, married once, heavy machinery operator, identity card number 5-0292-0096; José Antonio Salazar Zamora, of legal age, married once, publicist, identity card number 1-0943-0996; Gonzálo Pacheco León, of legal age, common-law marriage, retiree, identity card number 1-0314-0504; Roxana Valverde Rivera, of legal age, married once, seamstress, identity card number 1-0969-0997 and María Rocío Morales Varela, of legal age, single, nurse, identity card number 6-0239-0687: all residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, against Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., Constructora MECO S.A., the Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications, the Executive President of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, the Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Minister of Health, the Mayor and the President of the Council, both of the Municipalidad de Santa Ana, the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, the Director of Water and the General Director of Geology and Mines, both of the Ministry of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications, and the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA).

Resultando:

1.- By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seven hours thirty minutes on January twentieth, two thousand nine (folios 1 to 9), the petitioners filed an amparo action against Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., the Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications, the Executive President of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, the Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Minister of Health, the Mayor and the President of the Municipal Council, both of the Municipalidad de Santa Ana, and Constructora MECO S.A., and they state that they are residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana. They relate that since 1994, the company Constructora Meco, S.A. established itself in the area with a quarry (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices. That said area is—according to the Plan Regulador—classified as a "high-density residential zone (zona residencial de alta densidad)," which implies that the site is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause disturbances to the neighborhood. In fact, there is a declaration from the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo indicating that it had not granted construction permits in August 1994 for industrial activities in that area. Due to the existence of the quarry (tajo), the residents of the area suffer from dust pollution and noise pollution from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, in addition to the soils being unstable as a result of material extraction. Despite the fact that Constructora Meco has drafted letters about the good things it has done, such as placing manhole covers, instructing its vehicles not to transit through the neighborhood, and buying and installing signs for that same purpose, the truth is that the vehicles continue to transit, and they have again destroyed the streets surrounding the residential area. They assert that they have filed several proceedings before the respondent Municipal Corporation, aimed at pointing out the multiple disturbances that the cited company has caused them for years, but their claims have not been resolved. They point out that the Municipalidad de Santa Ana contracted a study on environmental fragility indices (índices de fragilidad ambiental), and this clearly explains that Constructora Meco is operating on the magmatic rock aquifer (manto acuífero de roca magmática) of moderate potential, which is why it does not recommend any type of activity in that area that puts it at risk of contamination. Said study indicates that the Constructora Meco area already suffers from a "high degree of environmental impact" and, viewed from Google Earth, the water table (nivel freático) appears to be exposed. They add that the Bosques de Santa Ana community is located right next to Constructora Meco and on top of what the environmental fragility index calls "the most important aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the Central Valley," so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate the mining activity from the area. It is also worth noting that in the past decade, the intention to place a sanitary landfill (relleno sanitario) on this same property, now owned by Constructora Meco, was halted due to environmental fragility, which, in their judgment, is once again in danger. On the other hand, they allege that for several years, Corporación de Supermercados Unidos installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite the fact that, as they have maintained, the area is residential, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. They assert that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo granted permits to the aforementioned corporation, contrary to the provisions of the plan regulador. Said company has not contained the disturbances produced by its commercial activities, a situation that is aggravated by the inertia of the respondents, who have not provided an effective solution to the pollution problem they complain of. They indicate that the aforementioned facts are known to the respondent authorities, before whom the corresponding administrative procedures were carried out, and some have been informed of the disturbances, but the truth is that these entities have not resolved the problems raised and have accepted the temporary solutions that Constructora Meco and Wal Mart have offered, they have archived the complaints as if the solutions were definitive, without following up on the actions and without demanding definitive solutions, such as eliminating the sources of the problem. They consider that their constitutional right to health and the right to obtain a definitive resolution from state institutions have been violated.

2.- Norman Coto Kikut reports, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. (folios 139 to 146), that the authorization for the location of the CSU warehouses in Santa Ana was granted by the Urban Planning Department (Dirección de Urbanismo) of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, through note UR-326 of April 2, 1993. The official communication authorizing the land use (uso del suelo) expressly mentions the existence of the Plan Regulador. The Municipalidad de Santa Ana did not deny the location of the CSU warehouses at the site, as it approved the plans, because it considered, as INVU did, that it would not cause any disturbance to the residents of the area. To date, the CSU warehouses do not cause any disturbance to the neighbors, as noise containment measures have been complied with. The warehouse itself does not generate noise; there are no machines. It is a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment, so there is no disturbance. His client is not responsible for the pollution or damage to the sidewalks or public roads located near the company's warehouses, as it is up to the MOPT or the local Municipalidad to repair them. The neighbors cannot attribute the damage to his client; the trucks are not the property of the company but of third parties who have the right to circulate on the public roads adjacent to the company and on any other public road. The company is also a user of the roads, and the neighbors cannot prevent it from using them. Furthermore, dozens of trucks not owned by CSU transit those streets, as that road connects San Antonio de Belén with Santa Ana and Santa Ana with Guachipelín de Escazú. He requests that the action filed be dismissed.

3.- Jorge Rodríguez Quirós reports under oath, in his capacity as Acting Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications (folios 153 to 160), that there are two mining concessions in the area. According to the Registro Nacional Minero, in administrative file 2366, a concession was granted in the name of Orlando Ramírez González, granted through resolution R-034-95-MIRENEM of nine hours forty minutes on March 23, 1995, for a term of 25 years starting from the approval of the Estudio de Impacto Ambiental. That approval was notified to the interested party by resolution No. 064 of eight hours fifteen minutes on June 20, 1995, at ten hours thirty-five minutes on June 26, 1995, the date from which the granted term runs. By resolution No. 221 of eight hours fifteen minutes on February 3, 1997, the assignment of the concession right was approved in favor of the company EDM DE COSTA RICA S.A., notified at nine hours forty minutes on February 12, 1997. By resolution No. 1925 of eight hours fifteen minutes on December 7, 1999, a lease agreement for the concession was approved in favor of CONSTRUCTORA MECO S.A., notified at eleven hours thirty minutes on December 10, 1999. Similarly, administrative file 2479 is recorded in the Registro Minero in the name of the company EDM DE COSTA RICA S.A., where a quarry exploitation concession is granted through resolution R-061-97-MINAE of twelve hours fifteen minutes on February 5, 1997, for a term of 20 years starting from the approval of the Estudio de Impacto Ambiental, an approval that was notified to the interested party through resolution No. 431-97-SETENA of twelve hours fifty minutes on July 9, 1997, the date from which the granted term runs, located in Honduras, district 3 Pozos, Canton 9, Santa Ana of the Province of San José. By resolution No. 1924 of eight hours on December 7, 1999, a lease agreement for the concession was approved in favor of CONSTRUCTORA MECO S.A., a resolution that was notified at eleven hours thirty-two minutes on December 7, 1999. He refers to the information provided by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental. He points out that regarding the quarries (tajos) located near the Virilla River, and mainly due to the episode that occurred a few years ago in the area concerning the aquifers (mantos acuíferos), the Dirección de Geología y Minas has required the concessionaires in the vicinity to submit hydrogeological studies. He adds that the arguments made against Supermercados Unidos are not within his jurisdiction; however, the content of official communication SG-AJ-167-2008-SETENA is important. He notes that amparo action file 08-014565-0007-CO is pending, in which aspects similar to the present case are discussed. He requests that the action filed be dismissed.

4.- Jorge Arturo Sánchez Zúñiga reports under oath, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (folios 165 to 168), that this Institution granted the land use (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. in April 1993, for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries, considering that it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Plan Regulador of Santa Ana, and that lot No. SJ 17213-91 had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which the minimum setbacks had to be 15 m from the boundaries, a front setback of 52m from the main road, and a rear setback of 35 meters, which by itself allows and guarantees containment of disturbances. However, this land use does not authorize the construction of the premises, nor the construction and operating permits, which correspond to the local Municipalidad and the Ministry of Health. The latter regarding sanitary operation. Regarding the quarry (tajo) activity carried out by Construcción MECO, it is demonstrated, according to the attached certified photocopy from the administrative file, that INVU did not grant any permit or authorization, as shown in official communications UR. 646 of June 6, 1994, UR.952 of July 28, 1994, PE-301-94-C of August 17, 1994, UR-M-061 dated February 18, 1997. It is important to note that in official communications PE-301-94 and UR.952-94, his client indicated that the use is non-conforming, and it is pointed out therein that the anomaly has been reported to the Municipalidad, which has taken action without any result. Furthermore, it is stated: “What would correspond is for the Municipalidad to order the closure of the work, and if this does not happen, to charge with contempt of authority, which could be punished with imprisonment.” He requests that the action filed be dismissed.

5.- Sonia Espinoza Valverde reports under oath, in her capacity as Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folios 171 to 174), that the facts alleged in this amparo action are related to those alleged in file number 08-014565-0007-CO. As indicated in official communication number SG-AJ-1232-2008-SETENA of November 7, 2008, the company Constructora Meco S.A. is the lessee of two quarries (tajos) in Pozos de Santa Ana, whose Estudios de Impacto Ambiental were approved for files 198-94 and 058-97. The approval of the first was due to article 5 of session No. 6 of May 24, 1995, issued by the Comisión Nacional de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental (CONEIA). That of the second was due to resolution number 431-97 of July 9, 1999, from this Secretariat. Regarding the zoning in which the project is currently located, it is determined that this is the responsibility of the Municipalidad de Santa Ana. Similarly, it is important to clarify that the approval of the Estudio de Impacto Ambiental is a condition or quality of the project that implies a scenario of harmonizing it with its environment, and said approval does not exempt the developer from the procedures to be fulfilled before other authorities, in this case the Municipalidad, in accordance with the competencies and current regulations. With regard to the allegation of noise and dust pollution and concerning the roads, she points out the result of the inspection conducted on February 18, 2009, by this Secretariat (for the purpose of answering the action and complying with the injunctive relief ordered by the Chamber). Focusing on the warehouses of the aforementioned supermarket corporation, the following is reported: 1. Said warehouses do not have environmental viability (viabilidad ambiental). 2. There is a file, 732-2004-SETENA, called Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., in which the expansion of these was intended, but a withdrawal occurred, for which the file was archived by resolution number 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005, and the expansion also does not have SETENA's approval. 3. As indicated in resolution number 1630-2004-SETENA, of October 5, 2004, the original warehouse was “built approximately 10 years ago.” She requests that the action filed be dismissed.

6.- By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at fourteen hours twenty-five minutes on February twenty-third, two thousand nine (folio 179), Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, indicates that she is providing a copy of file 058-97, which was mistakenly not submitted when she rendered the report.

7.- Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos reports under oath, in her capacity as Vice Minister of Health (folios 180 to 183), that according to information provided by the Director of the Área Rectora de Salud of Santa Ana, who has jurisdiction over the territory for the case, on September 12, 2008, the facilities of Empresa MECO were assessed, finding them adequately covered without water accumulation. In ARSSA-1477-08, during a visit by the Environmental Manager of the Área Rectora de Salud, they indicated that no sanitary problems were detected at the time of the visit. In ARSSA-153-09, during a visit conducted on February 19, 2008, by Marco Tulio Alvarado Godoy, Health Technician 2 of the Office of Protection of the Human Environment, indicates that no sanitary problems were verified. A noise measurement (medición sónica) is being requested from Dr. Guillermo Flores Galindo to monitor the noise pollution mitigation plan implemented by the company for the Supermercados Unidos Warehouses. She requests that the action filed be dismissed, as the operations of both the Max por Menos Warehouses and the E.D.M. Quarry (Tajo) are in order from a legal standpoint, and no problems were detected from a sanitary standpoint during the visit that was conducted.

8.- Audrys Esquivel Jiménez reports under oath, in his capacity as President of the Municipal Council of Santa Ana (folios 252 to 254), on what was agreed in ordinary session No. 68 of August 28, 2007, and in extraordinary session No. 53 of July 24, 2008. He points out that the case in question forms part of a larger situation of tension existing between the industrial and residential sectors that characterizes the eastern region of the San José Metropolitan Area, where it must be recognized that it was originally intended for industrial use and its services, and over time, the pressure for other uses, both residential and purely commercial, gave way, and various Municipal Councils were “relaxing” their position and accepting new residential developments, even though the area did not qualify as such. Thus, a historical error occurred in authorizing residential developments (urbanizaciones) in areas that were intended for industry. Currently, the Municipalidad is going to begin its final phase of discussion and approval of the reforms to the Plan Regulador, where the aim is to adopt alternatives to a difficult situation, and where the environmental fragility indices (índices de fragilidad ambiental) are just being prepared for incorporation into said Plan, which is why it is absolutely improper, inconvenient, and inopportune to refer to technical elements that are in the phase of preparation and preliminary analysis.

9.- Gerardo Oviedo Espinoza reports under oath, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of Santa Ana (folios 256 to 265), that the Plan Regulador of Santa Ana was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991; however, the zoning map, which is the graphic expression of the regulatory text, was not published with it. The zoning map was published in La Gaceta No. 137 of July first, 2001. The quarries (tajos) (today administered by Constructora MECO S.A.) were authorized for the mining concession processed under administrative files No. 2366 and 2479 in the years 1995 and 1997, respectively. Concessions granted by MIRENEM (now MINAET) without consulting the Municipalidad and without requiring a land-use certificate (certificado de uso de suelo) as a requirement. Similarly, the warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the Plan Regulador maps. The wagons, tankers, and other heavy cargo vehicles must transit only on the national highways and the main access road to the sector, and not on the internal streets of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. The parking of machinery and equipment used by the MECO company is part of the extraction and sale of construction aggregates that, since 1995, has had Mining Concession No. 2366 and a commercial license granted by municipal agreement adopted in ordinary session No. 3 of May 12, 1998. This Municipalidad is working on a comprehensive reform of the Plan Regulador, and in Ordinary Session No. 60 of July 03, 2007, the Council had agreed that the sector where the quarries (tajos) and the Más x Menos warehouses are located be established as an industrial and business zone where extraction and warehouse uses would be conforming. He clarifies that the zone proposed to be industrial and business only contemplates the lots where the quarries (tajos) and warehouses are located, which are large in size and have no buildings, while the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana remains a High-Density Residential Zone (Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad). In Extraordinary Session No. 53 held on Thursday, July 24, 2008, the complainants, who along with other residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, gave a presentation on the problems they suffer due to heavy traffic, and the Council agreed to the following: “To revoke the agreement recorded in the minutes of ordinary session No. 60 held by this Municipal Council on July 03, 2007, and to modify the industrial and business zone in Pozos to a use consistent with the residential use it now has (High-Density Residential). To empower the Commission on Urban Planning and Plan Regulador (Comisión de Ordenamiento Urbano y Plan Regulador) to issue a report on the environmental recovery of the zone.” The municipal authorizations for the quarries (tajos) to operate were given by agreement of the Municipal Council when the Zoning Regulation (Reglamento de Zonificación) was published but the corresponding map, which is the graphic expression that allows locating each zone and its extension, was not. The same happened with the authorization given for the operation of the Más x Menos warehouses. However, since these are non-conforming existing uses with the High-Density Residential Zone (Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad), the Municipalidad has not authorized the growth or expansion of these activities. Now, in this case, no mention is made of the view provided by Google Earth, as it is outdated and has been prepared by a company foreign to this Municipal Corporation, meaning that, in that sense, its veracity regarding the current reality cannot be guaranteed. Finally, regarding the issue of the environmental fragility indices (índices de fragilidad ambiental), it is necessary to highlight that said study, contracted to Mr. Allan Astorga, has not yet been delivered in full by him, which is why it has not been reviewed or approved by the Municipal Council or the administration. In this sense, it is necessary to reiterate that a comprehensive reform of the plan regulador will be proposed with the mentioned fragility indices, which has not yet occurred. He points out that file 08-14565-0007-CO deals with this same matter. He requests that the action be declared without merit.

10.- Magda Verdesia Solano reports, in her capacity as Legal Representative of Constructora MECO S.A. (folios 267 to 270), that if observed carefully, the petitioners at no time accuse any environmental damage; it could not be otherwise, as according to the facts, there has been none. Any variation that the classification of the zone might have in the future cannot have retroactive effects to the detriment of acquired rights.

11.- By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seventeen hours twenty-nine minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 286 and 287), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the Ministry of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications and by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA), he requests that the amparo action be declared without merit regarding his client.

12.- By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seventeen hours twenty-nine minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 288 to 290), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the President of the Municipal Council and the Municipal Mayor of Santa Ana, he requests that the amparo action be declared without merit regarding his client.

13.- By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seventeen hours twenty-nine minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 291 to 293), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the Vice Minister of Health, he requests that the amparo action be declared without merit regarding his client.

14.- By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seventeen hours thirty minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 294 and 295), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by INVU, he requests that the amparo action be declared without merit regarding his client.

15.- By means of a resolution at fourteen hours fifty-six minutes on July 10, 2009 (folios 296 to 298), the Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications and the Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental were required to address the point raised by the petitioners regarding the alleged risk of aquifer contamination (contaminación del manto acuífero) due to the work carried out by Constructora Meco S.A., also taking into account that the Hydrogeological and Quarry Contamination Risk Study (Estudio Hidrogeológico y de Riesgo de Contaminación de Cantera) signed by Roberto Protti, to which they refer and which appears in the certification of the administrative file provided, dates from January 2002.

16.- Sonia Espinoza Valverde reports, in her capacity as Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folios 302 to 305), that the Environmental Fragility Indices (Índices de Fragilidad Ambiental, IFA) are just one of the requirements that must be submitted to this Secretariat as part of environmental land-use planning (planificación ambiental del uso del suelo) stipulated in the Manual of Technical Instruments for the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (Manual de EIA) – Part III – Decree No. 32967-MINAE, in order to be eligible for Environmental Viability (Viabilidad (Licencia) Ambiental).

That the arguments put forward by the appellants are not on file with nor accepted by SETENA, since that Institution is unaware of the scope of the Environmental Fragility Indices contracted by the Municipality of Santa Ana, because they have not yet been submitted to, much less analyzed by, the technical staff of that Institution. On the other hand, and in reference to the vulnerability of aquifer contamination as a result of the activities carried out by the Quarry, it must be noted that the environmental impact assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental) for this project was submitted to the Inter-Institutional Commission for the Evaluation and Control of Environmental Impact Assessments on November 3, 1994, prior to the creation of SETENA and to the instruments used today in the environmental impact assessment (Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental) process; however, the chapter on groundwater and contamination vulnerability is presented in this document, where it mentions on page 30 that, within the geological formations that make up the project area, because they are formed of materials of low conductivity and permeability, there is no danger of contamination to more permeable materials, such as the underlying lavas that could have aquifer capacity. As a complement and part of the process of updating information in the administrative file kept at SETENA, the submission by the developer of the Hydrogeological Contamination Risk Study approved by the Directorate General of Geology and Mines is on file, which circumscribes the area where the exploitation works of the Tajo Santa Ana are carried out, and which included for its preparation a field phase where drilling was conducted to strengthen the analysis performed; in which Hydrogeologist Roberto Protti certifies, according to the stratigraphy of the aquifer, that the local rock basement forms a negative or no-flow barrier due to the low permeability of the volcanic rocks, which is consistent with the data provided in the environmental impact assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental). It is also indicated that SETENA will schedule another field inspection as soon as possible by officials from the Department of Environmental Auditing and Monitoring, in order to continue the process of monitoring the quarry's activities. Regarding the developer's related responsibilities, SETENA certifies on July 15 of the current year through SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA that the Environmental Viability (License) for the Tajo Santa Ana project is valid, as well as that the environmental commitments assumed by the developer, such as environmental reports and keeping the amount of the environmental guarantee up to date, are current. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

17.- Jorge Rodríguez Quirós reports, in his capacity as Minister of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (folios 339 to 346), similarly to the General Secretariat of SETENA (folios 302 to 305). He adds that regarding the developer's related responsibilities, SETENA certifies on July 15, 2009 through SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA that the Environmental Viability (License) for the Tajo Santa Ana project is valid, as well as that the environmental commitments assumed by the developer, such as environmental reports and keeping the amount of the environmental guarantee up to date, are current. Regarding the mining activity in the conflict zone, he reports on the tasks carried out by the Directorate of Geology and Mines, which is the competent entity to regulate mining activity. With respect to the processing of mining file number 2479, the Directorate of Geology and Mines informs that Ministerial Office that the lessee company submits a series of well monitoring reports. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

18.- By document received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at three ten in the afternoon on August eighteen, two thousand nine, (folios 396 and 397), Magda Verdesia Solano, in her capacity as representative of Constructora Meco S.A., indicates that, as stated in point e) of the “Conclusions” presented by the Director of the National Mining Registry, in her official communication DGM/RNM 629-2009 of July 27, 2009, it is not true that there is an “exposed water table”, as the appellant party irresponsibly claims. That assertion is taken from a report without scientific basis, which was prepared without a site visit or field analysis and from a Google Earth observation. The former is irresponsible and the latter is an unreliable source, being superficial and lacking depth.

19.- By resolution issued at twelve fifty-nine on September 18, 2009 (folios 402 and 403), the Vice Minister of Health was ordered to provide the sonic measurement of the activities of the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos and Constructora Meco S.A.

20.- By document received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at three thirty-one in the afternoon on September thirty, two thousand nine, (folios 406 to 410), Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos, in her capacity as Vice Minister of Health, reported regarding the sonic measurement of Supermercados Unidos as indicated in official communication URS-RCS-2011-09 of September 29, 2009. With respect to the inspection she conducted of several quarries in the Pozos de Santa Ana area, Eng. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto of the Health Governing Unit of the Central South Region reported the result in official communication URS-RCS-2009-2009 dated September 29, 2009. Based on the inspections conducted by both Lic. Luis Fernando Retana Segura and Eng. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto, officials of the Health Governing Unit of the Central South Region, Dr. Ana Cecilia Víquez Pérez, Director of the Health Governing Area of Santa Ana, through official communication ARSSA-1598-09 dated September 29 of the current year, requests the Traffic Engineering Directorate of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport to conduct an inspection of vehicular flow of machinery and heavy vehicles in the vicinity of Residencial Bosques de Santa Ana, specifically in front of the Más por Menos Warehouses, as this falls outside the competence of the Ministry of Health. Furthermore, Sanitary Order No. ARSSA-1583-09 was issued to Mr. Marco Alfaro Vega, Person in Charge of the EDM de Costa Rica Quarry, Constructora MECO S.A., granting him a period of 10 days to submit a plan establishing the dates on which the studies indicated by Eng. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto, of the Health Governing Unit of the Central Region, in official communication URS-RCS-2009-2009 dated September 29 of the current year, will be conducted. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

21.- Magistrate Fernando Castillo Víquez recused himself from hearing this matter on March 22, 2010 (folio 418).

22.- By resolution issued at one forty-three in the afternoon on March 24, 2010 (folio 419), the Acting President of the Chamber accepted the recusal of Magistrate Fernando Castillo Víquez and ordered that his substitution be requested from the Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice.

23.- On March 25, 2010, it was communicated by the Office of the Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice that Magistrate Enrique Napoleón Ulate Chacón was appointed to hear this amparo.

24.- By resolution issued at eleven thirty-six in the morning on April 13, 2010 (folios 422 to 425), the appeal was expanded against the Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, the Director of Water and the Director General of Geology and Mines of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications, and the Manager of the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service.

25.- Bernal Soto Zúñiga reports, in his capacity as General Manager of the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service (SENARA) (folios 430 to 433), that in that Department there is no record of any procedure for the operation of the Quarry referred to in this amparo. Nor has SENARA reviewed, approved, or endorsed specific hydrogeological studies for the operation of the quarry in question. The Constructora Meco S.A. Quarry is physically located on the left bank of the Virilla River. According to information derived from hydrogeological studies conducted or registered at SENARA, to date the right bank of the Virilla River is characterized by the presence of large and productive superimposed aquifers, originating and developed within the volcanic rock formations of Colima (Intra-Canyon), Barva, and Tiribí (Glowing Avalanche). These are utilized as wells and spring catchments, all of great productive capacity (e.g., La Valencia, La Libertad, Puente de Las Mulas, and Potrerillos). However, these aquifers discharge into the Virilla River and there is no hydraulic communication between aquifers in any direction across its banks. The extraordinary quality of these aquifers on the right bank of the Virilla River is a consequence of the combination of particular hydrogeological factors, sufficient extent and homogeneity of the rock units, particularly those that favor recharge and flow, favorable hydrodynamic characteristics (transmissivity, storage coefficient, position of confining layers, hydraulic conductivity), and others. This condition changes completely on the left (south) bank of the Virilla River, because although some lithologies from the right bank appear on the left, their extent is very limited and they lack adequate recharge areas or communication with lateral flows. The aquifers, where they exist, are of poor quality, not very extensive, with low hydrodynamic quality and productivity. The excavation of the deep canyon of the Virilla River has penetrated to below the top of the Lower Colima rocks, which has left the Glowing Avalanche Formation (Upper Colima, Puente de Mulas) totally exposed. With this, the drainage of its aquifer into the river occurs and hydraulic communication with the left bank is discontinued. There is no possibility of flow occurring between both banks, much less from left to right. The scarce recharge of the small aquifers on the left bank (Pozos, Honduras de Santa Ana, Uruca) is carried out through infiltration within the small catchment basins of the hills (Alto Las Palomas, Coyote, Real de Pereira) and the Alluviums of the La Uruca River. The Upper Colima Unit does not form an important aquifer, since the canyon of the Virilla River constitutes a natural barrier that prevents flow in any direction (from the right bank to the left and vice versa). Likewise, the area of coverage of these volcanic deposits on the left bank is so small that there is no significant possibility of recharge, and the volume of water they contain depends solely on the infiltration of rainwater. It is for this reason that in the quarry this material is found dry. Under that unit, it barely presents a partial seasonal saturation level at a depth of around 25 meters (according to a hydrogeological study conducted under the professional direction of geologist Roberto Protti in 1996), suspended or perched on a paleosol that characterizes the top of Grifo Alto. The Hydrogeological and Contamination Risk Study (2002) also concludes that the Grifo Alto rocks, particularly in their fractured and unaltered lower levels, give rise to a local aquifer of low potential, of a semi-confined to unconfined type. Using the Foster and Hirata GOD method, the aquifer contamination vulnerability index of the local Grifo Alto aquifer is 0.15, from low to very low. As conclusions: 1. Although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; while on the right bank they are very productive, on the left, due to their small recharge areas, they are not found saturated and only generate small aquifers of low potential. 2. The rainwater that infiltrates the quarry drains partly into the Virilla River and partly feeds the lower aquifer that develops near the Grifo Alto Formation, which has low aquifer potential. 3. The determination of the vulnerability of the Grifo Alto formation (base of the quarry) provided by Geologist Roberto Protti in the studies conducted, was made with a single hydraulic conductivity test, which together with the porosity data, rock and aquifer type, allows classifying the aquifer with low vulnerability. 4. For the purpose of assessing the current situation, it is recommended to conduct more hydraulic conductivity tests and recalculate the transit times and the intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer. In addition, an inventory of possible contamination sources in the quarry extraction development should be carried out and measures taken to prevent the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer. 5. It is also recommended to install piezometers in the quarry, with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the rock exploitation elevations or levels. These levels to be measured are also important for the construction of the flow model for the continuous monitoring of groundwater. During the construction process of the piezometers, provision can be made for water quality sampling. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

26.- José Francisco Castro Muñoz reports, in his capacity as Director of the Directorate of Geology and Mines of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (folios 434 to 439), that to date, within the administrative files, there is no communication from SETENA, the agency that by law is competent to determine the existence of environmental contamination, indicating that the company cannot carry out work due to an environmental problem. Nor is there an official communication from the Municipality of Santa Ana communicating the suspension of work due to the company's non-compliance with its obligations to the municipality. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

27.- Ricardo Sancho Chavarría reports under oath, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (folios 442 to 449), that the Meco Quarry is not located within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area demarcated by the AyA. According to the report called "Derechos de uso de aguas o sitios de Aprovechamiento para Abastecimiento poblacional por regiones operativas de Acueductos y Alcantarillados", the Meco Quarry is located on the left bank of the Virilla River at a straight-line distance of 880 m from Tunnel 1 of Puente Mulas, 850 m in a straight line from Tunnel 2 Puente Mulas, and 785 m in a straight line from Tunnel 3 Puente Mulas. These AyA intakes are located upstream of the Meco Quarry and on the right bank; therefore, they are not affected by this activity because the Puente Mulas Tunnels are located in a discharge zone of the Upper Colima aquifer to the Virilla River. He adds that in relation to the Fuente Potrerillos-AyA intake, located on the right bank of the Virilla River, the Meco Quarry is located on the left bank at a distance of 2 km. Therefore, this intake is not affected by the activity of that quarry, which collects water from the Lower Colima Aquifer. Therefore, the activity of the Meco Quarry does not affect the intakes for public supply or the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

28.- José Miguel Zeledón Calderón reports under oath, in his capacity as Director of the Water Directorate of MINAET (folios 456 to 458), that on the left bank of the Virilla River it has not been proven that the Colima aquifer outcrops, as stated by the appellants. The above is based on hydrogeological studies submitted to the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) and studies conducted by the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service (SENARA) and the Government of Great Britain (BGS) in that area. That it is true that on the right bank of the Virilla River a large number of springs generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer outcrop, and that together with water wells are captured by the AyA. The Constructora Meco quarry is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, with this river's canyon acting as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river. He points out that it is not possible through the Google Earth system to determine the exposed water table referred to by the appellants. What is observed is a lagoon formed by the large amount of rain, which due to the presence of the Grifo Alto Formation, which has low conductivity and permeability, prevents these waters from draining and they remain for a certain time at the site. That, as observed on the map of restriction and prohibition zones declared by the AyA, the most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Virilla River. The zones located on the left bank of the Virilla River are not aquifer zones of such relevance as the appellants assert, but rather it involves the Grifo Alto aquitard. In addition to the Hydrogeological Contamination Risk Study, hydrogeologist Roberto Protti Quesada conducted drilling to certify the stratigraphy of the aquifer, where it was confirmed that the rock basement acts as a negative barrier due to the permeability of the volcanic rocks. In the field visit conducted by SETENA officials on February 18, 2009, according to official communication No. ASA-509-SETENA, there are no findings that determine the exposure of any outcrop in the quarry area. He points out that both the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) and the Directorate General of Geology of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (MINAET) approved the environmental viability studies, the hydrogeological studies, the aquifer vulnerability studies, and the contaminant transit studies. Likewise, field and monitoring visits to the quarry are scheduled by the Department of Environmental Auditing and Monitoring of SETENA to verify compliance with the provisions contained in the SETENA resolution to the mining company. It requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

29.- In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.

Drafted by Magistrate Ulate Chacón; and,

Considering:

I.- Regarding the amparo against subjects of private law. The Constitutional Chamber, in cases similar to this one, has developed the scope of what is provided in article 57 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, regarding the amparo appeal against subjects of private law. Indeed, this process proceeds not only against the actions and omissions of subjects of public law that violate or threaten to violate any of the fundamental rights, but also against the actions or omissions of subjects of private law, when they act or must act in the exercise of public functions or powers, or are found, de jure or de facto, in a position of power against which the common jurisdictional remedies are clearly insufficient or tardy to guarantee the full enjoyment of the rights enshrined in the Political Constitution, as well as in the International Instruments on Human Rights in force in the Republic (in this regard, consult Judgment No. 2000-03337 of 19:26 on April 25, 2000). In the specific case, it is evident that the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. and Constructora MECO S.A., as subjects of private law, are in a situation of power with respect to the protected parties, against whom the common jurisdictional remedies may be insufficient or tardy to assert the rights they consider violated. For this reason, the Constitutional Chamber must hear the merits of this amparo proceeding.

II.- Object of the appeal. The appellants, residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that since 1994, the company Constructora Meco, S.A. established itself in that area with a quarry, warehouses, and administrative offices, despite the fact that said site is a "high-density residential zone" according to the Regulatory Plan, which implies that the place is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisances to the neighborhood. On the occasion of the quarry's existence, they suffer contamination by dust and sonic contamination from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, besides the fact that the soils are unstable as a consequence of the extraction of material. The community of Bosques de Santa Ana, they add, is located right next to Constructora Meco, and on top of what the environmental fragility index calls: "the most important aquifers of the Central Valley," so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate said mining activity. On the other hand, they argue, for several years the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos has installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite it being a residential zone, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. The National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, they claim, granted permits to the referred corporation, contradicting what is prescribed in the regulatory plan. Said company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation aggravated by the inertia of the respondents, who have not provided an effective solution to the contamination problem. Therefore, they allege their constitutional right to health and to obtain a definitive administrative response has been violated, and not temporary solutions, claiming that Articles 27 of the Constitution, which protects the right of petition and prompt response, as well as Article 41, have been violated, since they consider they have not found a response to their administrative proceedings.

III.- Proven facts. Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are considered duly demonstrated, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:

a. The company Constructora Meco S.A., is the lessee of two quarries in Pozos de Santa Ana, whose environmental impact assessments (Estudios de Impacto Ambiental) were approved for files 198-94 and 058-97. The approval of the first was due to Article 5 of Session No. 6 of May 24, 1995, issued by the National Commission of Environmental Impact Assessments (CONEIA). The approval of the second is by Resolution number 431-97 of July 9, 1999, from that Secretariat (report on folios 153 to 160).

b. The National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) and the Directorate General of Geology of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (MINAET) approved the environmental viability studies, the hydrogeological studies, the aquifer vulnerability studies, and the contaminant transit studies for the Meco Quarry (report on folios 456 to 458).

c. At the entrance of the Meco Quarry, there is a (prior) parking area for wagons waiting to be loaded, which is located within the property of the MECO company, so public roads are never obstructed (report on folios 171 to 174).

d. In the machinery transit zone, no oil stains were observed on the ground, which indicates that, at first glance, the machinery is in good condition (report on folios 171 to 174).

e. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the area surrounding the MECO company, due to the large number of nearby industries and other productive activities, and the high transit of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the road that separates the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas (report on folios 406 to 410).

f. No evidence of dust contamination from the quarry's own activities was found at the Meco Quarry, because they are geographically confined by considerable differences in elevation, and there is constant vigilance over the covering of material transport trucks, and the transit areas of the quarry are frequently watered (report on folios 406 to 410).

g. The noise in the processing zone is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material is processed from a larger to a smaller size, but when moving away from the place, near the urban area, no noise is perceived (report on folios 171 to 174).

h. The Meco Quarry is not located within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area demarcated by the AyA (report on folios 442 to 449).

i. The activity of the Meco Quarry, located on the left bank of the Virilla River, does not affect the intakes for public supply or the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (report on folios 442 to 449).

j. The Constructora Meco quarry is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, with this river's canyon acting as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river (report on folios 456 to 458).

k. The most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Virilla River, and those located on the left bank are not aquifer zones of such relevance (report on folios 456 to 458).

l. Although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; while on the right bank they are very productive, on the left, due to their small recharge areas, they are not found saturated and only generate small aquifers of low potential (report on folios 430 to 433).

m. On the right bank of the Virilla River, a large number of springs generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer outcrop, and together with water wells are captured by the AyA (report on folios 456 to 458).

n. The Directorate of Urbanism of the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, through note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted the land-use change (cambio de uso del suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries (report on folios 165 to 168).

o. The land-use change (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. was granted considering it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Regulatory Plan of Santa Ana, and that the land No. SJ 17213-91 had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) for which the minimum setbacks had to be 15 m from the boundaries, a 52m front setback on the main road, and a 35 meter rear setback, which allows and guarantees confinement of nuisances (report on folios 165 to 168).

p. The warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Regulatory Plan of Santa Ana, which was done according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, despite the fact that the cited Plan was published in Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991 (report on folios 256 to 265).

q.

Because these are existing uses that are non-conforming with the High-Density Residential Zone, the Municipality of Santa Ana has not authorized the growth or expansion of the activities of the Más x Menos warehouses (report at folios 256 to 265).

r. It is a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment, so there is no nuisance (folios 139 to 146).

s. In a visit made by the Environmental Protection Office of the Ministry of Health on February 19, 2008, no problems were detected from a sanitary point of view at the Max por Menos Warehouses (report at folios 180 to 183, document at folio 186).

t. The sonic measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, owner of the house, stated that it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that moment, as it is intermittent, since the vehicles (wagons and heavy transit vehicles) travel with different time ranges (report at folios 406 to 410).

u. In a visit made by the Regional Directorate of Health Rectorship Central South Region of the Ministry of Health on September 25, 2009, no noise was being generated at the Supermercados Unidos Warehouses (report at folios 406 to 410, document at folio 407).

IV.- On the merits. In this case, the appellants argue that their fundamental rights were affected due to actions from various facts by two private law entities, namely, the company Constructora Meco S.A. and Corporación de Supermercados Unidos, so the actions of each one will be analyzed separately, except regarding the rights protected in articles 27 and 41 of the Magna Carta, which will be done jointly. However, beforehand, it is considered of merit to reiterate that the Chamber has stressed the necessary balance between the country's development and the right to the environment. The Chamber recognized the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, as a fundamental right, before the constitutional reform of article 50 had occurred, with a systematic, material, and evolutionary interpretation of articles 6, 11, 69, and 89, providing different responses to the contrast between private interests (freedom of enterprise) and collective interests, establishing the protection, preservation, and rational exploitation of forest resources as principles of constitutional order (Judgment No. 2233 of May 28, 1993). It has also recognized the presence of diffuse interests to grant standing for action to protect the environment, when reacting against illegitimate acts or omissions, because precisely the most frequent violation of the environment occurs due to the inertia of public authorities in performing the necessary acts to protect them (Judgment No. 3707 of 3:00 p.m. on July 30, 1993, and No. 4422 of 10:30 a.m. on September 7, 1993). Likewise, the Chamber has highlighted the need for awareness in the governmental sphere and in private activities of the environment's importance for human health. Human life is conceived as the foundation, the necessary and determining condition for the person's existence. All of this within the national, regional, and world economy, through the conservation of nature and life itself in its broadest sense (Judgment No. 4423 of 12:00 p.m. on September 7, 1993). Thus, with the reform of constitutional articles 46 and 50, the right to the protection of health, environment, security, and economic interests of consumers is consolidated in the formal constitution. It is clear that environmental protection must be aimed at the adequate and intelligent use of its elements and their natural, sociocultural, technological, and political relationships (sustainable development), to thereby safeguard the heritage to which present and future generations have a right. Therefore, the primary objective of the use and protection of the environment is that through the production and use of technology, not only economic gains (freedom of enterprise) are obtained but also a development and favorable evolution of the environment and natural resources with the human person, that is, without causing damage or harm:

"This Chamber has also recognized that both the right to health and to a pollution-free environment, without which the former could not be effective, are fundamental rights, so that the State is obliged to provide for their protection, either through general policies to achieve that end or through concrete acts by the Administration. Sustainable development is one of those general policies that the State enacts to expand the possibilities for everyone to fulfill their aspirations for a better life, increasing production capacity or expanding the possibilities of achieving equitable progress between demographic growth or between this and natural systems. Sustainable development is the transformation process in the use of resources, direction of investments, channeling of technological development, institutional changes, and everything that helps to meet the human needs of the present and the future" (judgment number 1763-94, at four forty-five p.m. on April thirteen, nineteen ninety-four).

The Chamber has indicated that the environment must be understood as a potential for development to be used appropriately, and that action must be taken in an integrated manner in its natural, sociocultural, technological, and political relationships, since, otherwise, its productivity is degraded for the present and future and the heritage of coming generations could be put at risk. The origins of environmental problems are complex and correspond to an articulation of natural and social processes within the framework of the socioeconomic development style adopted by the country. For example, environmental problems occur when the modes of exploitation of natural resources lead to a degradation of ecosystems exceeding their regeneration capacity, which results in broad sectors of the population being harmed and generates a high environmental and social cost that leads to a deterioration in the quality of life; because precisely the primary objective of the use and protection of the environment is to obtain a development and evolution favorable to the human being. Environmental quality is a fundamental parameter of that quality of life; other no less important parameters are health, food, work, housing, education, etc., but more important than that is understanding that although the human person has the right to use the environment for their own development, they also have the duty to protect and preserve it for the use of present and future generations, which is not so novel, because it is nothing more than the translation to this matter of the principle of "injury," already consolidated in common law, by virtue of which the legitimate exercise of a right has two essential limits: On one hand, the equal rights of others and, on the other, the rational exercise and useful enjoyment of the right itself. Our country has depended and will continue to depend, like any other nation, on its natural resources and its environment to meet the basic needs of its inhabitants and keep operating the productive apparatus that sustains the national economy, whose main source is agriculture and, in recent years, tourism, especially in its ecotourism dimension, to which agrotourism and community rural tourism are added. The soil, water, air, marine and coastal resources, forests, biological diversity, mineral resources, and the landscape make up the environmental framework without which basic demands —such as living space, food, energy, housing, sanitation, and recreation— would be impossible. Likewise, our economy is also intimately linked to the state of the environment and natural resources. On the other hand, the goals of sustainable development have to do with the survival and well-being of the human being and with the maintenance of essential ecological processes, that is, of environmental quality and the survival of other species. Speaking of sustainable development in terms of satisfying present and future human needs and improving the quality of life is talking about the demand for natural resources at an individual level and the direct or support means necessary for the economy to function, generating employment and creating capital goods, which in turn make possible the transformation of resources into consumer, production, and export products. The declaration made at the Earth Summit in 1992 proclaimed and recognized the integral and interdependent nature of the planet; this means the acceptance of certain principles that inform the transition from current development styles to sustainability. The signatory States, among which is Costa Rica, committed themselves, within the preservation of sustainable development, to the protection above all of the human being. It started from the principle that every person has the right to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature; the right of present and future generations for development to be carried out in such a way that it satisfies their environmental and progress needs was included; the sovereign power of States to exploit their resources was maintained, emphasizing their responsibility to ensure that activities carried out within their jurisdiction and control do not cause environmental damage to other States or areas beyond the limits of their national jurisdiction. They established the duty of States to cooperate in the conservation, protection, and restoration of the environment and their common responsibilities in that sense; in this way, international cooperation in the promotion and support of economic growth and sustainable development will allow better addressing the problems of environmental degradation. But it must also be pointed out that, in accordance with the provisions of article 50 of the Constitution, the Organic Environmental Law establishes the responsibility of whoever pollutes the environment or causes it damage (article 2, subsection d). Damage or pollution to the environment can be produced by conduct of action or omission and is attributable to all natural or legal persons who carry it out (article 98), and the owners of the companies or the activities that cause the damages, whether by action or omission, are considered jointly and severally liable (article 101).

V.- About the company Constructora Meco S.A. Regarding this company, the appellants, who are neighbors of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that since 1994 it has been established in the area with a quarry (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices, despite the fact that said area is —according to the Plan Regulador— a "high-density residential zone," which implies that this place is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisances to the neighborhood. In fact, there is a declaration from the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, which indicates that in August 1994, it did not grant construction permits for industrial activities in that area. Due to the existence of the quarry (tajo), they suffer from dust pollution and sonic pollution from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, in addition to the fact that the soils are unstable as a consequence of the extraction of material and the streets surrounding the Residential area are destroyed. They add that the Bosques de Santa Ana community is located right next to Constructora Meco, and over what the environmental fragility index calls: "the most important aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the Central Valley," so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate the mining activity from the area. The previous disagreement raised by the appellants, and practically for the same facts, was already known to this Chamber, by reason of the amparo appeal No. 08-014565-0007-CO filed by María Antonieta Alegría de García and Roberto Rafael Alegría Rodríguez, also neighbors of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. That amparo was declared without merit through judgment No. 2009-003342 at twelve fourteen p.m. on February 27, 2009, under the following considerations:

“…. V.- Well, in the present case, it is being discussed whether the omission of the respondent authorities (namely, the Dirección de Geología y Minas of the Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, the Municipalidad del Cantón de Santa Ana, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía) with respect to the complaints raised about the alleged environmental contamination problems originating from the activity carried out by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, in a quarry (tajo) adjacent to the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, violates or not the right of the protected parties to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this regard, the authorities of the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía in their report under oath have indicated that the exploitation of the aforementioned quarry (tajo) has the environmental viability (viabilidad ambiental) and the corresponding permits, after having carried out the necessary environmental impact studies (estudios de impacto ambiental) (see folio 73), which is deduced from the content of files N°198-94 and 058-97. But the Minister of Ambiente y Energía has also affirmed under oath that “to date, it is up to date with its environmental commitments, such as the amount of the environmental guarantee which is current and the presentation of the supervisory reports (informes regenciales) (see report at folio 37), and that there is no communication from the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental nor the Dirección de Geología y Minas to the effect that said company must suspend its activities (see report at folio 37).

VI.- On the other hand, the Minister of Health in her report indicated that on November 7, 2008, an inspection was carried out at the site indicated by the appellants, noting that the appellant company has the necessary permits for the development of its task, as well as the appropriate physical conditions, and no anomaly was found (see report at folio 43). Finally, the authorities of the Municipalidad del Cantón de Santa Ana in their response —which is given under the solemnity of the oath, with timely warning of the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional— indicated that the permits enjoyed by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, predate the entry into force of the Plan Regulador del Cantón de Santa Ana (see report at folio 46), with which the Chamber appreciates that it constitutes a matter of mere legality to elucidate whether such permits remain valid despite the content of the local regulating plan (plan regulador), which must be ventilated before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose.

VII.- Thus, regarding the effective protection of the precautionary principle and the right protected in article 50 of the Political Constitution, this Constitutional Court does not find demonstrated any current illegitimate situation that impairs the full enjoyment of these rights, based on the evidentiary material that the plaintiffs have provided on this occasion. On the contrary, from the reports provided by the respondent authorities and the documentary evidence attached to the record, it is rather inferred that the activity carried out in the aforementioned quarry (tajo) does not pose environmental contamination problems, regarding the possible excess of noise or dust. So, the actions of the respondents, far from violating the fundamental rights of the promoters, conform to the Law of the Constitution. By virtue of the foregoing, the appropriate action is to declare the amparo appeal without merit, without prejudice (of course) to reaching a different conclusion on another occasion based on other evidentiary elements.” Thus, taking into account that recent precedent, it is considered that it is not of merit to analyze again the permits granted to said company that have allowed it to work in the Quarry (Tajo) of interest, as well as what relates to the Plan Regulador. Furthermore, it must be mentioned, this Court has indicated in previous cases, that it is not within the purview of an instance like this one to verify whether an Environmental Impact Study (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental), hydrological study, hydrogeological study, or any other of a technical nature was well prepared or not, since it evidently requires the knowledge of specialists in those disciplines, which are not typical of the jurisdictional function of this Constitutional Court (see judgments No. 2004-009927 of eleven hours and one minute on September 3, 2004, and 2005-005790 of ten hours and forty-one minutes on May 13, 2005). In the case under study, the concessionaire company had to submit various technical studies to ensure that the project would not cause environmental damage. Precisely the entities —in particular SETENA— responsible for reviewing said studies, considered that they do comply with the necessary information to evaluate and predict the impact of the exploitation of the quarry (tajo), and by reason of that, it was approved, granting the Environmental Viability (Viabilidad Ambiental) and the other permits cited above. In any case, if the promoters consider that the studies were not carried out adequately or believe that not all necessary legal aspects were contemplated —since they were private companies hired by the concessionaire company—, and that the zone's Plan Regulador does not allow its operation, this constitutes a matter that must be resolved before the instances knowledgeable in the technical aspects of this matter, and not before the constitutional jurisdiction, by virtue of the fact that it is an aspect that escapes the sphere of its competence. What does fall within the purview of this Chamber is to determine whether with the approval of this concession, a serious and irreversible damage to the environment was produced or exists the possibility that it could be produced, as contemplated by the Rio Convention. This is because it is unavoidable that all human activity on Earth implies an impact on the environment (or damage, since it alters it in one way or another); however, its relevance for study purposes consists in that this impact must be serious or irreparable, as provided by said Convention. In this regard, it is noted that at the entrance of the Meco Quarry (Tajo Meco) there is a parking area (previous) for the wagons waiting to be loaded that is located within the property of the company MECO, so the public road is not obstructed at any time. Additionally, in the machinery transit zone, no oil stains were observed on the ground, which indicates it is in good condition. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the area adjacent to the company MECO, due to the large number of industries and other nearby productive activities and the high traffic of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor state of the street that separates the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas; however, at the Meco Quarry (Tajo Meco), no evidence was found of dust contamination coming from the quarry's (tajo) own activities, as they are geographically confined by considerable elevation changes. It was verified that there is constant monitoring of the covering of trucks transporting materials and the transit zones of the quarry (tajo) are frequently sprinkled with water. It has been reported, under the gravity of the oath, that the noise in the process zone is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material is processed from a larger size to a smaller one, but when moving away from the site, near the urban planning zone, no noise is perceived. Under that context, it is considered that the amparo regarding that extreme is not appropriate, since once again it has not been possible to corroborate any sonic and environmental contamination produced by the activity carried out in the quarry (tajo) of interest. Notwithstanding the foregoing and based on the precautionary principle, note shall be taken of what was reported by the Vice-Minister of Health in that the Health Governing Area of Santa Ana issued health order No. ARSSA-1583-09 so that the construction company carries out two perimeter immission studies, in the rainy season and dry season, with the objective of scientifically determining whether the emissions generated by the company can affect the neighborhood (report at folios 406 to 410, document at folios 414 and 415). Additionally, the Municipality of Santa Ana must do likewise regarding the cantonal public roads concerning vehicular traffic and their maintenance, since it is evidenced from what was reported that there is a certain problem due to the high traffic of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor state of the street that separates the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas, which, regardless of who the producing actors are, it is certain that they are its responsibility.

VI.- As for the alleged contamination of water resources, which is a new element, it is necessary to point out that the jurisprudence of the Chamber is clear in recognizing the right to water as a fundamental right, such that along with the realization of serious efforts for its provision to the population, there is the duty of public institutions to make responsible and restrained use of the available water resource, which implies the need to acquire certainty of the water susceptible to exploitation —availability— guaranteeing its present provision and the future sustainability of the service, avoiding that the current use of the resource creates an environmental risk that compromises the existence and future supply of the liquid. Furthermore, the Chamber has had the opportunity to pronounce forcefully and in detail on the protection that must be granted to the national water resource, clarifying both the normative protective framework and the institutions that make up the water sector, recognizing and specifying the scope of competences of said instances and the transcendence of their actions in matters of granting, use, and protection of water. Groundwater has become the main means of public supply in the Central American region, since the majority of surface sources have been contaminated by the action of the human person. In the specific case of Costa Rica, it is estimated that approximately seventy percent of the water that the country's inhabitants consume daily comes from groundwater, a situation that highlights the importance of protecting this resource. It has also been pointed out that … “Unlike the contamination of surface waters, which is usually obvious and visible, allowing environmental actions aimed at mitigating or eradicating it to be taken, that of groundwater, by its own nature, tends to go unnoticed and becomes evident when it has reached great proportions. Aquifers (mantos acuíferos), due to the slow circulation of the waters, the absorption capacity of the terrain, and other factors, can take a long time to show contamination. Additionally, the large volume of water contained means that extensive contaminations take a prolonged period to manifest or, when dealing with localized contaminations, they are detected when they flow at some exploitation site. Certainly, this type of water has a resistance to contamination, however, when it occurs, its regeneration can be extraordinarily slow and at times is irreversible due to the high cost of the means to do so. It has been demonstrated that attempts to repair the damage caused by contamination to an aquifer (acuífero) to achieve, again, potability levels of the water have not been successful, technologies for its cleaning have contributed little to reduce the damage, and the methods are economically very expensive. To the above must be added the lack of organizational infrastructure, material, financial, and human resources, in the latter case, duly trained to evaluate, measure, and, in general, monitor the quality of this water and the exact dimension of its contamination. The degradation and contamination of aquifers (mantos acuíferos) imposes on the legislator and public administrations the urgent and unpostponable task of protecting them…” (judgment No. 2004-1923, at two fifty-five p.m. on February 25, 2004) (see also, among others, judgments No. 2008-012109 at three sixteen p.m. on August 5, 2008, No. 2008-014092, at nine twenty-eight a.m. on September 23, 2008, and No. 2008-015657 at eleven forty-five a.m. on October 17, 2008). In this case, it has been possible to verify, from all the reports rendered by the respondent public authorities, that the Meco Quarry (Tajo Meco) is not within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area (Área de Reserva Acuífera) demarcated by AyA. That although its activity is located on the left margin of the Río Virilla, it does not affect the uses for public supply or the Aquifer Reserve Zone (Zona de Reserva Acuífera) of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. Furthermore, the Virilla River canyon acts as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left margin of said river. It has also been fully demonstrated that the most important aquifers (acuíferos) of the Central Valley are located on the right margin of the Río Virilla and those located on the left margin are not aquifer (acuífera) zones of such relevance. Thus, although the volcanic materials that appear on the left margin (quarry (tajo) under study) are the same as on the right margin where very important aquifers (acuíferos) develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers (acuíferos) are not the same; while on the right margin they are very productive, on the left, due to their small recharge areas, they are not saturated and only generate small aquifers (acuíferos) of low potential. It is clarified that on the right margin of the Virilla River, a large number of springs (manantiales) emerge that have been generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer (acuífero) and that, together with water wells, are captured by AyA. Within that context, it is not possible, as the appellants claim, to presuppose in any way that the aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the zone run any risk of suffering contamination from the works carried out by Constructora MECO in the zone. The foregoing does not imply, of course, that the respondent public authorities consider their work finished, since they must continue coordinating and verifying the conditions under which the concession was granted, and the compliance with the Environmental Impact Study (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental), and must also take precautions if the case merits it. Note that the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) (folios 430 to 433), recommends that to assess the current situation, more hydraulic conductivity tests must be performed, and the transit times and intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer (acuífero) must be recalculated. Also, to carry out an inventory of possible sources of contamination in the development of extraction of the quarry (tajo) and take measures to prevent the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer (acuífero). Also, the installation of piezometers in the quarry (tajo), with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the elevations or rock exploitation levels.

VII.- About the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos. The appellants assert that for several years the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos has installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite the zone being residential, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. They claim that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo granted permits to the referred corporation, contrary to what is prescribed in the plan regulador.

That company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation aggravated by the inertia of the respondents, who have not provided an effective solution to the alleged contamination problem. In this regard, this Chamber has repeatedly indicated that, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 169 and 170 of the Political Constitution, the Urban Planning Law No. 4240 of November 15, 1968, establishes that primary authority in urban planning matters corresponds to the municipalities, which has been set forth in Articles 15 and 19 of that law. These entities are responsible for undertaking local urban planning through the enactment of the respective regulatory plans (planes reguladores), giving effect to the regulations issued for that purpose by the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, as the institution responsible for urban planning at the national level. The latter with the clarification that the Dirección de Urbanismo functions as an advisory body to the municipalities for the purposes of preparing, applying, and modifying the municipal or local regulatory plan (Plan Regulador) and its regulations before their final adoption; however, the Chamber has stated that the foregoing must be understood as the formal limit of the broad guidelines, technical standards, or general directives according to which local governments must prepare their respective regulatory plans (planes reguladores) and the corresponding urban development regulations, for it is not possible to claim that the National Urban Development Plan (Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano) be prepared and implemented entirely by the Central Government, without the direct intervention of the municipalities in this matter. The Chamber has considered that such a situation violates not only the most basic principles of logic and appropriateness, given that it concerns the particular interests of each canton (cantón) of the Republic, but also the constitutional principles of the municipal regime, established by our Fundamental Charter in Articles 168 to 175. In that context, urban planning, that is, the preparation and implementation of regulatory plans (planes reguladores), is a function inherent to the 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 Dirección de Urbanismo. Regarding the legal nature of regulatory plans (planes reguladores), the criterion sustained by this Chamber is that, by reason of their content and their general efficacy or binding force, they must be considered true legal norms or laws in the material sense, given that they recognize rights and establish obligations for the owners and possessors of properties located in the territorial circumscription of the respective canton (cantón). Likewise, attending to the formation procedure of these regulations, it has been considered that they constitute a manifestation of direct democracy, because they are prepared and approved by the respective municipalities, which find their very reason for being precisely in their composition, that is, by the citizens or neighbors, in a specific territorial circumscription –canton (cantón)–, for the "administration of local interests and services" (Articles 169 of the Political Constitution and 1 of the Municipal Code) (see judgment No. 2009-012515 of eighteen hours and three minutes of August 11, 2009). Furthermore, urban planning is one of the most important and transcendent tools for the satisfaction of local interests. It is the normative expression of the will and the planning and design of collective and individual development, but without detaching itself from the national contour and the territorial and environmental unit to which they belong. The way of planning the development of human activities has a significant impact on the environment, which may be negative or positive depending on the uses and activities authorized. Now, in the present case and specifically in light of the actions or omissions carried out by the respondent authorities, it is evident that the Dirección de Urbanismo of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, by note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted the land use (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries. The land use (uso de suelo) was granted considering that it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Santa Ana regulatory plan (Plan Regulador), and that property No. SJ 17213-91 had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which the minimum setbacks had to be 15 meters from the boundaries, a 52-meter front setback on the main road, and a 35-meter rear setback, which allows for and guarantees a confinement of nuisances. As has been reported, the warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Santa Ana regulatory plan (Plan Regulador), which took place according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, despite the fact that the cited Plan was published in Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991. However, as they are existing uses non-conforming with the High-Density Residential Zone, the Municipality of Santa Ana has not authorized the growth or expansion of the Más x Menos warehouse activities. On these points, in accordance with what was indicated above, it is worth noting that determining whether the permits allowing the operation of the cited warehouses were granted in accordance with the Law, as well as the statute of limitations or not for a potential challenge to them, constitutes a matter of mere legality. This must be ventilated before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose.

VIII.- Now, regarding the argued noise pollution (contaminación sónica), it is noted that it is a commercial premises with a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment. That during a visit carried out by the Office of Environmental Protection of the Ministry of Health on February 19, 2008, no problems were detected from a sanitary point of view at the Max por Menos Warehouses. Furthermore, the sound measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, owner of the home, stated that it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that moment, as it is intermittent, since the vehicles (vans and heavy transit vehicles) travel at different time intervals. As well as during another visit made by the Regional Directorate of Health Governance of the Central South Region of the Ministry of Health on September 25, 2009, no noise was being generated. From this it can be inferred that it has not been possible to determine that the cited warehouses are generators of noise pollution (contaminación sónica) as argued, so it is not possible to attribute any responsibility to the respondent private law company. The foregoing does not negate the responsibility of the health authorities to monitor that the petitioners are not affected by possible contamination of this type, for it cannot be lost sight of that it is the State's obligation, in the face of events such as those indicated here, to activate the mechanisms that are necessary to, eventually, preemptively safeguard the right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment as well as the right to health, in the face of possible dangers, with the purpose of, as has been indicated, making them endure for future generations.

IX.- Regarding the rights of petition and administrative justice. With respect to these, the petitioners allege in their filing of the appeal, the following: “(…) Although they present this documentation, the filing of this amparo (recurso de amparo) could not be obviated, nor the multiple letters sent to the Municipal Council signed by many of the neighbors of Bosques de Santa Ana, about the multiple nuisances that your company has caused us for years, without the authorities definitively accepting our claim. (…) The facts previously set forth are known to the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Municipality of Santa Ana, the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, and the Ministry of Health, institutions before which the corresponding administrative steps have been taken and some before which the nuisances have been manifested. In order to end the contamination we suffer. These entities have not resolved the problems presented and have accepted the temporary solutions that Constructora Meco and Wal Mart have offered, have archived the nuisances as if the solutions were definitive, without following up on the actions and without demanding definitive solutions, such as eliminating the sources of the problem. We come before this Honorable Chamber because we consider that the respondent institutions violate our constitutional right to health and the right to obtain a definitive response, not temporary solutions, from the state institutions. We consider that the administrative inactivity contravenes the provisions of Article 27 of the Political Constitution, which regulates the right of petition and prompt response. Likewise, Article 41 of the Constitution regulates that we must all find redress by resorting to the laws, in a prompt, fulfilled manner, without denial, and in strict conformity with the laws.” On the point of the right of petition and prompt resolution, as well as access to prompt and fulfilled justice, the case law of this Chamber is abundant, in accordance with which it has been determined that Article 27 of the Political Constitution enshrines the right of petition and prompt resolution, which consists of a power that citizens have to make petitions before public authorities. Such petitions before the Administration can be divided into simple petitions and those that seek the recognition or granting of something: the former can be protected as a direct violation of Articles 27 or 30 of the Constitution, by the simple expiration of the legal period to resolve, as stipulated by Article 32 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction; the latter, when not resolved within the legal period, constitute administrative delay and delay of justice, hence they are subject to amparo for violation of Articles 27 and 41 of the Magna Carta. However, from the documentation provided by the petitioners (folios 23, 49 to 54, 62 to 72), it is not possible to determine a violation of the rights protected in the aforementioned regulations. Note that these proceedings, directed to the Municipality of Santa Ana, refer to the opposition by several neighbors to a possible modification of the regulatory plan (plan regulador) that would allow the conversion of the lands where the respondent companies are located into an industrial zone. As well as the opposition to the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos expanding the warehouses it already has at the site. Regarding the first point, the Mayor of Santa Ana reported that the Municipality is working on a comprehensive reform of the regulatory plan (Plan Regulador) (folio 258). It can be deduced from this that the administrative procedure itself has not concluded, and for its definitive resolution it is necessary to take into account all the proceedings, evidently including those previously mentioned, so it is not possible to argue a lack of any response. While regarding the other point, whose proceeding was filed on August 27, 2004 (folio 49), the General Secretary of SETENA reported that there is a file, 732-2004-SETENA, called Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., in which the expansion of the warehouses was intended, but a withdrawal intervened, for which reason the file was archived by resolution No. 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005 (folio 173). The foregoing means that this opposition lacks current interest because the process they were objecting to was dismissed many years before this amparo was filed. In this context, it is considered that the noted constitutional violation, and with respect to the documented proceedings, has not occurred.

X.- Conclusion. As the injury to the fundamental rights alleged by the petitioners, attributable to the respondents, is not verified, this appeal is declared without merit, but not before making three calls to attention: first, to the Minister of Health to verify compliance with sanitary order No. ARSSA-1583-09 issued against Constructora MECO S.A. The second call to attention is for the General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Director of Geologías y Minas, and the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, to take note of the recommendation formulated by the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA), in protection of the water resources of the area. Third: In relation to vehicular traffic and the maintenance of cantonal public roads, the Municipality of Santa Ana shall adopt the necessary measures to avoid nuisances to the neighbors.

Por tanto:

The appeal is declared without merit. Let the Minister of Health, the General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Director of Geologías y Minas, the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, and the Municipality of Santa Ana take note of what was indicated in the last considerando.

Ana Virginia Calzada M. Presidenta Gilbert Armijo S. Ernesto Jinesta L.

Fernando Cruz C. Rodolfo E. Piza R.

Ricardo Guerrero P. Enrique Ulate C.

Furthermore, it is worth noting that in the past decade, the intention to locate the landfill on this same property, now owned by Constructora Meco, was halted due to the environmental fragility, which is now in danger once again, in their opinion. On the other hand, they allege that several years ago, Corporación de Supermercados Unidos installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite the fact that, as they have maintained, the area is residential, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. They assert that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo granted permits to the aforementioned corporation, contrary to what is prescribed in the regulatory plan. Said company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation that is aggravated by the inertia of the respondents, who have not provided an effective solution to the pollution problem they denounce. They indicate that the facts set forth above are known to the respondent authorities, before whom the corresponding administrative procedures were undertaken, and some have been made aware of the nuisances, but the truth is that these entities have not resolved the stated problems and have accepted the temporary solutions that Constructora Meco and Wal Mart have offered, have shelved the nuisances as if the solutions were definitive, without following up on the actions and without demanding definitive solutions, such as eliminating the sources of the problem. They consider that their constitutional right to health and the right to obtain a definitive resolution from state institutions have been violated.

**2.-** Reports Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. (folios 139 to 146), that the authorization for the location of CSU warehouses in Santa Ana was granted by the Urban Planning Directorate of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, through official note UR-326 of April 2, 1993. The official note authorizing the land use expressly mentions the existence of the Regulatory Plan. The Municipality of Santa Ana did not deny the location of CSU warehouses on the site, as it approved the plans, because it considered, as did INVU, that it would not cause any nuisance to the local neighbors. As of today, CSU warehouses do not cause any nuisance to the neighbors, as noise confinement has been complied with. The warehouse by itself does not generate noise; there are no machines. It is a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment, so no nuisance exists. Her represented party is not responsible for the pollution, damage to sidewalks, or to public roads located near the company's warehouses, as it is the responsibility of the MOPT or the local Municipality to repair them. The neighbors cannot attribute the damage to her represented party; the trucks are not the property of the company but of third parties who have the right to circulate on the public roads adjacent to the company and on any other public road. The company is also a user of the roads, and the neighbors cannot prevent its use. Furthermore, dozens of trucks not owned by CSU travel on those streets, as that road connects San Antonio de Belén with Santa Ana and Santa Ana with Guachipelín de Escazú. It requests that the filed appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**3.-** Reports under oath Jorge Rodríguez Quirós, in his capacity as Acting Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications (folios 153 to 160), that two mining concessions exist in the area. According to the Registro Nacional Minero, in administrative file 2366, a concession was granted in the name of Orlando Ramírez González, granted by resolution R-034-95-MIRENEM at nine hours forty minutes on March 23, 1995, for a term of 25 years from the approval of the Environmental Impact Study. That approval was notified to the interested party by resolution No. 064 at eight hours fifteen minutes on June 20, 1995, at ten hours thirty-five minutes on June 26, 1995, the date from which the granted term runs. By resolution No. 221 at eight hours fifteen minutes on February 3, 1997, the assignment of the concession right was approved in favor of the company EDM DE COSTA RICA S.A., notified at nine hours forty minutes on February 12, 1997. By resolution No. 1925 at eight hours fifteen minutes on December 7, 1999, a lease agreement for the concession was approved in favor of CONSTRUCTORA MECO S.A., notified at eleven hours thirty minutes on December 10, 1999. Likewise, the Registro Minero contains administrative file 2479 in the name of the company EDM DE COSTA RICA S.A., where a quarry exploitation concession is granted by resolution R-061-97-MINAE at twelve hours fifteen minutes on February 5, 1997, for a term of 20 years from the approval of the environmental impact assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental), an approval that was notified to the interested party by resolution No. 431-97-SETENA at twelve hours fifty minutes on July 9, 1997, the date from which the granted term runs, located in Honduras, district 3 Pozos, Canton 9, Santa Ana of the Province of San José. By resolution No. 1924 at eight hours on December 7, 1999, a lease agreement for the concession was approved in favor of CONSTRUCTORA MECO S.A., a resolution that was notified at eleven hours thirty-two minutes on December 7, 1999. He refers to what was reported by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental. He points out that regarding the quarries (tajos) located near the río Virilla, and mainly due to the episode that occurred a few years ago in the area, in relation to the aquifers (mantos acuíferos), the Dirección de Geología y Minas has required the concessionaires in the vicinity to submit hydrogeological studies. He adds that the arguments raised against Supermercados Unidos are not within his competence; however, what is stated in official note SG-AJ-167-2008-SETENA is important. He notes that an amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) is being processed in file 08-014565-0007-CO, in which aspects such as the present one are discussed. He requests that the filed appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**4.-** Reports under oath Jorge Arturo Sánchez Zúñiga, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (folios 165 to 168), that this Institution granted the land use in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. in April 1993, for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries, considering that it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Santa Ana Regulatory Plan, and that land No. SJ 17213-91 had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which the minimum setbacks (retiros) had to be 15 m from the boundaries, a 52m front setback onto the main road, and a 35-meter rear setback, which in itself allows and guarantees confinement of nuisances. However, that land use does not authorize the construction of the premises, nor the construction and operating permits, which is the responsibility of the local Municipality and the Ministry of Health. The latter regarding sanitary operation. With respect to the quarry (tajo) activity carried out by Construcción MECO, it is demonstrated, according to the attached certified photocopy of the administrative file, that INVU did not grant any permit or authorization, as shown in official notes UR. 646 of June 6, 1994, UR.952 of July 28, 1994, PE-301-94-C of August 17, 1994, UR-M-061 dated February 18, 1997. It is important to note that in official notes PE-301-94 and UR.952-94, it was pointed out by his represented entity that the use is non-conforming, and it is stated therein that the anomaly has been reported to the Municipality, which has taken actions without any result. Furthermore, it states: “*What would be appropriate is for the Municipality to order the closure of the work, and if this does not happen, to accuse it of contempt of authority, which could be penalized with imprisonment*”. He requests that the filed appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**5.-** Reports under oath Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folios 171 to 174), that the facts alleged in the present amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) are related to those alleged in file number 08-014565-0007-CO. As indicated in official note number SG-AJ-1232-2008-SETENA of November 7, 2008, the company Constructora Meco S.A. is the lessee of two quarries (tajos) in Pozos de Santa Ana, whose environmental impact assessments (Estudios de Impacto Ambiental) were approved for files 198-94 and 058-97. The approval of the first was due to article 5 of session No. 6 of May 24, 1995, issued by the Comisión Nacional de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental (CONEIA). The second was due to resolution number 431-97 of July 9, 1999, from this Secretariat. Regarding the zoning in which the project is currently located, it is determined that this is the competence of the Municipality of Santa Ana. Similarly, it is important to clarify that the approval of the environmental impact assessment is a condition or quality of the project, which implies the scenario of harmonizing it with its surroundings, and said approval does not exempt the developer from the procedure to be completed before other authorities, in this case the Municipality, in accordance with the current competencies and regulations. Regarding the allegation of noise pollution, dust, and related to the roads, he points to the result of the inspection carried out on February 18, 2009, by this Secretariat (in order to answer the appeal (recurso) and comply with the precautionary measure ordered by the Chamber (Sala)). Focusing on the warehouses of the mentioned supermarket corporation, the following is reported: 1. Said warehouses do not have environmental feasibility (viabilidad ambiental). 2. There is a file, 732-2004-SETENA, called Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., in which the expansion of the same was intended, but a withdrawal intervened, for which the file was archived by resolution number 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005, and the expansion also does not have SETENA approval. 3. As indicated in resolution number 1630-2004-SETENA of October 5, 2004, the original warehouse was “*built approximately 10 years ago*”. He requests that the filed appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**6.-** By written submission received in the Secretariat of the Chamber (Sala) at fourteen hours twenty-five minutes on February twenty-third, two thousand nine, (folio 179), Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, indicates that she is providing a copy of file 058-97 that was mistakenly not submitted when she rendered the report.

**7.-** Reports under oath Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos, in her capacity as Vice Minister of Health (folios 180 to 183), that according to information provided by the Director of the Área Rectora de Salud of Santa Ana, who by territorial competence handles the case, on September 12, 2008, the facilities of Empresa MECO were assessed, finding them adequately covered with no water accumulation. In ARSSA-1477-08, during a visit by the Environmental Manager of the Área Rectora de Salud, he indicates not detecting sanitary problems at the time of the visit. In ARSSA-153-09, during a visit carried out on February 19, 2008, by Marco Tulio Alvarado Godoy, Health Technician 2 of the Office for the Protection of the Human Environment, he indicates not verifying sanitary problems. A sonometric measurement is being requested from Dr. Guillermo Flores Galindo to monitor the mitigation plan for noise pollution implemented by the company Bodegas de Supermercados Unidos. He requests that the filed appeal (recurso) be dismissed since the operations of both the Max por Menos Warehouses and those of the Quarry (Tajo) E.D.M. are in order from the legal standpoint and no problems were detected from the sanitary standpoint during the visit that was carried out.

**8.-** Reports under oath Audrys Esquivel Jiménez, in his capacity as President of the Municipal Council of Santa Ana (folios 252 to 254), what was agreed in ordinary session No. 68 of August 28, 2007, and in extraordinary session No. 53 of July 24, 2008. He states that the case in question forms part of an overall situation of tension existing between the industrial and residential sectors, which characterizes the eastern region of the San José Metropolitan Area, where it must be recognized that it was originally intended for industrial use and its services, and over time, pressure for other uses, both residential and purely commercial, gave way, and various Municipal Councils were “*making more flexible*” their position and accepting new residential developments, despite the fact that the zone did not qualify as such. Thus, a historical error occurred in authorizing residential developments (urbanizaciones) in zones that were intended for industry. Currently, the Municipality is going to begin its final phase of discussion and approval of the reforms to the Regulatory Plan, where it is intended to adopt alternatives to a difficult situation and where the environmental fragility indices (índices de fragilidad ambiental) are just being prepared for their incorporation into said Plan, which is why it is absolutely improper, inconvenient, and inopportune to refer to some technical elements that are in the drafting and preliminary analysis phase.

**9.-** Reports under oath Gerardo Oviedo Espinoza, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of Santa Ana (folios 256 to 265), that the Regulatory Plan of Santa Ana was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991; however, the zoning map, which is the graphic expression of the regulatory text, was not published with it. The zoning map was published in La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001. The quarries (tajos) (today managed by Constructora MECO S.A.) were authorized the mining concession processed under administrative files No. 2366 and 2479 in the years 1995 and 1997, respectively. Concessions granted by MIRENEM (today MINAET) without consulting the Municipality and without requiring as a prerequisite a land use certificate. Similarly, the warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the maps of the Regulatory Plan. The dump trucks (vagonetas), tanker trucks, and other heavy load vehicles must only transit on roads that are national and the main access road to the sector, but not on the internal streets of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. The parking of machinery and equipment used by the company MECO is part of the extraction and sale of construction aggregates activity that since 1995 has had Mining Concession No. 2366 and a commercial license granted by municipal agreement adopted in ordinary session No. 3 of May 12, 1998. This Municipality is working on a comprehensive reform of the Regulatory Plan, and in Ordinary Session No. 60 of July 3, 2007, the Council had agreed that the sector where the quarries (tajos) and the Más x Menos warehouses are located be established as an industrial and business zone in which the extraction and warehouse uses would be conforming. He clarifies that the zone proposed as industrial and business only includes the lots where the quarries (tajos) and warehouses are located, which are large in size and have no constructions, while the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana remains as a High-Density Residential Zone. In Extraordinary Session No. 53 held on Thursday, July 24, 2008, the complainants were seen, who, together with other neighbors of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, gave a presentation on the problems they suffer due to heavy traffic, and the Council agreed as follows: “*To revoke the agreement recorded in the minutes of ordinary session No. 60 held by this Municipal Council on July 3, 2007, and to modify the industrial and business zone in Pozos to a use consistent with the residential use it now has (High-Density Residential). To empower the Comisión de Ordenamiento Urbano y Plan Regulador to issue an opinion on the environmental recovery of the zone*”. The municipal authorizations for the quarries (tajos) to operate were granted by agreement of the Municipal Council when the Zoning Regulations were published but the corresponding map, which is the graphic expression that allows locating each zone and its extension, was not. The same occurred with the authorization granted for the operation of the Más x Menos warehouses. However, as these are existing uses non-conforming with the High-Density Residential Zone, the Municipality has not authorized the growth or expansion of these activities. That said, in this case no mention is made of the view provided by Google Earth, since it is outdated and has been prepared by a company unrelated to this Municipal Corporation, and therefore, its veracity regarding current reality cannot be guaranteed. Finally, regarding the issue of the environmental fragility indices, it is necessary to emphasize that said study, contracted from Mr. Allan Astorga, has not yet been fully delivered by him, which is why it has not been reviewed or approved by the Municipal Council or the administration. In this sense, it is necessary to reiterate that the mentioned fragility indices will be used to propose a comprehensive reform to the regulatory plan, which has not yet occurred. He notes that file 08-14565-0007-CO deals with this same topic. He requests that the appeal (recurso) be declared without merit.

**10.-** Reports Magda Verdesia Solano, in her capacity as Legal Representative of Constructora MECO S.A. (folios 267 to 270), that if observed carefully, the appellants (recurrentes) at no time accuse any environmental damage, nor could it be otherwise, since according to the reality of the facts, there has been none. Any variation that the classification of the zone might have in the future cannot have retroactive effects to the detriment of acquired rights.

**11.-** By written submission received in the Secretariat of the Chamber (Sala) at seventeen hours twenty-nine minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine, (folios 286 and 287), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the Ministry of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications and by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA), he requests that the amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) be declared without merit with respect to his represented company.

**12.-** By written submission received in the Secretariat of the Chamber (Sala) at seventeen hours twenty-nine minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine, (folios 288 to 290), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the President of the Municipal Council and the Municipal Mayor of Santa Ana, he requests that the amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) be declared without merit with respect to his represented company.

**13.-** By written submission received in the Secretariat of the Chamber (Sala) at seventeen hours twenty-nine minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine, (folios 291 to 293), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the Vice Minister of Health, he requests that the amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) be declared without merit with respect to his represented company.

**14.-** By written submission received in the Secretariat of the Chamber (Sala) at seventeen hours thirty minutes on May twenty-second, two thousand nine, (folios 294 and 295), Norman Coto Kikut, in his capacity as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by INVU, he requests that the amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) be declared without merit with respect to his represented company.

**15.-** By resolution at fourteen hours fifty-six minutes on July 10, 2009 (folios 296 to 298), the Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications and the General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental were warned to refer to what was pointed out by the appellants (recurrentes) regarding the alleged risk of contamination of the aquifer (manto acuífero) due to the work carried out by Constructora Meco S.A., also taking into account that the Hydrogeological and Quarry Contamination Risk Study signed by Roberto Protti, to which they refer and which appears in the certification of the administrative file provided, dates from January 2002.

**16.-** Reports Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folios 302 to 305), that the Índices de Fragilidad Ambiental (IFA) are just one of the requirements that must be submitted to this Secretariat as part of the environmental planning of land use stipulated in the Manual de Instrumentos Técnicos para el proceso de Evaluación del Impacto Ambiental (Manual de EIA) –Part III- Decreto No. 32967-MINAE, in order to be eligible for the Environmental Viability (License). That the arguments put forward by the appellants (recurrentes) are not recorded or receivable by SETENA, since this Institution is unaware of the scope of the Índices de Fragilidad Ambiental contracted by the Municipality of Santa Ana, because they have not yet been submitted, much less analyzed, by the technical personnel of this Institution. On the other hand, and in reference to the vulnerability of aquifer contamination (contaminación de acuíferos), as a result of the activities carried out by the Quarry (Tajo), it must be indicated that the environmental impact assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental) for this project was presented before the Comisión Interinstitucional de Evaluación y Control de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental on November 3, 1994, prior to the creation of SETENA and the instruments used today in the environmental impact assessment process; however, the groundwater and contamination vulnerability chapter is presented in this document, where it mentions on page 30 that, within the geological formations that make up the project area, being formed of materials of low conductivity and permeability, there is no danger of contamination to more permeable materials, such as the underlying lavas that could have aquifer capacity. As a complement and part of the information update process for the administrative file kept at SETENA, there is the referral by the developer of the Hydrogeological Contamination Risk Study that was approved by the Dirección General de Geología y Minas, which circumscribes the area where the exploitation work of the Tajo Santa Ana is carried out, which included a field phase for its preparation where drillings were carried out to strengthen the analysis performed; in which Hydrogeologist Roberto Protti certifies, according to the stratigraphy of the aquifer, that the local bedrock forms a negative or no-flow barrier due to the low permeability of the volcanic rocks, which agrees with the data provided in the environmental impact assessment. It is also indicated that SETENA will schedule another field inspection as soon as possible by officials from the Department of Environmental Auditing and Monitoring (Departamento de Auditoría y Seguimiento Ambiental), in order to continue the monitoring process of the quarry's (tajo) activities. Regarding the related responsibilities of the developer, SETENA certifies on July 15 of the current year through SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA that the Environmental Viability (License) of the Tajo Santa Ana project is in force, as well as that the environmental commitments assumed by the developer, such as environmental reports and keeping the environmental guarantee amount up to date. He requests that the appeal (recurso) be declared without merit.

**17.-** Reports Jorge Rodríguez Quirós, in his capacity as Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications (folios 339 to 346), similarly to the General Secretary of SETENA (folios 302 to 305). He adds that regarding the related responsibilities of the developer, SETENA certifies on July 15, 2009, through SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA, that the Environmental Viability (License) of the Tajo Santa Ana project is in force, as well as that the environmental commitments assumed by the developer, such as environmental reports and keeping the environmental guarantee amount up to date. Regarding the mining activity in the conflict zone, he reports the actions carried out by the Dirección de Geología y Minas, which is the competent entity to regulate mining activity. With respect to the processing of mining file number 2479, the Dirección de Geología y Minas informs that Ministerial Office that the lessee company submits a series of well monitoring reports. He requests that the appeal (recurso) be declared without merit.

18.- By brief received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at three ten in the afternoon on August eighteenth, two thousand nine, (folios 396 and 397), Magda Verdesia Solano, in her capacity as representative of Constructora Meco S.A., indicates that, as stated in point e) of the “*Conclusions*” presented by the Director of the National Mining Registry (Registro Nacional Minero), in her official communication DGM/RNM 629-2009 of July 27, 2009, it is not true that there is an “*exposed water table (nivel freático expuesto)*” as irresponsibly affirmed by the appellant. That affirmation is extracted from a report without scientific basis, which was prepared without a site visit or field analysis and from a Google Earth observation. The former is irresponsible and the latter is an unreliable source, being light and superficial.

19.- By resolution at twelve fifty-nine in the afternoon on September 18, 2009 (folios 402 and 403), the Vice Minister of Health was formally required to provide the sound measurement of the operations of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos and Constructora Meco S.A.

20.- By brief received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at three thirty-one in the afternoon on September thirtieth, two thousand nine, (folios 406 to 410), Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos, in her capacity as Vice Minister of Health, reported regarding the sound measurement of Supermercados Unidos what was stated in official communication URS-RCS-2011-09 of September 29, 2009. With respect to the inspection carried out at several quarries (tajos) in the Pozos de Santa Ana area, Engineer José Mario Gutiérrez Soto of the Health Stewardship Unit of the Central South Region (Unidad Rectoría de la Salud de la Región Central Sur) reported the result via official communication URS-RCS-2009-2009 dated September 29, 2009. Based on the inspections carried out by both Lic. Luis Fernando Retana Segura and Engineer José Mario Gutiérrez Soto, officials of the Health Stewardship Unit of the Central South Region, Dr. Ana Cecilia Víquez Pérez, Director of the Health Stewardship Area of Santa Ana (Área Rectora de Salud de Santa Ana), via official communication ARSSA-1598-09 of September 29 of the current year, requests the Traffic Engineering Directorate of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport (Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, MOPT) to carry out an inspection of the vehicular flow of heavy machinery and vehicles in the vicinity of Residencial Bosques de Santa Ana, specifically in front of the Bodegas de Más por Menos, since this falls outside the competence of the Ministry of Health. Furthermore, Sanitary Order No. ARSSA-1583-09 was issued to Mr. Marco Alfaro Vega, Person in Charge of the Quarry EDM de Costa Rica, Constructora MECO S.A., granting a period of 10 days to present a plan establishing the dates on which the studies indicated by Engineer José Mario Gutiérrez Soto of the Health Stewardship Unit of the Central Region in official communication URS-RCS-2009-2009 dated September 29 of the present year will be carried out. She requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

21.- Magistrate Fernando Castillo Víquez recused himself from hearing this matter on March 22, 2010 (folio 418).

22.- By resolution at one forty-three in the afternoon on March 24, 2010 (folio 419), the Interim President of the Chamber accepted the recusal of Magistrate Fernando Castillo Víquez and ordered that his substitution be requested from the Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice.

23.- On March 25, 2010, it was communicated by the Office of the Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice that Magistrate Enrique Napoleón Ulate Chacón was appointed to hear this amparo.

24.- By resolution at eleven thirty-six in the morning on April 13, 2010 (folios 422 to 425), the appeal was expanded against the Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), the Director of Water (Director de Aguas) and the Director General of Geology and Mines of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones), and the Manager of the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service (Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento).

25.- Bernal Soto Zúñiga, in his capacity as General Manager of the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service (SENARA) (folios 430 to 433), reports that in that Unit there is no record of any procedure for the operation of the Quarry (Tajo) to which this amparo refers. Nor has SENARA reviewed, approved, or endorsed specific hydrogeological studies for the operation of the quarry in question. The Quarry of Constructora Meco S.A. is physically located on the left bank of the Río Virilla. According to information derived from hydrogeological studies carried out or registered with SENARA, to date the right bank of the Río Virilla is characterized by the presence of large and productive superimposed aquifers, originated and developed within the volcanic-origin rock formations of Colima (Intra-Cañón), Barva, and Tiribí (Avalancha Ardiente). These are exploited as wells and catchments in springs (manantiales), all of great productive capacity (e.g., La Valencia, La Libertad, Puente de Las Mulas, and Potrerillos). However, these aquifers discharge towards the Río Virilla and there is no hydraulic communication between aquifers in any direction between its banks. The extraordinary quality of these aquifers on the right bank of the Río Virilla is a consequence of the conjunction of particular hydrogeological factors, the sufficient extension and homogeneity of the rock units, particularly those that favor recharge and flow, the favorable hydrodynamic characteristics (transmissivity, storage coefficient, position of the seal layers, hydraulic conductivity), and others. This condition changes completely on the left (south) bank of the Río Virilla, because although some lithologies of the right bank appear on the left bank, their extension is very limited and they do not have adequate recharge areas or communication with lateral flows. The aquifers, when they exist, are of poor quality, not very extensive, of low hydrodynamic quality and productivity. The excavation of the deep canyon of the Río Virilla has penetrated down below the roof of the Lower Colima rocks, which has left the Avalancha Ardiente Formation (Upper Colima, Puente de Mulas) totally exposed. Consequently, the drainage of its aquifer towards the river occurs and hydraulic communication with the left bank is discontinued. There is no possibility of flow occurring between both banks, much less from left to right. The scarce recharge of the small aquifers of the left bank (Pozos, Honduras de Santa Ana, Uruca) occurs through infiltration within the small collector basins of the hills (Alto Las Palomas, Coyote, Real de Pereira) and the Alluviums of the Río La Uruca. The Upper Colima Unit does not form an important aquifer, as the canyon of the Río Virilla constitutes a natural barrier that prevents flow in any direction (from the right bank to the left and vice versa). Likewise, the coverage area of these volcanic deposits on the left bank is so small that there is no significant possibility of recharge, and the volume of water they contain depends solely on rainfall infiltration. That is why this material is found dry in the quarry. Below that unit, it barely presents a seasonal partial saturation level at a depth of around 25 meters (according to a hydrogeological study carried out under the professional direction of geologist Roberto Protti in 1996), suspended or perched on a paleosol that characterizes the roof of the Grifo Alto formation. The Hydrogeological and Contamination Risk Study (2002) also concludes that the Grifo Alto rocks, particularly in their fractured and unaltered lower levels, give rise to a local aquifer of low potential, of a semi-confined to water table (freático) type. Using the Foster and Hirata GOD method, the aquifer pollution vulnerability index of the local Grifo Alto aquifer is 0.15, low to very low. As conclusions: 1. Although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; while on the right bank they are very productive, on the left bank, due to their small recharge areas, they are not found saturated and only generate small, low-potential aquifers. 2. The rainwater that infiltrates the quarry drains partly towards the Río Virilla and another part feeds the lower aquifer that develops near the Grifo Alto Formation, which has low aquifer potential. 3. The determination of the vulnerability of the Grifo Alto formation (base of the quarry) provided by Geologist Roberto Protti in the studies carried out was made with a single hydraulic conductivity test, which, together with the porosity, rock type, and aquifer data, allows the aquifer to be classified with low vulnerability. 4. It is recommended, for the purpose of assessing the current situation, to carry out more hydraulic conductivity tests and recalculate the transit times and the intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer. Furthermore, an inventory of possible contamination sources in the quarry extraction development should be carried out and measures taken to prevent the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer. 5. It is also recommended to install piezometers in the quarry, with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the rock exploitation elevations or levels. These levels to be measured are also important for the construction of the flow model for the continuous monitoring of groundwater. In the piezometer construction process, provisions can be made for water quality sampling. He requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

26.- José Francisco Castro Muñoz, in his capacity as Director of the Geology and Mines Directorate (Dirección de Geología y Minas) of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (folios 434 to 439), reports that to date there is no communication within the administrative files from SETENA, the body legally competent to determine the existence of environmental contamination, indicating that the company cannot carry out work due to an environmental problem. There is also no official communication from the Municipality of Santa Ana communicating the suspension of work due to the company's non-compliance with obligations before the local government. He requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

27.- Ricardo Sancho Chavarría, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, AyA) (folios 442 to 449), reports under oath that the Quarry Meco is not located within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area designated by AyA. According to the report entitled “*Water Use Rights or Exploitation Sites for Population Supply by Operational Regions of Aqueducts and Sewers*”, Quarry Meco is located on the left bank of the Río Virilla at a straight-line distance of 880 m from Tunnel 1 of Puente Mulas, 850 m straight-line from Tunnel 2 Puente Mulas, and 785 m straight-line from Tunnel 3 Puente Mulas. These AyA exploitations are located upstream of Quarry Meco and on the right bank; therefore, they are not affected by this activity because the Puente Mulas Tunnels are located in a discharge zone of the Upper Colima aquifer to the Río Virilla. He adds that regarding the exploitation of Fuente Potrerillos-AyA, located on the right bank of the Río Virilla, Quarry Meco is on the left bank at a distance of 2 km. Therefore, this exploitation is not affected by the activity of that quarry, which is capturing the Lower Colima Aquifer. Consequently, the activity of Quarry Meco does not affect the exploitations for public supply and the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers. He requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

28.- José Miguel Zeledón Calderón, in his capacity as Director of the Water Directorate (Dirección de Aguas) of MINAET (folios 456 to 458), reports under oath that on the left bank of the Río Virilla, it has not been proven that the Colima aquifer outcrops as indicated by the appellants. The foregoing is based on hydrogeological studies presented before the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) and studies carried out by the National Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage Service (SENARA) and the Government of Great Britain (BGS) in that area. It is true that on the right bank of the Río Virilla, a large number of springs (manantiales) outcrop, generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer, which together with water wells are captured by AyA. The quarry of Constructora Meco is located on the left bank of the Río Virilla, with its canyon acting as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river. He points out that it is not possible to determine the exposed water table (nivel freático expuesto) referred to by the appellants through the Google Earth system. What is observed is a lagoon caused by the large amount of rain, which, due to the presence of the Grifo Alto Formation—which has low conductivity and permeability—does not allow these waters to drain and they remain for a certain time at the site. As observed on the map of restriction and prohibition zones declared by AyA, the most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Río Virilla. The zones located on the left bank of the Río Virilla are not aquifer zones of such relevance as the appellants assert, but rather involve the Grifo Alto aquitard (acuitardo). In addition to the hydrogeological contamination risk study, the hydrogeologist Roberto Protti Quesada carried out drilling to certify the aquifer stratigraphy, where it was proven that the bedrock acts as a negative barrier due to the permeability of the volcanic rocks. In the field visit carried out by SETENA officials on February 18, 2009, according to official communication No. ASA-509-SETENA, there are no findings that determine the exposure of any outcrop in the quarry area. He points out that both the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) and the General Directorate of Geology of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (MINAET) approved the environmental feasibility studies, the hydrogeological studies, the aquifer vulnerability studies, and the contaminant transit studies. Likewise, field and monitoring visits to the quarry are scheduled by the Department of Environmental Audit and Monitoring of SETENA to verify compliance with the provisions contained in the SETENA resolution issued to the mining company. He requests that the appeal be declared without merit.

29.- In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.

Drafted by Magistrate **Ulate Chacón**; and, **Considering:** **I.- Regarding the amparo against subjects of private law.** The Constitutional Chamber, in cases similar to this one, has developed the scope of the provisions of Article 57 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), concerning the amparo appeal against subjects of private law. Indeed, this proceeding is applicable not only against actions and omissions of subjects of public law that violate or threaten to violate any fundamental rights, but also against actions or omissions of subjects of private law, when they act or must act in the exercise of public functions or powers, or are, de jure or de facto, in a position of power against which common jurisdictional remedies are clearly insufficient or tardy to guarantee the full enjoyment of the rights enshrined in the Political Constitution, as well as in the International Instruments on Human Rights in force in the Republic (in this regard, see Judgment No. 2000-03337 of 19:26 of April 25, 2000). In the specific case, it is evident that Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. and Constructora MECO S.A., as subjects of private law, are in a situation of power with respect to the protected parties, against whom common jurisdictional remedies may prove insufficient or tardy to enforce the rights they consider violated. For this reason, the Constitutional Chamber must hear the merits of this amparo proceeding.

**II.- Object of the appeal.** The appellants, residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that since 1994, the company Constructora Meco, S.A. established itself in that area with a quarry (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices, despite the fact that said site is a "*high-density residential zone*" according to the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador), which implies that this location is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisance to the neighborhood. Due to the existence of the quarry, they suffer dust pollution and noise pollution (contaminación sónica) from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, besides the fact that the soils are unstable as a consequence of the material extraction. The community of Bosques de Santa Ana, they add, is located right next to Constructora Meco, and above what the environmental fragility index calls: "*the most important aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the Central Valley*", so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate said mining activity. Furthermore, they allege that for several years, Corporación de Supermercados Unidos installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite it being a residential zone, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. The National Institute of Housing and Urban Development (Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, INVU), they claim, granted permits to the referred corporation, contrary to the provisions of the Regulatory Plan. Said company has not contained the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation aggravated by the inertia of the respondents, who have not provided an effective solution to the contamination problem. For this reason, they claim their constitutional right to health and to obtain a definitive administrative response—and not temporary solutions—has been violated, claiming that Article 27 of the Constitution, which protects the right of petition and prompt response, as well as Article 41, have been infringed, since they consider they have not found a response to their administrative procedures.

**III.- Proven facts.** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven, either because they have been accredited in this manner or because the respondent omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:

a. The company Constructora Meco S.A., is the lessee of two quarries (tajos) in Pozos de Santa Ana, whose Environmental Impact Studies were approved for files 198-94 and 058-97. The approval of the first was due to Article 5 of Session No. 6 of May 24, 1995, issued by the National Commission of Environmental Impact Studies (CONEIA). The second, to resolution number 431-97 of July 9, 1999, from that Secretariat (report at folios 153 to 160).

b. The National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) and the General Directorate of Geology of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (MINAET) approved the environmental feasibility studies, the hydrogeological studies, the aquifer vulnerability studies, and the contaminant transit studies for Quarry Meco (report at folios 456 to 458).

c. At the entrance of Quarry Meco, there is a parking area (prior) for the wagons waiting to be loaded, which is located within the property of the company MECO, so the public road is not obstructed at any time (report at folios 171 to 174).

d. In the machinery transit zone, no oil stains were observed on the ground, which indicates that, at a glance, the machinery is in good condition (report at folios 171 to 174).

e. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the area surrounding the MECO company, due to the large number of industries and other productive activities nearby and the high transit of heavy vehicles and machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street that separates the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas (report at folios 406 to 410).

f. At the Meco Quarry (Tajo Meco), no evidence of contamination by dust from the quarry's own activities was found, as they are geographically confined by considerable elevation changes, and there is constant monitoring to ensure trucks transporting materials are covered, and the quarry's transit zones are watered often (report at folios 406 to 410).

g. The noise in the processing zone is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material is processed from a larger to a smaller size, but moving away from the site, near the urban area, no noise is perceived (report at folios 171 to 174).

h. The Meco Quarry (Tajo Meco) is not located within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area (Área de Reserva Acuífera de Puente Mulas) demarcated by AyA (report at folios 442 to 449).

i. The activity of the Meco Quarry (Tajo Meco), which is located on the left bank of the Río Virilla, does not affect the water resources used for public supply or the Aquifer Reserve Zone (Zona de Reserva Acuífera) of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers) (report at folios 442 to 449).

j. The Constructora Meco quarry is located on the left bank of the Río Virilla, with its canyon acting as a negative barrier to the activities generated on that left bank of said river (report at folios 456 to 458).

k. The most important aquifers of the Central Valley (Valle Central) are located on the right bank of the Río Virilla, and those located on the left bank are not aquifer zones of such relevance (report at folios 456 to 458).

l. Although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not equal; while those on the right bank are very productive, those on the left, due to their small recharge areas, are not saturated and only generate small aquifers with low potential (report at folios 430 to 433).

m. On the right bank of the Río Virilla, a large number of springs (manantiales) emerge, generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer, which, together with water wells, are collected by AyA (report at folios 456 to 458).

n. The Directorate of Urban Planning (Dirección de Urbanismo) of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, INVU), through note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted land-use rights (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries (report at folios 165 to 168).

o. The land-use rights (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. were granted considering that it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Santa Ana Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador de Santa Ana), and that land No. SJ 17213-91 had special characteristics, such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2), for which the minimum setbacks had to be 15 m from property boundaries, a 52m front setback from the main road, and a 35-meter rear setback, which allows and guarantees the containment of nuisances (report at folios 165 to 168).

p. The warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Santa Ana Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador de Santa Ana), which occurred according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, even though said Plan was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991 (report at folios 256 to 265).

q. As they are existing uses non-conforming with the High-Density Residential Zone (Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad), the Municipality of Santa Ana (Municipalidad de Santa Ana) has not authorized the growth or expansion of the activities of the Más x Menos warehouses (report at folios 256 to 265).

r. It is a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment, and therefore there is no nuisance of any kind (folios 139 to 146).

s. In a visit conducted by the Environmental Protection Office (Oficina de Protección al Ambiente) of the Ministry of Health on February 19, 2008, no problems from a sanitary point of view were detected at the Max por Menos Warehouses (report at folios 180 to 183, document at folio 186).

t. The sonic measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, owner of the home, stated that it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that moment, as it is intermittent, given that the vehicles (dump trucks and heavy transit vehicles) pass through with different time ranges (report at folios 406 to 410).

u. In a visit conducted by the Regional Directorate of the Health Rectorate for the Central South Region (Dirección Regional de Rectoría de la Salud Región Central Sur) of the Ministry of Health on September 25, 2009, at the Supermercados Unidos Warehouses, no noise whatsoever was being generated (report at folios 406 to 410, document at folio 407).

**IV.- On the merits.** In this case, the appellants argue an infringement of their fundamental rights due to the actions, based on diverse facts, of two private law entities, namely, the company Constructora Meco S.A. and the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos. Therefore, the actions of each will be analyzed separately, except regarding the rights protected in articles 27 and 41 of the Constitution (Carta Magna), which will be done jointly. However, it is first considered relevant to reiterate that this Chamber has emphasized the necessary balance between the country's development and the right to the environment (ambiente). This Chamber recognized the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado) as a fundamental right, before the constitutional reform of article 50 had taken effect, through a systematic, material, and evolutionary interpretation of articles 6, 11, 69, and 89, providing distinct responses to the opposition between private interests (freedom of enterprise) and collective interests, establishing as principles of constitutional order the protection, preservation, and rational exploitation of forest resources (Judgment No. 2233 of May 28, 1993). It has also recognized the presence of diffuse interests to legitimize the action for the sake of protecting the environment, when one must react against illegitimate acts or omissions, because precisely the most frequent violation of the environment occurs due to the inertia of public authorities in performing the acts necessary to protect them (Judgment No. 3707 of 3:00 p.m. on July 30, 1993, and No. 4422 of 10:30 a.m. on September 7, 1993). Likewise, this Chamber has highlighted the need for an awareness at the governmental level and in private activities of the importance of the environment for human health. Human life is conceived as the foundation, the necessary and determining condition of the person's existence. All of this within the national, regional, and global economy, through the conservation of nature and of life itself in its broadest sense (Judgment No. 4423 of 12:00 p.m. on September 7, 1993). In this way, with the reform of constitutional articles 46 and 50 taking effect, the right to the protection of health, environment, security, and economic interests of consumers is consolidated in the formal constitution. It is clear that environmental protection must be directed toward the adequate and intelligent use of its elements and in their natural, sociocultural, technological, and political relationships (sustainable development), in order to thereby safeguard the heritage to which present and future generations are entitled. For this reason, the primary objective of the use and protection of the environment is that, through the production and use of technology, not only economic gains (freedom of enterprise) are obtained but also a favorable development and evolution of the environment and natural resources with the human person, that is, without causing damage or harm:

"This Chamber has also recognized that both the right to health and the right to an environment free of contamination, without which the former could not be effective, are fundamental rights, so that the State has the obligation to provide for their protection, whether through general policies to achieve that goal or through concrete acts by the Administration. Sustainable development is one of those general policies that the State issues to broaden the possibilities for everyone to fulfill their aspirations for a better life, increasing production capacity or expanding the possibilities of achieving equitable progress between demographic growth or between it and natural systems. Sustainable development is the process of transformation in the use of resources, direction of investments, channeling of technological development, institutional changes, and everything that contributes to meeting the human needs of the present and the future" (Judgment number 1763-94, at sixteen hours forty-five minutes on April thirteen, nineteen ninety-four).

This Chamber has indicated that the environment must be understood as a potential for development to be used appropriately, requiring integrated action in its natural, sociocultural, technological, and political relationships, since, otherwise, its productivity is degraded for the present and the future and the heritage of coming generations could be put at risk. The origins of environmental problems are complex and correspond to an articulation of natural and social processes within the framework of the socioeconomic development style adopted by the country. For example, environmental problems are produced when the modalities of natural resource exploitation lead to a degradation of ecosystems exceeding their capacity for regeneration, which results in broad sectors of the population being harmed and a high environmental and social cost being generated that leads to a deterioration in the quality of life; precisely the primary objective of the use and protection of the environment is to obtain a development and evolution favorable to the human being. Environmental quality is a fundamental parameter of that quality of life; other parameters no less important are health, food, work, housing, education, etc., but more important than that is understanding that while the human person has the right to make use of the environment for their own development, they also have the duty to protect and preserve it for the use of present and future generations. This is not so novel, as it is merely the translation to this matter of the principle of "harm (lesión)", already consolidated in common law, by virtue of which the legitimate exercise of a right has two essential limits: on one hand, the equal rights of others, and on the other, the rational exercise and useful enjoyment of the right itself. Our country has depended and will continue to depend, like any other nation, on its natural resources and its environment to meet the basic needs of its inhabitants and keep operating the productive apparatus that sustains the national economy, whose main source is agriculture and, in recent years, tourism, especially in its ecotourism dimension, to which agritourism and rural community tourism are added. The soil, water, air, marine and coastal resources, forests, biological diversity, mineral resources, and the landscape make up the environmental framework without which basic demands—such as living space, food, energy, housing, health, and recreation—would be impossible. Likewise, our economy is also intimately linked to the state of the environment and natural resources. On the other hand, the goals of sustainable development have to do with the survival and well-being of the human being and with the maintenance of essential ecological processes, that is, of environmental quality and the survival of other species. Speaking of sustainable development in terms of satisfying present and future human needs and improving the quality of life is speaking of the demand for natural resources at the individual level and of the direct or support means necessary for the economy to function, generating employment and creating capital goods, which in turn make possible the transformation of resources into consumer, production, and export products. The declaration made at the Earth Summit in 1992 proclaimed and recognized the integral and interdependent nature of the planet; this means the acceptance of certain principles that inform the transition from current development styles to sustainability. The signatory States, among which is Costa Rica, committed themselves, within the preservation of sustainable development, to the protection above all of the human being. It was based on the principle that every person has the right to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature; it included the right of present and future generations for development to be carried out in such a way that satisfies their environmental and progress needs; it maintained the sovereign power of States to exploit their resources, emphasizing their responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction and control do not cause environmental damage to other States or areas beyond the limits of their national jurisdiction. They established the duty of States to cooperate in the conservation, protection, and restoration of the environment and their common responsibilities in that sense; in this way, international cooperation in the promotion and support of economic growth and sustainable development will allow for better addressing the problems of environmental degradation. But it must also be pointed out that in accordance with the provisions of article 50 of the Constitution, the Organic Law of the Environment (Ley Orgánica del ambiente) establishes the liability of whoever contaminates the environment or causes it damage (article 2, subsection d). Damage or contamination to the environment can be produced by conduct of action or omission and is attributable to all natural or legal persons who carry them out (article 98), and the owners of the enterprises or the activities that cause the damage, whether by action or by omission, are considered jointly and severally liable (article 101).

**V.- Regarding the company Constructora Meco S.A.** Regarding this company, the appellants, who are residents of the Bosques de Santa Ana Residential Development (Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana), located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that since 1994 it has been established in the area with a quarry (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices, despite the fact that said area is—according to the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador)—a "high-density residential zone (zona residencial de alta densidad)", which means that this place is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisances to the neighborhood. In fact, there is a statement from the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, INVU) indicating that in August 1994 it did not grant construction permits for industrial activities in that area. Due to the existence of the quarry, they suffer from dust contamination and noise contamination from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, besides the fact that the soils are unstable as a result of material extraction and the roads surrounding the Residential community are destroyed. They add that the Bosques de Santa Ana community is located right next to Constructora Meco, and on what the environmental fragility index calls: "the most important aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the Central Valley (Valle Central)", for which the most sensible thing would be to eliminate the mining activity from the area. The foregoing disagreement raised by the appellants, and practically for the same facts, was already known to this Chamber, by reason of the amparo action (recurso de amparo) No. 08-014565-0007-CO filed by María Antonieta Alegría de García and Roberto Rafael Alegría Rodríguez, also residents of the Bosques de Santa Ana Residential Development. That amparo was declared without merit by Judgment No. 2009-003342 at twelve hours fourteen minutes on February 27, 2009, under the following considerations:

VI.-</span></i><i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> On the other hand, the Minister of Health in her report indicated that on November 7, 2008, an inspection was carried out at the site indicated by the appellants, noting that the appellant company has the necessary permits for the development of its undertaking, as well as the appropriate physical conditions, with no anomaly being found (see report at folio 43). Finally, the authorities of the Municipality of the Canton of Santa Ana in their response – which is given under the solemnity of an oath, with timely warning of the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional – indicated that the permits held by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, predate the entry into force of the Regulatory Plan of the Canton of Santa Ana (see report at folio 46), with which the Chamber appreciates that it constitutes a matter of mere legality to elucidate whether such permits still remain in force despite the content of the local regulatory plan, which must be ventilated before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose. </span></i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'><o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div style='margin-left:1.0cm;margin-right:19.85pt'> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:17.0pt;line-height:150%'><b><i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>VII.-</span></i></b><i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> Thus, as regards the effective protection of the precautionary principle and the right protected in Article 50 of the Constitución Política, this Constitutional Court does not find any current illegitimate situation proven that impairs the full enjoyment of these rights, based on the evidentiary material that the plaintiffs have provided on this occasion. On the contrary, from the reports provided by the respondent authorities and the documentary evidence adduced to the case file, it is rather inferred that the activity carried out in the aforementioned quarry (tajo) does not pose environmental contamination problems, regarding the possible excess of noise or dust. So that the actions of the respondents, far from violating the fundamental rights of the petitioners, conform to the Law of the Constitution. By virtue of the foregoing, it is appropriate to dismiss the amparo appeal, without prejudice (of course) to reaching a different conclusion on another occasion based on other elements of proof.”</span></i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'><o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>Thus, taking into account that recent precedent, it is considered that it is not meritorious to analyze again the permits granted to said company and that have allowed it to work in the quarry (tajo) of interest, as well as that regarding the Regulatory Plan. Furthermore, it must be mentioned, this Court has indicated in previous cases, that it is not within the purview of an instance such as this one to verify whether an environmental impact assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental), hydrological study, hydrogeological study, or any other of a technical nature was well prepared or not, since this evidently requires the knowledge of specialists in those disciplines, which are not typical of the jurisdictional function of this Constitutional Court (see judgments No. 2004-009927 of eleven hours and one minute of September 3, 2004, and 2005-005790 of ten hours and forty-one minutes of May 13, 2005). In the case under study, the concessionaire company had to submit various technical studies to ensure that the project would not produce environmental damage. Precisely the entities - in particular SETENA - in charge of reviewing said studies, considered that they do comply with the necessary information to evaluate and predict the impact of the quarry's (tajo) exploitation, and by reason thereof it was approved, granting the environmental feasibility (Viabilidad Ambiental) and the other permits cited above. In any case, if the petitioners consider that the studies were not carried out adequately or estimate that all necessary legal aspects were not contemplated - because they were private companies contracted by the concessionaire company -, and that the zone's Regulatory Plan does not permit its operation, that constitutes a matter that must be resolved before the instances knowledgeable in the technical aspects of this matter, and not before the constitutional jurisdiction, by virtue of it being an aspect that falls outside the sphere of its competence. What does fall within the purview of this Chamber is to determine whether, with the approval of this concession, serious and irreversible environmental damage was produced or exists the possibility of being produced, as contemplated by the Rio Convention. This is because it is unavoidable that all human activity on Earth implies an impact on the environment (or damage, since it alters it in one way or another); however, its relevance for study purposes consists in whether that impact must be serious or irreparable, as provided by said Convention. In this regard, it is found that at the entrance of Tajo Meco there is a (prior) parking area for the wagons waiting to be loaded, which is located within the property of the MECO company, so the public road is never obstructed. Additionally, in the machinery transit zone, no oil stains were observed on the ground, which indicates it is in good condition. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the zone adjacent to the MECO company, due to the large number of industries and other nearby productive activities and the high traffic of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street that separates the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas; however, in Tajo Meco no evidence of contamination by dust from its own activities was found, because they are geographically confined by considerable differences in elevation. It was verified that there is constant vigilance over the covering of material transport trucks and the transit zones of the quarry (tajo) are frequently watered. It has been reported, under the gravity of oath, that the noise in the process zone is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material is processed from a larger to a smaller size, but upon moving away from the place, near the urban area, no noise is perceived. Under that context, it is considered that the amparo regarding that point is not appropriate, since once again it has not been possible to corroborate any sonic or environmental contamination produced by the activity carried out in the quarry (tajo) of interest. Notwithstanding the foregoing and based on the precautionary principle, note must be taken of what was reported by the Vice Minister of Health in that the Santa Ana Health Rectorate Area issued sanitary order No. ARSSA-1583-09 so that the construction company carries out two perimeter immission studies, in the rainy season and the dry season, with the objective of scientifically determining if the emissions generated by the company can affect the neighborhood (report at folios 406 to 410, document at folios 414 and 415). Furthermore, the Municipality of Santa Ana must do its part regarding the cantonal public roads concerning vehicular traffic and their maintenance, since it is evident from what has been reported that there is a certain problem due to the high traffic of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street that separates the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas, which regardless of who the producing actors are, the truth is that they are its responsibility. <o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>VI.- </span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>Regarding the alleged contamination of water resources, which is a new element, it is necessary to point out that the jurisprudence of the Chamber is clear in recognizing the right to water as a fundamental right, such that along with the undertaking of serious efforts for its provision to the population, there exists the duty of public institutions to make responsible and restrained use of the available water resource, which implies the need to acquire certainty of the water susceptible to exploitation –availability– guaranteeing its current provision and the future sustainability of the service, preventing the current use of the resource from producing environmental risk that compromises the existence and future endowment of the liquid. Furthermore, the Chamber has had the opportunity to rule in a forceful and detailed manner on the protection that must be granted to the national water resource, clarifying both the normative protection framework and the institutions that make up the water sector, recognizing and specifying the scope of competences of said instances and the transcendence of their actions regarding the granting, utilization, and protection of water. Groundwater has become the principal means of public supply in the Central American region, as the majority of surface sources have been contaminated by the action of the human person. In the specific case of Costa Rica, it is estimated that approximately seventy percent of the water consumed daily by the country's inhabitants comes from groundwater, a situation that highlights the importance of protecting this resource. It has also been pointed out that … “<i>Unlike the contamination of surface waters, which is usually patent and visible, allowing for environmental actions tending to mitigate or eradicate it, groundwater contamination, by its very nature, usually goes unnoticed and becomes evident when it has reached large proportions. Aquifers, due to the slow circulation of waters, the absorption capacity of the terrain, and other factors, can take a long time to show contamination. Additionally, the large volume of contained water means that extensive contaminations take a prolonged period to manifest, or when it comes to localized contaminations, they are detected when they flow to some exploitation site. Certainly, this type of water has a resistance to contamination, however, when this occurs, its regeneration can be extraordinarily slow and on occasions is irreversible due to the high cost of the means to do so. It has been demonstrated that attempts to repair the damage produced by contamination to an aquifer to once again achieve levels of water potability have not been successful, the technologies for its cleanup have contributed little to reducing the damage, and the methods are economically very costly. To the above must be added the lack of organizational infrastructure, material, financial, and human resources, in this last case, duly trained to evaluate, measure, and, in general, monitor the quality of this water and the exact dimension of its contamination. The degradation and contamination of aquifers imposes upon the legislator and the public administrations the urgent and non-deferrable task of protecting them…” </i>(judgment No. 2004-1923, of fourteen hours fifty-five minutes of February 25, 2004) (see also, among others, judgments No. 2008-012109 of fifteen hours and sixteen minutes of August 5, 2008, No. 2008-014092, of nine hours twenty-eight minutes of September 23, 2008, and No. 2008-015657 of eleven hours forty-five minutes of October 17, 2008). In this case, it has been possible to verify, from all the reports rendered by the respondent public authorities, that Tajo Meco is not located within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area demarcated by AyA. That although its activity is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, it does not affect the exploitations for public supply and the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. Furthermore, the canyon of the Virilla River acts as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river. It has also been fully demonstrated that the most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Virilla River, and those located on the left bank are not aquifer zones of such relevance. Thus, although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers are developed (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; while on the right bank they are very productive, on the left, due to their small recharge areas, they are not found to be saturated and only generate small aquifers of low potential. It is clarified that on the right bank of the Virilla River a great quantity of springs (manantiales) emerge that have been generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer and that, together with water wells, are captured by AyA. Within that context, it is not possible, as the appellants claim, to presuppose in any way that the aquifers of the zone run any risk of suffering contamination from the work carried out by Constructora MECO in the zone. The foregoing does not imply, of course, that the respondent public authorities consider their work finished, as they must continue coordinating and verifying the conditions under which the concession was granted, and compliance with the environmental impact assessment, also having to take precautions should the case so merit. See that the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) (folios 430 to 433), recommends that for purposes of evaluating the current situation, more hydraulic conductivity tests must be performed and the transit times and the intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer recalculated. Additionally, carry out an inventory of possible contamination sources in the extraction development of the quarry (tajo) and take measures to not allow the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer. Also, the installation of piezometers in the quarry (tajo), with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the elevations or levels of rock exploitation. <o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>VII.- About the</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>Corporación de Supermercados Unidos</b>. The appellants argue that for several years the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the zone, even though the zone is residential, and therefore, no industry or commerce can be located there. They claim that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo granted permits to the referred corporation, contrary to what is established in the regulatory plan. Said company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation that is aggravated by the inertia of the respondents who have not given an effective solution to the contamination problem they allege. In this regard, this Court has repeatedly indicated that, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 169 and 170 of the Constitución Política, the Ley de Planificación Urbana No. 4240 of November 15, 1968, establishes that primary ownership in matters of urban planning corresponds to the municipalities, which has been embodied in Articles 15 and 19 of said law. Such entities are responsible for undertaking local urban planning through the promulgation of the respective regulatory plans, making effective the regulations that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo dictates for that purpose, as the institution in charge of urban planning at the national level. The latter with the clarification that the Dirección de Urbanismo functions as an advisory body to the municipalities for the purposes of preparing, applying, and modifying the municipal or local Regulatory Plan and its Regulations before their definitive adoption; however, the Chamber has stated that the foregoing must be understood as the formal limit of the broad guidelines, technical norms, or general directives according to which the local governments must elaborate their respective regulatory plans and the corresponding urban development regulations, since it is not possible to claim that the National Urban Development Plan should be elaborated and implemented entirely by the Central Government, without the direct intervention of the municipalities in that matter. The Chamber has considered that such a situation contravenes not only the most elementary principles of logic and convenience, given that it concerns the particular interests of each canton of the Republic, but also the constitutional principles of the municipal regime, established by our Carta Fundamental in Articles 168 to 175. In that context, urban planning, that is, the elaboration and implementation of regulatory plans, is a function inherent to the municipalities to the exclusion of any other public entity, except as stated regarding the general directing powers attributed to the Ministry of Planning and the Dirección de Urbanismo. Regarding the legal nature of regulatory plans, the criterion upheld by this Chamber is that by reason of their content and their general effectiveness or binding force, they must be considered as true legal norms or laws in a material sense, given that they recognize rights and establish obligations for the owners and holders of properties located in the territorial circumscription of the respective canton. Likewise, considering the procedure for forming these regulations, it has been considered that they constitute a manifestation of direct democracy, by reason that they are elaborated and approved by the respective municipalities, which find their reason for being, precisely in their formation, that is, by the municipal citizens or residents, in a determined territorial circumscription –canton–, for the "<i>administration of local interests and services</i>" (Articles 169 of the Constitución Política and 1 of the Código Municipal) (see judgment No. 2009-012515 of eighteen hours and three minutes of August 11, 2009). Furthermore, urban ordering is one of the most important and transcendent tools for the satisfaction of local interests. It is the normative expression of the will and of the planning and design of collective and individual development, but without detaching from the national contour and the territorial and environmental unity to which they belong. The way of planning the development of human activities has a significant impact on the environment, which may be negative or positive according to the uses and activities that are authorized. Now, in the present case and properly in light of the actions or omissions carried out by the respondent authorities, it is found that the Dirección de Urbanismo of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, through note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted the land-use change (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries. The land-use change (uso de suelo) was granted upon considering it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Regulatory Plan of Santa Ana, and that the plot of land (terreno) No. SJ 17213-91, had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which the minimum setbacks should be 15 meters from the boundaries, a front setback of 52 meters on the main road, and a rear setback of 35 meters, which permits and guarantees a confinement of nuisances. As has been reported, the Más x Menos warehouse activity was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Regulatory Plan of Santa Ana, which was done according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, despite the fact that the cited Plan was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991. However, because they are existing non-conforming uses with the High-Density Residential Zone, the Municipality of Santa Ana has not authorized the growth or expansion of the Más x Menos warehouse activities. Regarding these points, in accordance with what was indicated above, it is meritorious to point out that it constitutes a matter of mere legality to elucidate whether the permits that allow the operation of the cited warehouses were granted in accordance with Law, as well as the prescription or not of a possible challenge to them. This must be ventilated before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose. <o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>VIII.-</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> Now, regarding the argued sonic contamination, it is found that it is a commercial premises with a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment. That in a visit made by the Environmental Protection Office of the Ministry of Health on February 19, 2008, no problems were detected from a sanitary point of view at the Max por Menos Warehouses. Furthermore, the sonic measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, owner of the dwelling, stated it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that moment, given that it is intermittent, as the vehicles (wagons and heavy transit vehicles) travel with different time ranges. As well as in another visit made by the Regional Directorate of the Health Rectorate Central South Region of the Ministry of Health on September 25, 2009, no noise whatsoever was being generated. From this, it is deduced that it has not been possible to determine that the cited warehouses generate sonic contamination as argued, therefore, it is not possible to attribute any responsibility to the private law company in question. The foregoing does not negate the responsibility of the health authorities to monitor that the appellants are not affected by a possible contamination of that type, as it cannot be lost sight of that it is the State's obligation that, in the face of events like those indicated here, the necessary mechanisms be activated to eventually, in an anticipatory manner, shelter the right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, as well as the right to health, in the face of possible dangers, with the purpose of, as has been indicated, making them endure for future generations.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>IX.- Regarding the rights of petition and administrative justice. </span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>Regarding these, the appellants allege in the writ filing the appeal, the following: <i>“(…) Even if this documentation is presented, this amparo appeal filed could not be obviated, nor the multiple letters sent to the Municipal Council signed by many of the residents of Bosques de Santa Ana, regarding the multiple nuisances that your company has caused us for years, without the authorities definitively accepting our claim. (…) The facts stated above are known to the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, the Municipality of Santa Ana, the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, and the Ministry of Health, institutions before which the corresponding administrative procedures were carried out and some before which the nuisances have been made known. With the purpose of ending the contamination that</i> <i>we suffer. These entities have not resolved the stated problems and have accepted the temporary solutions that Constructora Meco and Wal Mart have offered, they have filed the nuisances as if the solutions were definitive, without following up on the actions and without demanding definitive solutions, like eliminating the sources of the problem</i>. <i>We come before this Honorable Chamber because we consider that the respondent institutions violate our constitutional right to health, and the right to obtain a definitive response, not temporary solutions, from state institutions. We consider that the administrative inactivity contravenes the provisions of Article 27 of the Constitución Política, which regulates the right of petition and prompt response. Likewise, Article 41 of the Constitution regulates that we must all find reparation by resorting to the laws, in a prompt, thorough manner, without denial, and in strict conformity with the laws</i>”. Regarding the right of petition and prompt resolution, as well as the right to prompt and thorough access to justice, the jurisprudence of this Chamber is copious, in accordance with which it has been determined that Article 27 of the Constitución Política enshrines the right of petition and prompt resolution, which consists of a faculty that the administered parties have to make petitions before the public authorities. Such petitions before the Administration can be divided into simple petitions and those that actually tend to seek the recognition or granting of something: the former can be protected as a direct violation of Articles 27 or 30 of the Constitution, by the simple expiration of the legal deadline to resolve, as stipulated by Article 32 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional; the latter, when not resolved within the legal deadline, constitute administrative delay and justice delay, hence they are amenable to amparo for violation of Articles 27 and 41 of the Magna Carta. However, from the documentation provided by the appellants (folios 23, 49 to 54, 62 to 72), it is not possible to determine a violation of the rights protected in the aforementioned regulations. See that those proceedings, addressed to the Municipality of Santa Ana, refer to the opposition by various residents to a possible modification to the regulatory plan that would allow converting the lands where the respondent companies are located into an industrial zone. As well as the opposition to the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos expanding the warehouses it already has in the place. Regarding the first point, the Mayor of Santa Ana reported that said Municipality is working on a comprehensive reform of the Regulatory Plan (folio 258). From this, it is deduced that the administrative procedure itself has not concluded, and for its definitive resolution it is necessary to take into account all proceedings, evidently including those referred to above, therefore it is not possible to argue any lack of response. Meanwhile, regarding the other point, whose proceeding was presented on August 27, 2004 (folio 49), the Secretary General of SETENA reported that there is a case file, 732-2004-SETENA, called Distribution Center of C.S.U., in which the expansion of the warehouses was sought, but a withdrawal occurred, for which reason the case file was archived by resolution No. 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005 (folio 173). The foregoing means that said opposition lacks current interest since the proceeding they objected to was dismissed many years before this amparo was filed. Under that context, it is considered that the noted constitutional violation, and regarding the proceedings that are documented, has not occurred. <o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%'><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>X.- Conclusion.</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> As the injury to the fundamental rights alleged by the appellants, attributable to the respondents, is not verified, this appeal is dismissed, not without first making three calls to attention: <u>first</u>, to the Minister of Health so that she verifies compliance with sanitary order No.

ARSSA-1583-09 issued against Constructora MECO S.A. The <u>second</u> call to attention is for the Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Director of Geologías y Minas, and the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, so that they take note of the recommendation formulated by the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA), in protection of the water resources of the area. <u>Third</u>: In relation to vehicular traffic and the maintenance of public cantonal roads, the Municipality of Santa Ana must adopt the necessary measures to avoid nuisance to the neighbors.

**Por tanto:** The appeal (recurso) is declared without merit. The Minister of Health, the Secretary General of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Director of Geologías y Minas, and the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, and the Municipality of Santa Ana shall take note of what is indicated in the last considerando.

Ana Virginia Calzada M.

Presidenta Gilbert Armijo S. Ernesto Jinesta L.

Fernando Cruz C. Rodolfo E. Piza R.

Ricardo Guerrero P. Enrique Ulate C.

It was based on the principle that every person has the right to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature; it included the right of present and future generations for development to be carried out in such a way that satisfies their environmental and progress needs; it maintained the sovereign power of States to exploit their resources, emphasizing their responsibility to ensure that activities carried out within their jurisdiction and control do not cause environmental damage to other States or areas beyond the limits of their national jurisdiction. They established the duty of States to cooperate in the conservation, protection, and restoration of the environment and their common responsibilities in this regard; in this way, international cooperation in promoting and supporting economic growth and sustainable development will make it possible to better address the problems of environmental degradation. But it must also be noted that in accordance with the provisions of Article 50 of the Constitution, the Organic Law of the Environment establishes the liability of anyone who contaminates the environment or causes damage to it (Article 2, subsection d). Damage or contamination to the environment can be produced by acts or omissions and is attributable to all natural or legal persons who carry them out (Article 98), and the owners of the enterprises or activities that cause the damage, whether by act or omission, are considered jointly and severally liable (Article 101).<o:p></o:p> **V.- Regarding the company Constructora Meco S.A.** With respect to this company, the petitioners, who are residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that it established itself in the area in 1994 with a quarry (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices, despite the fact that this area is – according to the Plan Regulador – a *"high-density residential zone"*, which implies that this location is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisance to the neighborhood. In fact, there is a declaration from the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo indicating that in August 1994 it did not grant construction permits for industrial activities in that area. Due to the existence of the quarry, they suffer from dust pollution and noise pollution from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, not to mention that the soils are unstable as a consequence of the extraction of material and the streets surrounding the Residential area are destroyed. They add that the community of Bosques de Santa Ana is located right next to Constructora Meco, and on what the environmental fragility index calls: *"the most important aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the Valle Central"*, so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate the mining activity from the area. The foregoing disagreement raised by the petitioners, and practically for the same facts, has already been brought to the attention of this Chamber, by reason of the amparo appeal No. 08-014565-0007-CO filed by María Antonieta Alegría de García and Roberto Rafael Alegría Rodríguez, also residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. That amparo was declared without merit through judgment No. 2009-003342 of twelve hours fourteen minutes on February 27, 2009, under the following considerations: <o:p></o:p> ***“…. V.-** Well, in the present case, what is being discussed is whether the omission of the respondent authorities (namely, the Dirección de Geología y Minas of the Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, the Municipalidad del Cantón de Santa Ana, the Ministerio de Salud, and the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía) regarding the complaints filed about the alleged environmental pollution problems caused by the activity deployed by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, in a quarry adjacent to the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, violates or does not violate the right of the protected parties to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this regard, the authorities of the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía in their sworn report have indicated that the exploitation of the aforementioned quarry has the environmental feasibility (viabilidad ambiental) and the corresponding permits, after having carried out the necessary environmental impact assessments (estudios de impacto ambiental) (see folio 73), which is deduced from the content of files No. 198-94 and 058-97. But the Minister of Ambiente y Energía has also affirmed under oath that “as of today, it is up to date with its environmental commitments, such as the amount of the environmental guarantee which is current and in the presentation of the regency reports (informes regenciales) (see report on folio 37), and that there is no communication from the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental or the Dirección de Geología y Minas to the effect that said company must suspend its activities (see report on folio 37).”* ***VI.-** On the other hand, the Minister of Salud in her report indicated that on November 7, 2008, an inspection was carried out at the site indicated by the petitioners, noting that the petitioning company has the necessary permits for the development of its undertaking, as well as the adequate physical conditions, and no anomaly was found (see report on folio 43). Finally, the authorities of the Municipalidad del Cantón de Santa Ana in their response – which is given under the solemnity of oath, with timely warning of the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional – indicated that the permits enjoyed by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, predate the entry into force of the Plan Regulador of the Cantón de Santa Ana (see report on folio 46), whereby the Chamber appreciates that it constitutes a matter of mere legality to determine whether such permits still remain in force despite the content of the local plan regulador, which must be aired before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose.* ***VII.-** Thus, with regard to the effective protection of the precautionary principle and the right protected in Article 50 of the Constitution, this Constitutional Court has not found any current illegitimate situation proven that impairs the full enjoyment of these rights, based on the evidentiary material that the plaintiffs have provided on this occasion. On the contrary, from the reports provided by the respondent authorities and the documentary evidence adduced to the record, it is rather inferred that the activity deployed in the aforementioned quarry does not pose problems of environmental pollution, regarding possible excess noise or dust. So that the conduct of the respondents, far from violating the fundamental rights of the promoters, conforms to the Law of the Constitution. By virtue of the foregoing, the appropriate course is to declare the amparo appeal without merit, without prejudice (of course) to arriving at a different conclusion on another occasion based on other elements of proof.”* Thus, taking into account that recent precedent, it is considered that there is no merit in re-examining the permits granted to said company that have allowed it to work in the Quarry of interest, nor the matter concerning the Plan Regulador. Furthermore, it must be mentioned that this Court has indicated in previous cases that it is not the competence of an instance such as this one to verify whether an Environmental Impact Assessment, hydrological study, hydrogeological study, or any other of a technical nature was well prepared or not, since it evidently requires the knowledge of specialists in those disciplines, which are not part of the jurisdictional function of this Constitutional Court (see judgments No. 2004-009927 of eleven hours one minute on September 3, 2004, and 2005-005790 of ten hours forty-one minutes on May 13, 2005). In the case under study, the concessionaire company had to present various technical studies to ensure that the project would not produce environmental damage. Precisely the entities – in particular SETENA – responsible for reviewing said studies, assessed that they indeed meet the necessary information to evaluate and predict the impact of the quarry exploitation, and by reason of this, it was approved, granting the Environmental Feasibility (Viabilidad Ambiental) and the other permits cited previously. In any case, if the promoters consider that the studies were not carried out properly or they believe that not all the necessary legal aspects were contemplated – because they were private companies contracted by the concessionaire company –, and that the Plan Regulador of the area does not permit its operation, this constitutes a matter that must be resolved before the instances knowledgeable of the technical aspects in this area, and not before the constitutional jurisdiction, by virtue of being an aspect that escapes the sphere of its competence. What is within the competence of this Chamber is to determine whether, with the approval of this concession, serious and irreversible damage to the environment was produced or there is a possibility of it being produced, as contemplated in the Rio Convention. This is because it is unavoidable that every human activity on Earth implies an impact on the environment (or damage, since it alters it in one way or another); however, its relevance for study purposes consists in the fact that this impact must be serious or irreparable, as provided in said Convention. In this regard, it is observed that at the entrance of the Tajo Meco there is a parking area (beforehand) for the trucks waiting to be loaded, which is located within the property of the company MECO, so the public road is not obstructed at any time. In addition, in the machinery transit zone, no oil stains on the ground were observed, which indicates it is in good condition. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the area adjacent to the company MECO, due to the large number of industries and other productive activities nearby and the high transit of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street separating the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas; however, in the Tajo Meco, no evidence was found of dust pollution coming from its own activities, as they are geographically confined by considerable level differences. It was confirmed that there is constant monitoring of the covering of material transport trucks and the transit zones within the quarry (tajo) are frequently watered. It has been reported, under the gravity of oath, that the noise in the process zone is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material is processed from a larger to a smaller size, but when moving away from the site, near the urban zone, no noise is perceived. In this context, it is considered that the amparo appeal regarding this aspect is not admissible, since once again it has not been possible to corroborate any noise or environmental pollution produced by the activity carried out in the quarry of interest. Notwithstanding the foregoing and based on the precautionary principle, note must be taken of what was reported by the Vice Minister of Salud that the Área Rectora de Salud de Santa Ana issued sanitary order No. ARSSA-1583-09 so that the construction company performs two perimeter immission studies, in the rainy season and dry season, with the objective of scientifically determining if the emissions generated by the company may affect the neighborhood (report on folios 406 to 410, document on folios 414 and 415). Furthermore, the Municipalidad de Santa Ana must do the same regarding the cantonal public roads concerning vehicular traffic and their maintenance, since it is evident from what was reported that there is a certain problem due to the high transit of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street separating the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas, which, regardless of who the producing actors are, the truth is that it is their responsibility. <o:p></o:p> **VI.-** Regarding the alleged contamination of water resources, which is a new element, it is necessary to point out that the jurisprudence of the Chamber is clear in recognizing the right to water as a fundamental right, thus, along with the realization of serious efforts for its provision to the population, the public institutions have the duty to make responsible and moderate use of the available water resource, which implies the need to obtain certainty of the water susceptible to exploitation – availability – guaranteeing its present provision and the future sustainability of the service, preventing the current use of the resource from producing an environmental risk that compromises the future existence and supply of the liquid. Moreover, the Chamber has had the opportunity to pronounce itself in a forceful and detailed manner on the protection that must be granted to the national water resource, clarifying both the normative protection framework and the institutions that make up the water sector, recognizing and specifying the scope of competencies of those instances and the transcendence of their actions in matters of grant, use, and protection of water. Groundwater has become the main means of public supply in the Central American region, since the majority of surface sources have been contaminated by human action. In the specific case of Costa Rica, it is estimated that approximately seventy percent of the water consumed daily by the country's inhabitants comes from groundwater, a situation that highlights the importance of protecting this resource. It has also been noted that … *“Unlike the pollution of surface water, which is usually evident and visible, allowing for environmental actions aimed at mitigating or eradicating it, that of groundwater, by its very nature, usually goes unnoticed and becomes evident when it has reached large proportions. Aquifers (mantos acuíferos), due to the slow circulation of the waters, the absorption capacity of the terrain, and other factors, can take a long time to show contamination. Additionally, the large volume of water contained means that extensive contamination takes a prolonged period to manifest itself, or when it involves localized contamination, it is detected when it flows into some exploitation site. Certainly, this type of water has a resistance to contamination, however, when this occurs, its regeneration can be extraordinarily slow and at times is irreversible due to the high cost of the means to do so. It has been demonstrated that attempts to repair the damage caused by contamination to an aquifer to achieve, again, levels of water potability have not been successful, technologies for its cleaning have contributed little to reducing the damage, and the methods are economically very high. To the above must be added the lack of organizational infrastructure, material, financial, and human resources, in the latter case, duly trained to evaluate, measure, and, in general, monitor the quality of this water and the exact dimension of its contamination. The degradation and contamination of aquifers (mantos acuíferos) imposes on the legislator and public administrations the urgent and non-deferrable task of protecting them…”* (judgment No. 2004-1923, of fourteen hours fifty-five minutes on February 25, 2004) (see also, among others, judgments No. 2008-012109 of fifteen hours and sixteen minutes on August 5, 2008, No. 2008-014092, of nine hours twenty-eight minutes on September 23, 2008, and No. 2008-015657 of eleven hours forty-five minutes on October 17, 2008). In this case, it has been possible to confirm, from all the reports rendered by the respondent public authorities, that the Tajo Meco is not located within the Área de Reserva Acuífera de Puente Mulas demarcated by the AyA. That although its activity is located on the left bank of the Río Virilla, it does not affect water usage for public supply and the Zona de Reserva Acuífera of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. Additionally, the canyon of the Río Virilla acts as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river. It has also been fully demonstrated that the most important aquifers of the Valle Central are located on the right bank of the Río Virilla, and those located on the left bank are not aquifer zones (zonas acuíferas) of such relevance. Thus, although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; while on the right bank they are very productive, on the left bank, due to their small recharge areas, they are not saturated and only generate small aquifers of low potential. It is clarified that on the right bank of the Río Virilla, a large number of springs (manantiales) emerge that have been generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer and that, together with water wells, are captured by the AyA. Within this context, it is not possible, as the petitioners claim, to presuppose in any way that the aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the area run any risk of suffering contamination from the work carried out by Constructora MECO in the zone. The foregoing does not imply, of course, that the respondent public authorities consider their work finished, as they must continue coordinating and verifying the conditions under which the concession was granted, and compliance with the Environmental Impact Assessment, also having to take precautions if the case so warrants. See that the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) (folios 430 to 433), recommends that for purposes of assessing the current situation, more hydraulic conductivity tests should be carried out and the transit times and the intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer recalculated. Additionally, to carry out an inventory of possible sources of contamination in the extraction development of the quarry (tajo) and take measures to prevent the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer. Also the installation of piezometers in the quarry, with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the rock exploitation levels or elevations. <o:p></o:p> **VII.- Regarding the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos**. The petitioners argue that several years ago, the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite the zone being residential, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. They assert that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo granted permits to the referred corporation, contrary to what is prescribed in the plan regulador. Said company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation that is aggravated by the inertia of the respondents who have not provided an effective solution to the pollution problem they allege. In this regard, this Court has repeatedly indicated that, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 169 and 170 of the Constitution, the Ley de Planificación Urbana No. 4240 of November 15, 1968, establishes that primary ownership in matters of urban planning corresponds to the municipalities, which has been set forth in Articles 15 and 19 of said law. These entities are responsible for assuming local urban planning through the enactment of the respective plans reguladores, making effective the regulations dictated for that purpose by the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, as the institution responsible for urban planning at the national level. The latter with the clarification that the Dirección de Urbanismo functions as an advisory body to the municipalities for the purposes of preparing, applying, and modifying the municipal or local Plan Regulador and its Regulations before their final adoption; however, the Chamber has stated that the foregoing must be understood as the formal limit of the broad guidelines, technical norms, or general directives according to which local governments must elaborate their respective plans reguladores and the corresponding urban development regulations, since it is not possible to pretend that the Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano be elaborated and implemented entirely by the Central Government, without the direct intervention of the municipalities in this matter. The Chamber has considered that such a situation violates not only the most elemental principles of logic and convenience, given that it concerns the particular interests of each canton of the Republic, but also the constitutional principles of the municipal regime, established by our Fundamental Charter in Articles 168 to 175. In that context, urban planning, that is, the elaboration and implementation of plans reguladores, is a function inherent to the municipalities to the exclusion of all other public entities, except as stated regarding the general directive powers attributed to the Ministerio de Planificación and the Dirección de Urbanismo. Regarding the legal nature of plans reguladores, the criterion upheld by this Chamber is that by reason of their content and their general efficacy or mandatory nature, they must be considered as true legal norms or laws in the material sense, given that they recognize rights and establish obligations for the owners and possessors of properties located in the territorial circumscription of the respective canton. Likewise, taking into account the procedure for the formation of these regulations, it has been considered that they constitute a manifestation of direct democracy, by reason of being elaborated and approved by the respective municipalities, which find their raison d'être precisely in their conformation, that is, by the citizens or residents, in a specific territorial circumscription – canton – for the "*administration of local interests and services*" (Articles 169 of the Constitution and 1 of the Código Municipal) (see judgment No. 2009-012515 of eighteen hours and three minutes on August 11, 2009). Moreover, urban planning is one of the most important and transcendental tools for the satisfaction of local interests. It is the normative expression of the will and of the planning and design of collective and individual development, but without detaching itself from the national contour and the territorial and environmental unity to which they belong. The way of planning the development of human activities has a significant impact on the environment, which may be negative or positive depending on the uses and activities that are authorized. Now, in the present case and strictly in light of the actions or omissions carried out by the respondent authorities, it is observed that the Dirección de Urbanismo of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, through note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted the land use (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries. The land use was granted considering that it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Plan Regulador of Santa Ana, and that the plot No. SJ 17213-91 had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which the minimum setbacks had to be 15 meters from the boundaries, a front setback of 52 meters from the main road, and a rear setback of 35 meters, which allows and guarantees a confinement of nuisances. According to what has been reported, the warehouse activity of Mas x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Plan Regulador of Santa Ana, which occurred according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, even though the cited Plan was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991. However, because these are existing uses not conforming with the Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad, the Municipalidad de Santa Ana has not authorized the growth or expansion of the activities of the Mas x Menos warehouses. On these aspects, in accordance with what was indicated above, it is of merit to point out that it constitutes a matter of mere legality to determine whether the permits that allow the operation of the cited warehouses were granted in accordance with Law, as well as the prescription or not of a potential challenge thereof. This must be aired before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose. <o:p></o:p> **VIII.-** Now, regarding the argued noise pollution, it is observed that it is a commercial premises with a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment. That in a visit conducted by the Oficina de Protección al Ambiente of the Ministerio de Salud on February 19, 2008, no problems were detected from the sanitary point of view at the Max por Menos Warehouses. Furthermore, the noise measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, owner of the dwelling, stated that it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that time, as it is intermittent, because the vehicles (trucks and heavy transit vehicles) transit at different time intervals. Also, during another visit conducted by the Dirección Regional de Rectoría de la Salud Región Central Sur of the Ministerio de Salud on September 25, 2009, no noise was being generated at all. From this, it is deduced that it has not been possible to determine that the cited warehouses are generators of noise pollution as argued, so it is not possible to attribute any liability to the respondent private law company. The foregoing does not undermine the responsibility of the health authorities to monitor that the petitioners are not affected by possible pollution of that type, because it cannot be overlooked that it is the State's obligation that, in the face of events such as those indicated here, the necessary mechanisms be activated to eventually and anticipatorily safeguard the right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment as well as the right to health, against possible dangers, this with the purpose of, as has been indicated, making them endure for future generations.

**IX.- Regarding the rights of petition and administrative justice.** Regarding these, the appellants allege in the brief filing the appeal, the following: <i>"(…) Although they present this documentation, this amparo appeal filed could not be ignored, nor the multiple letters sent to the Municipal Council signed by many of the residents of Bosques de Santa Ana, regarding the multiple nuisances that your company has caused us for years, without the authorities definitively accepting our claim. (…) The facts set forth above are known to the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Municipality of Santa Ana, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, and the Ministry of Health, institutions before which the corresponding administrative procedures were carried out and some before which the nuisances have been expressed. In order to end the pollution that</i> <i>we suffer. These entities have not resolved the stated problems and have accepted the temporary solutions that Constructora Meco and Wal Mart have offered, they have archived the nuisances as if the solutions were definitive, without following up on the actions and without demanding definitive solutions, such as eliminating the sources of the problem</i>. <i>We come before this Honorable Chamber because we consider that the respondent institutions violate our constitutional right to health, and the right to obtain a definitive response, not temporary solutions, from state institutions. We consider that the administrative inactivity contravenes the provisions of Article 27 of the Political Constitution, which regulates the right of petition and prompt response. Likewise, Article 41 of the Constitution regulates that we must all find redress by resorting to the laws, in a prompt and fulfilled manner, without denial and in strict conformity with the laws</i>".&nbsp; Regarding the right of petition and prompt resolution, as well as access to prompt and fulfilled justice, the jurisprudence of this Chamber is copious, according to which it has been determined that Article 27 of the Political Constitution enshrines the right of petition and prompt resolution, which consists of a power that those administered have to make petitions before public authorities. Such petitions before the Administration can be divided into simple petitions and those that do seek the recognition or granting of something: the former can be protected as a direct violation of Articles 27 or 30 of the Constitution, by the simple expiration of the legal deadline to resolve, as stipulated in Article 32 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction; the latter, when they are not resolved within the legal deadline, constitute administrative delay and delay of justice, hence they are protectable for violation of Articles 27 and 41 of the Magna Carta. Nevertheless, from the documentation provided by the appellants (folios 23, 49 to 54, 62 to 72), it is not possible to determine the violation of the rights protected in the aforementioned regulations. Note that these procedures, directed to the Municipality of Santa Ana, refer to the opposition by several residents to a possible modification to the regulatory plan that would allow converting the lands where the respondent companies are located into an industrial zone. As well as the opposition to the Corporation of United Supermarkets expanding the warehouses it already has at the location. Regarding the first point, the Mayor of Santa Ana reported that this Municipality is working on a comprehensive reform of the Regulatory Plan (folio 258). From this it can be deduced that the administrative procedure itself has not concluded and for its definitive resolution it is necessary to take into account all the procedures, evidently including those referred to above, so it is not possible to argue a lack of any response. While regarding the other extreme, whose procedure was filed on August 27, 2004, (folio 49), the General Secretary of SETENA reported that a file exists, 732-2004-SETENA, called Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., in which the expansion of the warehouses was intended, but a withdrawal intervened, for which reason the file was archived by Resolution No. 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005 (folio 173). The foregoing means that this opposition lacks current interest because the proceeding they objected to was dismissed many years before this amparo was filed. Under that context, it is considered that the noted constitutional violation, and regarding the procedures that are documented, has not occurred.

X.- Conclusion. As no injury to the fundamental rights alleged by the appellants, attributable to the respondents, has been verified, this appeal is declared without merit, but not without first making three calls to attention: first, to the Minister of Health so that she verifies compliance with sanitary order No. ARSSA-1583-09 issued against Constructora MECO S.A. The second call to attention is for the General Secretary of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat, the Director of Geology and Mines, and the Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, so that they take note of the recommendation made by the General Manager of the National Service of Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage (Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento, SENARA), in protection of the water resources of the area. Third: In relation to vehicular traffic and the maintenance of cantonal public roads, the Municipality of Santa Ana must adopt the necessary measures to avoid nuisances to the residents." However, that land use does not authorize the construction of the premises, nor the construction and operating permits, which are the responsibility of the local Municipality and the Ministry of Health. The latter with regard to sanitary operation. With respect to the quarry (tajo) activity carried out by Construcción MECO, it is proven, according to the attached certified photocopy of the administrative file, that INVU did not grant any permit or authorization, as demonstrated in official letters UR. 646 of June 6, 1994, UR.952 of July 28, 1994, PE-301-94-C of August 17, 1994, UR-M-061 dated February 18, 1997. It is important to note that in official letters PE-301-94 and UR.952-94, it was indicated by your represented party that the use is non-conforming, and they state that the anomaly has been reported to the Municipality, which has taken action without any result. In addition, it states: “<i>The appropriate course would be for the Municipality to order the closure of the work, and if this does not happen, to charge for contempt of authority, which could be penalized with imprisonment</i>.” It requests that the appeal filed be dismissed.

**5.-** Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as Secretary General of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, SETENA), reports under oath (folios 171 to 174) that the facts alleged in this amparo appeal are related to those alleged in file number 08-014565-0007-CO. As indicated in official letter number SG-AJ-1232-2008-SETENA of November 7, 2008, the company Constructora Meco S.A. is the lessee of two quarries (tajos) in Pozos de Santa Ana, whose environmental impact assessments (Estudios de Impacto Ambiental) were approved for files 198-94 and 058-97. The approval of the first was due to article 5 of session No. 6 of May 24, 1995, issued by the National Commission for Environmental Impact Studies (Comisión Nacional de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental, CONEIA). That of the second, to resolution number 431-97 of July 9, 1999, from that Secretariat. Regarding the zoning in which the project is currently located, it is determined that this is the competence of the Municipality of Santa Ana. Similarly, it is important to clarify that the approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment is a condition or quality of the project, which implies the scenario of harmonizing it with its surroundings, and said approval does not exempt the developer from the procedures to be complied with before other authorities, in this case the Municipality, in accordance with the competencies and regulations in force. With respect to the allegation of noise pollution, dust pollution, and regarding the roads, it points out the result of the inspection carried out on February 18, 2009, by that Secretariat (in order to answer the appeal and comply with the precautionary measure ordered by the Chamber). Focusing on the warehouses of the mentioned supermarket corporation, the following is reported: 1. Said warehouses do not have environmental viability (viabilidad ambiental). 2. There is a file, 732-2004-SETENA, called Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., in which the expansion of the same was intended, but a withdrawal occurred, for which the file was archived by resolution number 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005, and the expansion also does not have the approval of SETENA. 3. As indicated in resolution number 1630-2004-SETENA, of October 5, 2004, the original warehouse was “<i>built approximately 10 years ago</i>”. It requests that the appeal filed be dismissed.

**6.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at two twenty-five p.m. on February twenty-third, two thousand nine (folio 179), Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as Secretary General of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA), indicates that she provides a copy of file 058-97, which was not presented by mistake when she rendered the report.

**7.-** Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos, in her capacity as Vice Minister of Health, reports under oath (folios 180 to 183) that according to information provided by the Director of the Governing Health Area (Área Rectora de Salud) of Santa Ana, who by territorial competence handles the case, on September 12, 2008, the facilities of Empresa MECO were assessed, finding them adequately covered without water accumulation. In ARSSA-1477-08, during a visit by the Environmental Manager of the Governing Health Area, it is indicated that no sanitary problems were detected at the time of the visit. In ARSSA-153-09, during a visit made on February 19, 2008, by Marco Tulio Alvarado Godoy, Health Technician 2 of the Office for the Protection of the Human Environment, it is indicated that no sanitary problems were verified. A sound measurement is being requested from Dr. Guillermo Flores Galindo, to monitor the mitigation plan for noise pollution implemented by the company Bodegas de Supermercados Unidos. She requests that the appeal filed be dismissed because the operations of both the Bodegas del Max por Menos and those of the Tajo E.D.M. are in order from a legal standpoint, and no sanitary problems were detected during the visit that was conducted.

**8.-** Audrys Esquivel Jiménez, in his capacity as President of the Municipal Council of Santa Ana, reports under oath (folios 252 to 254) on what was agreed in ordinary session No. 68 of August 28, 2007, and in extraordinary session No. 53 of July 24, 2008. He points out that the case in question is part of an overall situation of tension existing between the industrial and residential sectors, which characterizes the eastern region of the Greater Metropolitan Area of San José, where it must be recognized that it was originally intended for industrial use and its services, and over time the pressure for other uses, both residential and purely commercial, gave way and various Municipal Councils were “<i>loosening”</i> their position and accepting new residential developments, even though the zone did not qualify as such. Thus, a historical error occurred in authorizing developments in zones that were intended for industry. Currently, the Municipality is about to begin its final phase of discussion and approval of the reforms to the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador), where it intends to adopt alternatives to a difficult situation and where environmental fragility indices (índices de fragilidad ambiental) are just being prepared for incorporation into said Plan, which is why it is absolutely improper, inconvenient, and inopportune to refer to technical elements that are in the preparation and preliminary analysis phase.

**9.-** Gerardo Oviedo Espinoza, in his condition as Municipal Mayor of Santa Ana, reports under oath (folios 256 to 265) that the Regulatory Plan of Santa Ana was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991; however, the zoning map, which is the graphic expression of the regulatory text, was not published with it. The zoning map was published in La Gaceta No. 137 of July first, 2001. The quarries (tajos) (today managed by Constructora MECO S.A.) were authorized the mining concession processed under administrative files No. 2366 and 2479 in the years 1995 and 1997, respectively. Concessions granted by MIRENEM (today MINAET) without consulting the Municipality and without requiring a land-use certificate (certificado de uso de suelo) as a prerequisite. Similarly, the warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the Regulatory Plan maps. The dump trucks, tanker trucks, and other heavy-load vehicles must only transit on roads that are national and the main access road to the sector, not on the internal streets of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. The parking of machinery and equipment used by the company MECO is part of the extraction and sale activity of construction aggregates that, since 1995, has had Mining Concession No. 2366 and a commercial license granted by municipal agreement adopted in ordinary session No. 3 of May 12, 1998. That Municipality is working on a comprehensive reform of the Regulatory Plan, and in Ordinary Session No. 60 of July 3, 2007, the Council had agreed that the sector where the quarries (tajos) and the Más x Menos warehouses are located be established as an industrial and business zone in which the uses of extraction and warehouses would be conforming. He clarifies that the zone proposed to be industrial and business only includes the lots where the quarries (tajos) and warehouses are located, which are large and have no constructions, while the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana remains a High-Density Residential Zone. In Extraordinary Session No. 53 held on Thursday, July 24, 2008, the complainants who, together with other residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, gave a presentation on the problems they suffer due to heavy traffic were attended to, and the Council agreed to the following: “<i>To revoke the agreement contained in the minutes of ordinary session No. 60 held by this Municipal Council on July 3, 2007, and to modify the industrial and business zone in Pozos to a use consistent with the residential use it now has (High-Density Residential). To empower the Urban Planning and Regulatory Plan Commission to issue an opinion on the environmental recovery of the zone</i>.” The municipal authorizations for the quarries (tajos) to operate were given by agreement of the Municipal Council when, although the Zoning Regulation (Reglamento de Zonificación) was published, the corresponding map, which is the graphic expression that allows locating each zone and its extension, was not. The same occurred with the authorization given for the operation of the Más x Menos warehouses. However, because these are existing non-conforming uses with the High-Density Residential Zone, the Municipality has not authorized the growth or expansion of these activities. Now then, in this case no mention is made of the view provided by Google Earth since it is outdated and has been prepared by a company unrelated to that Municipal Corporation, and in that sense, its veracity regarding the current reality cannot be guaranteed. Finally, regarding the issue of environmental fragility indices (índices de fragilidad ambiental), it is necessary to highlight that this study, contracted to Mr. Allan Astorga, has not yet been delivered in its entirety by him, which is why it has not been reviewed or approved by the Municipal Council or the administration. In this sense, it is necessary to reiterate that with the aforementioned fragility indices, a comprehensive reform to the regulatory plan will be proposed, which has not yet occurred. He points out that file 08-14565-0007-CO deals with this same topic. He requests that the appeal be dismissed.

**10.-** Magda Verdesia Solano, in her condition as Legal Representative of Constructora MECO S.A., reports (folios 267 to 270) that if observed carefully, the appellants at no time accuse any environmental damage; it could not be otherwise since, as is evident in the reality of the facts, there has been none. Any variation that the classification of the zone might have in the future cannot have retroactive effects to the detriment of acquired rights.

**11.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at five twenty-nine p.m. on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 286 and 287), Norman Coto Kikut, in his condition as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications and by the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA), he requests that the amparo appeal be dismissed with respect to his represented party.

**12.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at five twenty-nine p.m. on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 288 to 290), Norman Coto Kikut, in his condition as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the President of the Municipal Council and the Municipal Mayor of Santa Ana, he requests that the amparo appeal be dismissed with respect to his represented party.

**13.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at five twenty-nine p.m. on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 291 to 293), Norman Coto Kikut, in his condition as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by the Vice Minister of Health, he requests that the amparo appeal be dismissed with respect to his represented party.

**14.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at five thirty p.m. on May twenty-second, two thousand nine (folios 294 and 295), Norman Coto Kikut, in his condition as representative of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indicates that in accordance with the response rendered by INVU, he requests that the amparo appeal be dismissed with respect to his represented party.

**15.-** By resolution at two fifty-six p.m. on July 10, 2009 (folios 296 to 298), the Minister of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications and the Secretary General of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) were cautioned to refer to what was pointed out by the appellants regarding the alleged risk of contamination of the aquifer (manto acuífero) due to the work carried out by Constructora Meco S.A., also considering that the Hydrogeological and Quarry Contamination Risk Study (Estudio Hidrogeológico y de Riesgo de Contaminación de Cantera) signed by Roberto Protti, to which they refer and which is contained in the certification of the administrative file provided, dates from January 2002.

**16.-** Sonia Espinoza Valverde, in her capacity as Secretary General of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA), reports (folios 302 to 305) that the Environmental Fragility Indices (Índices de Fragilidad Ambiental, IFA) are only one of the requirements that must be submitted to that Secretariat as part of the environmental planning of land use stipulated in the Manual of Technical Instruments for the Environmental Impact Assessment process (Manual de EIA) –Part III- Decree No. 32967-MINAE, in order to be eligible for Environmental Viability (License) (Viabilidad (Licencia) Ambiental). The arguments put forward by the appellants are not recorded nor are they admissible by SETENA, since that Institution is unaware of the scope of the Environmental Fragility Indices contracted by the Municipality of Santa Ana, because they have not yet been submitted, much less analyzed by the technical staff of that Institution. Furthermore, and in reference to the vulnerability of aquifer contamination due to the activities carried out by the Quarry (Tajo), it must be indicated that the Environmental Impact Assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental) for this project was submitted before the Interinstitutional Commission for the Evaluation and Control of Environmental Impact Studies (Comisión Interinstitucional de Evaluación y Control de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental) on November 3, 1994, prior to the creation of SETENA and the instruments used today in the Environmental Impact Assessment process; nevertheless, the groundwater and contamination vulnerability chapter is presented in this document, where it mentions on page 30 that within the geological formations that make up the project area, being formed of materials with low conductivity and permeability, there is no danger of contamination to more permeable materials, such as could be the underlying lavas that could have aquifer capacity. As a complement and part of the process of updating information in the administrative file maintained at SETENA, there is a record of the submission by the developer of the Hydrogeological Contamination Risk Study (Estudio Hidrogeológico de Riesgo de Contaminación), which was approved by the Directorate General of Geology and Mines (Dirección General de Geología y Minas), which circumscribes the area where the exploitation work of the Tajo Santa Ana is carried out. This study included, for its preparation, a field phase where drilling was performed to strengthen the analysis conducted; in it, Hydrogeologist Roberto Protti certifies, according to the stratigraphy of the aquifer, that the local bedrock forms a negative or no-flow barrier due to the low permeability of the volcanic rocks, which agrees with the data provided in the Environmental Impact Assessment. It is indicated at the same time that SETENA will schedule another field inspection as soon as possible by officials from the Department of Environmental Auditing and Follow-up (Departamento de Auditoría y Seguimiento Ambiental) in order to continue the monitoring process of the quarry (tajo) activities. Regarding the related responsibilities of the developer, SETENA certifies on July 15 of the current year through SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA that the Environmental Viability (License) of the Tajo Santa Ana project is in force, as well as that the environmental commitments assumed by the developer, such as the environmental reports and keeping the amount of the environmental guarantee (garantía ambiental) up to date, are current. It requests that the appeal be dismissed.

**17.-** Jorge Rodríguez Quirós, in his condition as Minister of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications, reports (folios 339 to 346) in similar terms to the Secretary General of SETENA (folios 302 to 305). He adds that regarding the related responsibilities of the developer, SETENA certifies on July 15, 2009, through SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA, that the Environmental Viability (License) of the Tajo Santa Ana project is in force, as well as that the environmental commitments assumed by the developer, such as the environmental reports and keeping the amount of the environmental guarantee up to date, are current. Regarding the mining activity in the conflict zone, he reports on the work carried out by the Directorate of Geology and Mines (Dirección de Geología y Minas), which is the competent entity to regulate mining activity. With respect to the actions on mining file number 2479, the Directorate of Geology and Mines informs that Ministerial Office that the lessee company presents a series of well monitoring reports. He requests that the appeal be dismissed.

**18.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at three ten p.m. on August eighteenth, two thousand nine (folios 396 and 397), Magda Verdesia Solano, in her condition as representative of Constructora Meco S.A., indicates that, as stated in point e) of the “<i>Conclusions”</i> presented by the Director of the National Mining Registry (Registro Nacional Minero), in her official letter DGM/RNM 629-2009 of July 27, 2009, it is not true that there is an “<i>exposed water table (nivel freático expuesto)</i>”, as the appellant party irresponsibly claims. That statement is extracted from a report without a scientific basis, which was prepared without a site visit or field analysis and based on a Google Earth observation. The former is irresponsible and the latter is an unreliable source, being flimsy and superficial.

**19.-** By resolution at twelve fifty-nine p.m. on September 18, 2009 (folios 402 and 403), the Vice Minister of Health was cautioned to render the sound measurement of the actions of Corporación de Supermercados Unidos and of Constructora Meco S.A.

**20.-** By a writing received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at three thirty-one p.m. on September thirtieth, two thousand nine (folios 406 to 410), Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos, in her condition as Vice Minister of Health, reported regarding the sound measurement for Supermercados Unidos as indicated by official letter URS-RCS-2011-09 of September 29, 2009. With respect to the inspection carried out at several quarries (tajos) in the Pozos de Santa Ana area, Eng. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto of the Health Governing Unit of the Central South Region (Unidad Rectoría de la Salud de la Región Central Sur) reported the result through official letter URS-RCS-2009-2009 dated September 29, 2009. Based on the inspections conducted by both Lic. Luis Fernando Retana Segura and Eng. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto, officials of the Health Governing Unit of the Central South Region, Dr. Ana Cecilia Víquez Pérez, Director of the Governing Health Area of Santa Ana, through official letter ARSSA-1598-09 of September 29 of the current year, requests the Traffic Engineering Directorate of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport (Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes) to conduct an inspection of vehicle flow of machinery and heavy vehicles in the vicinity of Residencial Bosques de Santa Ana, specifically in front of the Bodegas de Más por Menos, as this falls outside the competence of the Ministry of Health. In addition, Sanitary Order No. ARSSA-1583-09 was issued to Mr. Marco Alfaro Vega, Manager of Tajo EDM de Costa Rica, Constructora MECO S.A., granting a period of 10 days to present a plan establishing the dates on which the studies indicated by Eng. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto of the Health Governing Unit of the Central Region, in official letter URS-RCS-2009-2009 dated September 29 of the current year, will be carried out. She requests that the appeal be dismissed.

**21.-** Magistrate Fernando Castillo Víquez recused himself from hearing this matter on March 22, 2010 (folio 418).

**22.-** By resolution at one forty-three p.m. on March 24, 2010 (folio 419), the acting President of the Chamber accepted the recusal of Magistrate Fernando Castillo Víquez and ordered that his substitution be requested from the Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice.

**23.-** On March 25, 2010, the Office of the Presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice communicated that Magistrate Enrique Napoleón Ulate Chacón was appointed to hear this amparo.

**24.-** By resolution at eleven thirty-six a.m. on April 13, 2010 (folios 422 to 425), the appeal was expanded against the Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), the Director of Water (Director de Aguas) and the Director General of Geology and Mines (Director General de Geología y Minas) of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications, and the Manager of the National Service for Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage (Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento).

**25.-** Bernal Soto Zúñiga, in his condition as General Manager of the National Service for Groundwater, Irrigation and Drainage (SENARA), reports (folios 430 to 433) that in that Unit there is no record of any procedure for the operation of the Quarry (Tajo) referred to in this amparo. Nor has SENARA reviewed, approved, or endorsed specific hydrogeological studies for the operation of the quarry (tajo) in question. The Tajo of Constructora Meco S.A. is physically located on the left bank of the Río Virilla. According to information derived from hydrogeological studies carried out or registered with SENARA, to date, the right bank of the Río Virilla is characterized by the presence of large and productive superimposed aquifers (acuíferos), originating and developed within the volcanic rock formations of Colima (Intra-Cañón), Barva, and Tiribí (Avalancha Ardiente). These are exploited as wells and spring (manantiales) catchments, all with great productive capacity (e.g., La Valencia, La Libertad, Puente de Las Mulas, and Potrerillos). However, these aquifers discharge into the Río Virilla, and there is no hydraulic communication between aquifers in any direction across its banks. The extraordinary quality of these aquifers on the right bank of the Río Virilla is a consequence of the combination of particular hydrogeological factors, sufficient extension and homogeneity of the rock units, particularly those that favor recharge and flow, favorable hydrodynamic characteristics (transmissivity, storage coefficient, position of the seal layers, hydraulic conductivity), and others. This condition changes completely on the left (south) bank of the Río Virilla, because although some lithologies from the right bank appear on the left, their extension is very limited and they do not have adequate recharge areas or communication with lateral flows. The aquifers, when they exist, are of poor quality, not very extensive, of low hydrodynamic quality and productivity. The excavation of the deep canyon of the Río Virilla has penetrated below the top of the rocks of the Lower Colima, which has left the Avalancha Ardiente Formation (Upper Colima, Puente de Mulas) completely exposed.

This results in the drainage of its aquifer toward the river and discontinues the hydraulic communication with the left bank. There is no possibility of flow occurring between both banks, much less from left to right. The scarce recharge of the small aquifers of the left bank (Pozos, Honduras de Santa Ana, Uruca) occurs through infiltration within the small catchment basins of the hills (Alto Las Palomas, Coyote, Real de Pereira) and the alluvial deposits (Aluviones) of the Río La Uruca. The Unidad de Colima Superior does not form a significant aquifer, since the canyon of the Río Virilla constitutes a natural barrier that prevents flow in any direction (from the right bank to the left and vice versa). Likewise, the coverage area of these volcanic deposits on the left bank is so small that there is no significant possibility of recharge and the volume of water they contain depends solely on rainwater infiltration. That is why this material is found dry in the pit (tajo). Under that unit, there is barely a seasonal partial saturation level at a depth of around 25 meters (according to a hydrogeological study (estudio hidrogeológico) conducted under the professional direction of geologist Roberto Protti in 1996), suspended or perched on a paleosol that characterizes the roof of Grifo alto. The Hydrogeological and Contamination Risk Study (Estudio Hidrogeológico y de Riesgo a la Contaminación) (2002) also concludes that the Grifo Alto rocks, particularly in their lower fractured and unaltered levels, give rise to a low-potential local aquifer, of a semi-confined to unconfined (freático) type. Using the Foster and Hirata GOD method, the aquifer contamination vulnerability index of the local Grifo alto aquifer is 0.15, ranging from low to very low. As conclusions: 1. Although the volcanic materials appearing on the left bank (pit under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; whereas on the right bank they are highly productive, on the left bank, due to their small recharge areas, they are not saturated and only generate small, low-potential aquifers. 2. Rainwater that infiltrates the pit drains partly toward the Virilla River and partly feeds the lower aquifer that develops near the Grifo Alto Formation, of low aquifer potential. 3. The determination of the vulnerability of the Grifo Alto formation (base of the pit) provided by Geologist Roberto Protti in the studies conducted was made with a single hydraulic conductivity test, which, together with data on porosity, rock type, and aquifer, allows classifying the aquifer as having low vulnerability. 4. It is recommended, for purposes of assessing the current situation, to conduct more hydraulic conductivity tests and recalculate the transit times and the intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer. Furthermore, an inventory of possible contamination sources in the extraction development of the pit should be carried out and measures taken to prevent the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer. 5. It is also recommended to install piezometers in the pit, with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the elevations (cotas) or levels of rock extraction. These levels to be measured are also important for the construction of the flow model for the continuous monitoring of groundwater. During the process of constructing the piezometers, provisions can be made for water quality sampling. It requests that the appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**26.-** José Francisco Castro Muñoz reports, in his capacity as Director of the Dirección de Geología y Minas of the Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (folios 434 to 439), that to date there is no communication within the administrative files from SETENA, the agency legally competent to determine the existence of environmental contamination, indicating that the company cannot carry out work due to an environmental problem. There is also no official communication (oficio) from the Municipality of Santa Ana informing them of the suspension of work due to the company's non-compliance with obligations before the municipality. It requests that the appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**27.-** Ricardo Sancho Chavarría reports under oath, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (folios 442 to 449), that the Tajo Meco is not within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area (Área de Reserva Acuífera) demarcated by AyA. According to the report entitled “*Water Use Rights or Sites of Use (Aprovechamiento) for Population Supply by operational regions of Acueductos y Alcantarillados*”, the Tajo Meco is located on the left bank of the Virilla River at a straight-line distance of 880 m from Tunnel 1 of Puente Mulas, 850 m in a straight line from Tunnel 2 Puente Mulas, and 785 m in a line from Tunnel 3 Puente Mulas. These uses (aprovechamientos) of AyA are located upstream of Tajo Meco and on the right bank; therefore, they are not affected by this activity because the Puente Mulas Tunnels are located in a discharge zone of the Colima Superior aquifer to the Virilla River. He adds that in relation to the Fuente Potrerillos-AyA use (aprovechamiento), located on the right bank of the Virilla River, Tajo Meco is on the left bank at a distance of 2 km. Therefore, this use is not affected by the activity of that pit, which is tapping the Colima Inferior Aquifer. Consequently, the activity of Tajo Meco does not affect the uses for public supply and the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. It requests that the appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**28.-** José Miguel Zeledón Calderón reports under oath, in his capacity as Director of the Dirección de Aguas of MINAET (folios 456 to 458), that it has not been proven that the Colima aquifer outcrops on the left bank of the Virilla River, as indicated by the appellants (recurrentes). The foregoing is based on hydrogeological studies (estudios hidrogeológicos) presented to the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA) and studies conducted by the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) and the Government of Great Britain (BGS) in said area. That it is true that on the right bank of the Virilla River, a large number of springs (manantiales) outcrop, generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer, which, together with water wells, are tapped by AyA. The pit of Constructora Meco is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, with the canyon of the latter acting as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river. He points out that it is not possible to determine the exposed water table (nivel freático) referred to by the appellants through the Google Earth system. What is observed is a lagoon originating from the large amount of rain, which, due to the presence of the Grifo Alto Formation, which has low conductivity and permeability, does not allow these waters to drain and remain on the site for some time. That, as observed on the map of restriction and prohibition (veda) zones declared by AyA, the most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Virilla River. The zones located on the left bank of the Virilla River are not aquifer zones of such relevance as asserted by the appellants, but rather consist of the Grifo Alto aquitard (acuitardo). Furthermore, from the hydrogeological contamination risk study, hydrogeologist Roberto Protti Quesada carried out drilling to certify the aquifer's stratigraphy, where it was proven that the rock basement acts as a negative barrier due to the permeability of the volcanic rocks. During the field visit conducted by officials of SETENA on February 18, 2009, according to official communication No. ASA-509-SETENA, there is no record of findings determining the exposure of any outcrop in the quarry area. He points out that both the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA) and the Dirección General de Geología of the Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (MINAET) approved the environmental feasibility studies (estudios de viabilidad ambiental), the hydrogeological studies, the aquifer vulnerability studies, and the contaminant transit studies. Field and monitoring visits to the pit are also scheduled by the Department of Environmental Auditing and Monitoring (Departamento de Auditoría y Seguimiento Ambiental) of SETENA to verify compliance with the provisions contained in SETENA's resolution for the mining company. It requests that the appeal (recurso) be dismissed.

**29.-** The legal requirements have been observed in the procedures followed.

Magistrate **Ulate Chacón** prepares the draft; and, **Considering:** **I.- Regarding the amparo against subjects of private law.** The Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), in cases similar to this one, has developed the scope of the provisions of Article 57 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), regarding the recurso de amparo against subjects of private law. Indeed, this proceeding is not only available against actions and omissions of subjects of public law that violate or threaten to violate any fundamental right, but also against actions or omissions of subjects of private law, when they act or must act in the exercise of public functions or powers, or are, de jure or de facto, in a position of power against which common jurisdictional remedies are clearly insufficient or tardy to guarantee the full enjoyment of the rights enshrined in the Political Constitution and in the International Human Rights Instruments in force in the Republic (concerning this, see Judgment No. 2000-03337 at 19:26 on April 25, 2000). In this specific case, it is evident that Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. and Constructora MECO S.A., as subjects of private law, are in a position of power with respect to the protected parties, against which common jurisdictional remedies may be insufficient or tardy to enforce the rights they consider violated. For this reason, the Constitutional Chamber must hear the merits of this amparo proceeding.

**II.- Purpose of the recurso.** The appellants, residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that since 1994, the company Constructora Meco, S.A. has been established in that area with a pit (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices, even though said site is a "*high-density residential zone*" according to the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador), which implies that the place is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisance to the neighborhood. Due to the existence of the pit, they suffer dust contamination and noise pollution (contaminación sónica) from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, in addition to the soils being unstable as a consequence of material extraction. The community of Bosques de Santa Ana, they add, is located right next to Constructora Meco, and on what the environmental fragility index calls: "*the most important aquifers of the Central Valley*", so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate said mining activity. On the other hand, they allege that for several years, Corporación de Supermercados Unidos has installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, despite it being a residential zone, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. The Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, they claim, granted permits to the referred corporation, contradicting what is prescribed in the regulatory plan. Said company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation aggravated by the inertia of the respondents (recurridos), who have not provided an effective solution to the contamination problem. For this reason, they accuse that their constitutional right to health and to obtain a definitive administrative response has been violated, and not temporary solutions, claiming that Articles 27 of the Constitution, which protects the right of petition and prompt response, and Article 41, have been infringed, since they consider they have not found a response to their administrative procedures.

**III.- Proven facts.** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:

a. The company Constructora Meco S.A., is the lessee of two pits (tajos) in Pozos de Santa Ana, whose Environmental Impact Studies (Estudios de Impacto Ambiental) were approved for files 198-94 and 058-97. The approval of the first was due to Article 5 of session No. 6 of May 24, 1995, issued by the Comisión Nacional de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental (CONEIA). That of the second to resolution number 431-97 of July 9, 1999, of that Secretariat (report on folios 153 to 160). b. The Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA) and the Dirección General de Geología of the Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (MINAET) approved the environmental feasibility studies, the hydrogeological studies, the aquifer vulnerability studies, and the contaminant transit studies of Tajo Meco (report on folios 456 to 458). c. At the entrance of Tajo Meco, there is a (prior) parking area for the carts waiting to be loaded, which is located within the property of the MECO company, so the public road is not obstructed at any time (report on folios 171 to 174). d. In the machinery transit area, no oil stains were observed on the ground, which indicates that, at first glance, the machinery is in good condition (report on folios 171 to 174). e. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the area adjacent to the MECO company, due to the large number of industries and other nearby productive activities and the high transit of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street separating the industrial zone from neighboring residential areas (report on folios 406 to 410). f. At Tajo Meco, no evidence of dust contamination from the pit's own activities was found, as they are geographically confined by considerable slopes, and there is constant monitoring of the covering of material transport trucks, and the transit areas of the pit are frequently watered (report on folios 406 to 410). g. The noise in the processing area is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material is processed from a larger size to a smaller one, but when moving away from the site, near the urban development (urbanística) area, noise is not perceived (report on folios 171 to 174). h. Tajo Meco is not within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area demarcated by AyA (report on folios 442 to 449). i. The activity of Tajo Meco, which is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, does not affect the uses (aprovechamientos) for public supply and the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (report on folios 442 to 449). j. The pit of Constructora Meco is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, with the canyon of the latter acting as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river (report on folios 456 to 458). k. The most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Virilla River, and those located on the left bank are not such relevant aquifer zones (report on folios 456 to 458). l. Although the volcanic materials appearing on the left bank (pit under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; whereas on the right bank they are highly productive, on the left bank, due to their small recharge areas, they are not saturated and only generate small, low-potential aquifers (report on folios 430 to 433). m. On the right bank of the Virilla River, a large number of springs (manantiales) outcrop, generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer, which, together with water wells, are tapped by AyA (report on folios 456 to 458). n. The Dirección de Urbanismo of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, through note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted land use (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries (report on folios 165 to 168). o. The land use in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. was granted considering it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador) of Santa Ana, and that the property No. SJ 17213-91, had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which the minimum setbacks had to be 15 m from the boundaries, a front setback of 52m from the main road, and a rear setback of 35 meters, which allows and guarantees confinement of nuisances (report on folios 165 to 168).

p. The Más x Menos warehouse activity was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Santa Ana Regulatory Plan (Plan Regulador de Santa Ana), which occurred according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, even though the cited Plan was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991 (report on folios 256 to 265).

q. Because these are existing uses that are non-conforming with the High-Density Residential Zone (Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad), the Municipality of Santa Ana has not authorized the growth or expansion of the Más x Menos warehouse activities (report on folios 256 to 265).

r. It is a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment, so no nuisance exists (folios 139 to 146), s. During a visit conducted by the Environmental Protection Office of the Ministry of Health on February 19, 2008, no problems were detected from a sanitary standpoint at the Max por Menos Warehouses (report on folios 180 to 183, document on folio 186).

t. The sonic measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, the homeowner, stated it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that moment, as it is intermittent, because the vehicles (dump trucks and heavy transit vehicles) travel with different time intervals (report on folios 406 to 410).

u. During a visit conducted by the Regional Directorate of the Health Stewardship (Rectoría de la Salud) Central South Region of the Ministry of Health on September 25, 2009, at the Bodegas de Supermercados Unidos, no noise was being generated (report on folios 406 to 410, document on folio 407).

**IV.- On the merits.** In this case, the appellants argue an infringement of their fundamental rights due to actions based on various facts by two private-law entities, namely, the company Constructora Meco S.A. and the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos, so the conduct of each will be analyzed separately, except regarding the rights protected by Articles 27 and 41 of the Magna Carta, which will be done jointly. However, beforehand it is considered meritorious to reiterate that the Chamber has emphasized the necessary balance between the country's development and the right to the environment. The Chamber recognized the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment as a fundamental right, even before the constitutional reform of Article 50 went into effect, through a systematic, material, and evolutionary interpretation of Articles 6, 11, 69, and 89, providing different responses to the conflict between private interests (freedom of enterprise) and collective interests, establishing the protection, preservation, and rational exploitation of forest resources as principles of constitutional order (Judgment No. 2233 of May 28, 1993). The presence of diffuse interests has also been recognized to legitimize actions for the sake of protecting the environment, when reacting to illegitimate acts or omissions, precisely because the most frequent violation of the environment occurs due to the inertia of public authorities in performing the acts necessary to protect it (Judgment No. 3707 at 3:00 p.m. on July 30, 1993, and No. 4422 at 10:30 a.m. on September 7, 1993). Likewise, the Chamber has highlighted the need for awareness in the governmental sphere and in private activities of the importance of the environment for human health. Human life is conceived as the foundation, the necessary and determining condition for the existence of the person. All of this within the national, regional, and world economy, through the conservation of nature and of life itself in its broadest sense (Judgment No. 4423 at 12:00 p.m. on September 7, 1993). Thus, with the implementation of the reform to constitutional Articles 46 and 50, the right to the protection of health, environment, safety, and economic interests of consumers is consolidated in the formal constitution. It is clear that environmental protection must be directed toward the adequate and intelligent use of its elements and in their natural, sociocultural, technological, and political relationships (sustainable development), in order to safeguard the heritage to which present and future generations are entitled. Therefore, the primary objective of the use and protection of the environment is that, through production and the use of technology, not only economic gains (freedom of enterprise) are obtained but also a favorable development and evolution of the environment and natural resources with the human person, that is, without causing damage or harm:

"This Chamber has also recognized that both the right to health and to an environment free of contamination, without which the former could not be made effective, are fundamental rights, so that it is the State's obligation to provide for their protection, either through general policies aimed at that end or through specific acts by the Administration. Sustainable development is one of those general policies that the State issues to expand the possibilities for everyone to fulfill their aspirations for a better life, increasing production capacity or expanding the possibilities of achieving equitable progress between demographic growth or between it and natural systems. Sustainable development is the process of transformation in the use of resources, the direction of investments, the channeling of technological development, institutional changes, and anything that contributes to meeting the human needs of the present and the future" (judgment number 1763-94, at four forty-five p.m. on April thirteen, nineteen ninety-four).

The Chamber has indicated that the environment must be understood as a potential for development to be used appropriately, and action must be taken in an integrated manner regarding its natural, sociocultural, technological, and political relationships, since otherwise, its productivity for the present and the future is degraded and the heritage of future generations could be put at risk. The origins of environmental problems are complex and correspond to an articulation of natural and social processes within the framework of the socioeconomic development style adopted by the country. For example, environmental problems occur when the modes of exploiting natural resources lead to a degradation of ecosystems exceeding their capacity for regeneration, which results in broad sectors of the population being harmed and generates a high environmental and social cost that leads to a deterioration in the quality of life; for precisely the primary objective of the use and protection of the environment is to achieve development and evolution favorable to the human being. Environmental quality is a fundamental parameter of that quality of life; other no less important parameters are health, food, work, housing, education, etc., but more important than that is understanding that while the human person has the right to use the environment for their own development, they also have the duty to protect and preserve it for the use of present and future generations, which is not so novel, because it is merely the translation to this area of the principle of "injury" (*lesión*), already consolidated in common law, by virtue of which the legitimate exercise of a right has two essential limits: On the one hand, the equal rights of others and, on the other, the rational exercise and useful enjoyment of the right itself. Our country has depended and will continue to depend, like any other nation, on its natural resources and environment to meet the basic needs of its inhabitants and keep operating the productive apparatus that sustains the national economy, the main source of which is agriculture and, in recent years, tourism, especially in its ecotourism dimension, to which agrotourism and community rural tourism are added. Soil, water, air, marine and coastal resources, forests, biological diversity, mineral resources, and the landscape make up the environmental framework without which basic demands—such as living space, food, energy, housing, sanitation, and recreation—would be impossible. Likewise, our economy is also intimately linked to the state of the environment and natural resources. On the other hand, the goals of sustainable development have to do with the survival and well-being of the human being and with the maintenance of essential ecological processes, that is, environmental quality and the survival of other species. Speaking of sustainable development in terms of satisfying present and future human needs and improving the quality of life is speaking about the demand for natural resources at the individual level and the direct means or support necessary for the economy to function, generating employment and creating capital goods, which in turn make possible the transformation of resources into consumer, production, and export products. The declaration made at the Earth Summit in 1992 proclaimed and recognized the integral and interdependent nature of the planet; this means the acceptance of certain principles that inform the transition from current development styles to sustainability. The signatory States, among which Costa Rica figures, committed themselves, within the preservation of sustainable development, to the protection above all of the human being. It started from the principle that every person has the right to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature; the right of present and future generations for development to be carried out in such a way that it satisfies their environmental and progress needs was included; the sovereign power of States to exploit their resources was maintained, emphasizing their responsibility to ensure that activities carried out within their jurisdiction and control do not cause environmental damage to other States or areas beyond the limits of their national jurisdiction. They established the duty of States to cooperate in the conservation, protection, and restoration of the environment and their common responsibilities in that regard; in that way, international cooperation in the promotion and support of economic growth and sustainable development will allow better addressing the problems of environmental degradation. But furthermore, it must be noted that in accordance with the provisions of Article 50 of the Constitution, the Organic Environmental Law establishes the responsibility of anyone who contaminates the environment or causes it damage (Article 2, subsection d). Damage or contamination to the environment can be produced by conduct through action or omission and is attributable to all individuals or legal entities that carry them out (Article 98), and the owners of the companies or the activities that cause the damages are considered jointly and severally liable, whether by action or omission (Article 101).

**V.- Regarding the company Constructora Meco S.A.** Regarding this company, the appellants, who are residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, located in Pozos de Santa Ana, state that since 1994 it set up in the area with a quarry (tajo), warehouses, and administrative offices, despite the fact that said area is—according to the Regulatory Plan—a "high-density residential zone" (*zona residencial de alta densidad*), which implies that this place is not suitable for the operation of industries, warehouses, sawmills, and other activities that cause nuisances to the neighborhood. In fact, there is a declaration from the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism (INVU), which indicates that in August 1994 it did not grant construction permits for industrial activities in that area. Due to the existence of the quarry, they suffer from dust contamination and noise pollution (contaminación sónica) from the constant passage of heavy vehicles 24 hours a day, besides the fact that the soils are unstable as a consequence of material extraction and the streets surrounding the Residential area are destroyed. They add that the Bosques de Santa Ana community is located right next to Constructora Meco, and on what the environmental fragility index calls: "the most important aquifers (mantos acuíferos) of the Central Valley," so the most sensible thing would be to eliminate the mining activity from the area. The previous disagreement raised by the appellants, and practically for the same facts, was already under the knowledge of this Chamber, due to amparo action No. 08-014565-0007-CO filed by María Antonieta Alegría de García and Roberto Rafael Alegría Rodríguez, also residents of the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. That amparo was dismissed by judgment No. 2009-003342 at twelve fourteen p.m. on February 27, 2009, under the following considerations:

**"…. V.-** Well, in the present case, it is discussed whether the omission of the respondent authorities (namely, the Directorate of Geology and Mines of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications, the Municipality of the Canton of Santa Ana, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Environment and Energy) regarding the complaints filed about the alleged environmental contamination problems caused by the activity carried out by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, in a quarry adjacent to the Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, violates or not the right of the amparo petitioners to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. On this matter, the authorities of the Ministry of Environment and Energy in their sworn report have indicated that the exploitation of the aforementioned quarry has the environmental viability and the corresponding permits, after having conducted the necessary environmental impact studies (EIA) (see folio 73), which is deduced from the contents of files N°198-94 and 058-97. But the Minister of Environment and Energy has also affirmed under oath that 'as of today it is up to date with its environmental commitments, such as the amount of the environmental guarantee which is current and in the presentation of regulatory reports (see report on folio 37), and that there is no communication from the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA) or from the Directorate of Geology and Mines indicating that said company must suspend its activities (see report on folio 37).

**VI.-** On the other hand, the Minister of Health in her report indicated that on November 7, 2008, an inspection was carried out at the site indicated by the appellants, noting that the appellant company has the necessary permits to carry out its task, as well as adequate physical conditions, with no anomaly being found (see report on folio 43). Finally, the authorities of the Municipality of the Canton of Santa Ana in their response—which is given under the solemnity of an oath, with timely warning of the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction—indicated that the permits enjoyed by the company Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, predate the entry into force of the Regulatory Plan of the Canton of Santa Ana (see report on folio 46), with which the Chamber considers that determining whether such permits still remain in force despite the content of the local regulatory plan constitutes a matter of mere legality to be ventilated before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose.

**VII.-** Thus, regarding the effective protection of the precautionary principle and the right protected in Article 50 of the Political Constitution, this Constitutional Court does not consider any current illegitimate situation that impairs the full enjoyment of these rights to be demonstrated, based on the evidentiary material that the plaintiffs have provided on this occasion. On the contrary, from the reports provided by the respondent authorities and the documentary evidence attached to the record, it is rather inferred that the activity carried out in the aforementioned quarry does not pose environmental contamination problems, regarding possible excess noise or dust. So that the conduct of the respondents, far from violating the fundamental rights of the promoters, conforms to the Law of the Constitution. By virtue of the foregoing, the appropriate course is to dismiss the amparo action, without prejudice (of course) to reaching a different conclusion on another occasion based on other evidence." Thus, taking into account this recent precedent, it is considered that it is not meritorious to analyze again the permits granted to said company that have allowed it to work in the Quarry of interest, nor matters regarding the Regulatory Plan. Furthermore, it must be mentioned that this Court has indicated in previous cases that it is not the competence of an instance such as this one to verify whether an Environmental Impact Study, hydrological study, hydrogeological study, or any other of a technical nature was well prepared or not, given that it evidently requires the knowledge of specialists in those disciplines, which are not typical of the jurisdictional function of this Constitutional Court (see judgments No. 2004-009927 at eleven o'clock and one minute on September 3, 2004, and 2005-005790 at ten forty-one on May 13, 2005). In the case under study, the concessionaire company had to submit various technical studies to ensure that the project would not produce environmental damage. Precisely the entities—in particular SETENA—responsible for reviewing said studies, considered that they did comply with the necessary information to evaluate and predict the impact of the quarry's exploitation, and therefore it was approved, granting the Environmental Viability and the other permits cited above. In any case, if the promoters consider that the studies were not carried out adequately or believe that not all necessary legal aspects were contemplated—because they were conducted by private companies contracted by the concessionaire company—and that the Regulatory Plan for the area does not permit its operation, this constitutes a matter that must be resolved before the instances knowledgeable about the technical aspects in this area, and not before the constitutional jurisdiction, by virtue of it being an aspect that falls outside the sphere of its competence. What does fall within the competence of this Chamber is to determine whether, with the approval of this concession, serious and irreversible damage to the environment was produced or exists the possibility of it being produced, as contemplated by the Rio Convention. This is because it is unavoidable that every human activity on Earth implies an impact on the environment (or damage, as it alters it in one way or another); nevertheless, its relevance for study purposes is that this impact must be serious or irreparable, as stipulated by said Convention. Regarding this, it is noted that at the entrance to the Meco Quarry there is a parking area (prior to entry) for the dump trucks waiting to be loaded, which is located within the property of the MECO company, so the public road is never obstructed. Additionally, in the machinery transit zone, no oil stains were observed on the ground, which indicates it is in good condition. The sources of noise, smoke, dust, and gases are multiple in the area surrounding the MECO company, due to the large number of industries and other nearby productive activities and the high transit of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street separating the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas; however, at the Meco Quarry, no evidence of dust contamination from its own activities was found, as they are geographically confined by considerable slopes. It was verified that there is constant vigilance to ensure transport trucks are covered with tarpaulins and that the transit areas of the quarry are frequently watered. It has been reported, under the gravity of oath, that the noise in the processing area is characteristic of this type of activity, where rocky material of a larger size is processed into a smaller one, but when moving away from the place, near the urban development zone, no noise is perceived. Under that context, it is considered that the amparo regarding this point is not admissible, since once again it has not been possible to corroborate any noise or environmental pollution produced by the activity carried out in the quarry of interest. Notwithstanding the foregoing and based on the precautionary principle, note should be taken of what was reported by the Vice Minister of Health that the Health Steering Area (Área Rectora de Salud) of Santa Ana issued sanitary order No. ARSSA-1583-09 so that the construction company conducts two perimeter immission studies, in the rainy season and dry season, with the objective of scientifically determining if the emissions generated by the company could affect the neighborhood (report on folios 406 to 410, document on folios 414 and 415). Furthermore, the Municipality of Santa Ana must do likewise regarding the cantonal public streets concerning vehicular traffic and their maintenance, since it is evident from what was reported that there is a certain problem due to the high transit of vehicles and heavy machinery, coupled with the poor condition of the street separating the industrial zone from the neighboring residential areas, which, regardless of who the producing actors are, the truth is that they are its responsibility.

**VI.-** Regarding the alleged contamination of water resources, which is a new element, it is necessary to point out that the Chamber's jurisprudence is clear in recognizing the right to water as a fundamental right, such that along with the undertaking of serious efforts to provide it to the population, there is a duty of public institutions to make responsible and prudent use of available water resources, which implies the need to acquire certainty about the water susceptible to exploitation—availability—guaranteeing its present delivery and the future sustainability of the service, avoiding that with the current use of the resource, an environmental risk is produced that compromises the future existence and supply of the liquid.

Furthermore, the Chamber has had the opportunity to rule forcefully and in detail on the protection that must be afforded to the national water resource, clarifying both the regulatory framework for protection and the institutions that make up the water sector, recognizing and specifying the scope of competencies of those bodies and the significance of their actions in the granting, use, and protection of water. Groundwater has become the primary means of public supply in the Central American region, since most surface sources have been contaminated by human action. In the specific case of Costa Rica, it is estimated that approximately seventy percent of the water consumed daily by the country's inhabitants comes from groundwater, a situation that highlights the importance of protecting this resource. It has also been pointed out that … “<i>Unlike contamination of surface waters, which is usually obvious and visible, allowing environmental actions aimed at mitigating or eradicating it, contamination of groundwater, by its very nature, often goes unnoticed and becomes evident when it has reached large proportions. Aquifers, due to the slow circulation of waters, the absorption capacity of the terrain, and other factors, can take a long time to show contamination. Additionally, the large volume of water contained means that extensive contaminations take a prolonged period to manifest, or when dealing with localized contaminations, they are detected when they flow to some extraction point. Certainly, this type of water has a resistance to being contaminated; however, when this occurs, its regeneration can be extraordinarily slow and is sometimes irreversible due to the high cost of the means to do so. It has been demonstrated that attempts to repair the damage caused by contamination to an aquifer to once again achieve potable water levels have not been successful, cleaning technologies have contributed little to reducing the damage, and the methods are economically very expensive. To the above must be added the lack of organizational infrastructure, material, financial, and human resources—in this last case, duly trained to evaluate, measure, and, in general, monitor the quality of this water and the exact extent of its contamination. The degradation and contamination of aquifers imposes on the legislator and public administrations the urgent and unpostponable task of protecting them…” </i>(judgment No. 2004-1923, of fourteen hours fifty-five minutes of February 25, 2004) (see also, among others, judgments No. 2008-012109 of fifteen hours and sixteen minutes of August 5, 2008, No. 2008-014092, of nine hours twenty-eight minutes of September 23, 2008, and No. 2008-015657 of eleven hours forty-five minutes of October 17, 2008). In this case, it has been possible to confirm, from all the reports provided by the respondent public authorities, that Tajo Meco is not within the Puente Mulas Aquifer Reserve Area demarcated by the AyA. That although its activity is located on the left bank of the Virilla River, it does not affect uses for public supply and the Aquifer Reserve Zone of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. Furthermore, the Virilla River canyon acts as a negative barrier to the activities generated on the left bank of said river. It has also been fully demonstrated that the most important aquifers of the Central Valley are located on the right bank of the Virilla River, and those located on the left bank are not aquifer zones of such relevance. Thus, although the volcanic materials that appear on the left bank (quarry under study) are the same as those on the right bank where very important aquifers develop (Puente de Mulas), the aquifers are not the same; while those on the right bank are very productive, on the left bank, due to their small recharge areas, they are not saturated and only generate small aquifers of low potential. It is clarified that on the right bank of the Virilla River, a large number of springs (manantiales) outcrop that have been generated in fractured lava rocks belonging to the Puente de Mulas aquifer and which, together with water wells, are captured by the AyA. Within this context, it is not possible, as the petitioners allege, to presuppose in any way that the aquifers of the zone run any risk of suffering contamination from the work carried out by Constructora MECO in the area. The foregoing does not imply, of course, that the respondent public authorities consider their work finished, since they must continue coordinating and verifying the conditions under which the concession was granted, and the compliance with the Environmental Impact Assessment (Estudio de Impacto Ambiental), and must also take precautions should the case so warrant. Note that the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) (folios 430 to 433), recommends that, for the purposes of evaluating the current situation, more hydraulic conductivity tests should be carried out and the transit times and intrinsic vulnerability of the aquifer recalculated. Additionally, an inventory of possible contamination sources in the quarry extraction development should be performed and measures taken to prevent the infiltration of contaminating substances into the aquifer. Also, the installation of piezometers in the quarry, with the objective of verifying the groundwater level and its relationship with the rock exploitation levels or elevations.

**VII.- Concerning the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos.** The petitioners argue that for several years, Corporación de Supermercados Unidos installed a commercial premises with warehouses in the area, even though the area is residential, and therefore, industry or commerce cannot be located in that place. They assert that the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo granted permits to the aforementioned corporation, contrary to what is prescribed in the regulatory plan. Said company has not confined the nuisances produced by its commercial activities, a situation that is aggravated by the inertia of the respondents, who have not provided an effective solution to the contamination problem they allege. In this regard, this Court has repeatedly indicated that, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 169 and 170 of the Political Constitution, the Urban Planning Law No. 4240 of November 15, 1968, establishes that primary authority in urban planning matters corresponds to the municipalities, which has been embodied in Articles 15 and 19 of said law. These entities are responsible for assuming local urban planning through the promulgation of the respective regulatory plans, implementing the regulations issued for that purpose by the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, as the institution responsible for urban planning at the national level. This latter point with the clarification that the Dirección de Urbanismo functions as an advisory body to the municipalities for the purposes of preparing, applying, and modifying the municipal or local Regulatory Plan and its Regulations before their final adoption; however, the Chamber has said that the foregoing must be understood as the formal limit of the broad guidelines, technical standards, or general directives according to which local governments must prepare their respective regulatory plans and corresponding urban development regulations, since it is not possible to claim that the National Urban Development Plan is prepared and implemented entirely by the Central Government, without the direct intervention of the municipalities in this matter. The Chamber has considered that such a situation violates not only the most elementary principles of logic and convenience, given that the particular interests of each canton of the Republic are at stake, but also the constitutional principles of the municipal regime, established by our Magna Carta in Articles 168 to 175. In this context, urban planning, meaning the preparation and implementation of regulatory plans, is a function inherent to the municipalities to the exclusion of any other public entity, except for what has been said regarding the general directive powers attributed to the Ministry of Planning and the Dirección de Urbanismo. Regarding the legal nature of regulatory plans, the criterion sustained by this Chamber is that, by reason of their content and their general efficacy or binding nature, they must be considered true legal norms or laws in the material sense, given that they recognize rights and establish obligations for the owners and possessors of properties located in the territorial circumscription of the respective canton. Likewise, attending to the procedure for forming these regulations, it has been considered that they constitute a manifestation of direct democracy, because they are prepared and approved by the respective municipalities, which find their reason for being precisely in their composition, that is, by the citizens or neighbors, in a specific territorial circumscription –canton–, for the "<i>administration of local interests and services</i>" (Articles 169 of the Political Constitution and 1° of the Municipal Code) (see judgment No. 2009-012515 of eighteen hours and three minutes of August 11, 2009). Furthermore, urban planning is one of the most important and transcendental tools for the satisfaction of local interests. It is the normative expression of the will and of the planning and design of collective and individual development, without detaching itself from the national contour and the territorial and environmental unity to which they belong. The way of planning the development of human activities has a significant impact on the environment, which may be negative or positive depending on the uses and activities authorized. Now, in the present case and specifically in light of the actions or omissions carried out by the respondent authorities, it is found that the Dirección de Urbanismo of the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, through note No. UR-326 of April 2, 1993, granted the land use (uso de suelo) in favor of Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., for the installation of a collection center for non-perishable grains and groceries. The land use was granted considering that it was located in an urban growth zone according to the Santa Ana Regulatory Plan, and that property No. SJ 17213-91, had special characteristics such as its size (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) and for which minimum setbacks had to be 15 meters from the boundaries, a 52-meter front setback on the main road, and a 35-meter rear setback, which allows and guarantees a confinement of nuisances. As reported, the warehouse activity of Más x Menos was authorized prior to the publication of the zoning maps of the Santa Ana Regulatory Plan, which was done according to La Gaceta No. 137 of July 1, 2001, even though the cited Plan was published in La Gaceta No. 74 of April 19, 1991. However, as they are existing uses not conforming to the High Density Residential Zone, the Municipality of Santa Ana has not authorized the growth or expansion of the activities of the Más x Menos warehouses. On these points, in accordance with what was indicated above, it is worth noting that determining whether the permits allowing the operation of the cited warehouses were granted in accordance with the law, as well as the prescription or not of a potential challenge to them, constitutes a matter of mere legality. This must be aired before the ordinary courts, through the exercise of the actions and procedures that the legal system establishes for that purpose.

**VIII.-** Now, regarding the alleged sonic contamination, it is found that it is a commercial premises with a passive warehouse where merchandise is received and distributed without any type of industrial processing, without machines or equipment. That in a visit conducted by the Environmental Protection Office of the Ministry of Health on February 19, 2008, no problems were detected from a sanitary point of view at the Max por Menos Warehouses. Furthermore, the sonic measurement scheduled for September 25, 2009, was not carried out because Mrs. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, owner of the home, stated that it was not necessary since no noise was being generated at that moment, as it is intermittent, since the vehicles (vans and heavy traffic vehicles) transit with different time intervals. As well as in another visit conducted by the Regional Directorate of the Rectoría de la Salud Región Central Sur of the Ministry of Health on September 25, 2009, no noise was being generated. From this, it can be deduced that it has not been possible to determine that the cited warehouses are generators of sonic contamination as argued, so it is not possible to attribute any responsibility to the respondent private-law company. The foregoing does not negate the responsibility of the health authorities to monitor that the petitioners are not affected by possible contamination of this type, since it cannot be lost sight of that it is the State's obligation that, faced with events such as those indicated herein, the necessary mechanisms are activated to, eventually, proactively shelter the right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment as well as the right to health, from possible dangers, with the aim of, as has been indicated, making them endure for future generations.

**IX.- Regarding the rights of petition and administrative justice.** Concerning these, the petitioners allege in the brief filing the appeal, the following: <i>“(…) Even if they present this documentation, this filed amparo appeal could not be obviated, nor the multiple letters sent to the Municipal Council signed by many of the neighbors of Bosques de Santa Ana, about the multiple nuisances that your company has caused us for years, without the authorities definitively accepting our claim. (…) The facts set forth above are known to the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Municipality of Santa Ana, the Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, and the Ministry of Health, institutions before which the corresponding administrative procedures were carried out and some before which the nuisances have been expressed. In order to end the contamination that we suffer. These entities have not resolved the exposed problems and have accepted the temporary solutions that Constructora Meco and Wal Mart have offered, they have archived the nuisances as if the solutions were definitive, without following up on the actions and without demanding definitive solutions, such as eliminating the sources of the problem</i>. <i>We come before this Honorable Chamber because we consider that the respondent institutions violate our constitutional right to health, and the right to obtain a definitive response, not temporary solutions, from the state institutions. We consider that the administrative inactivity contravenes the provisions of Article 27 of the Political Constitution, which regulates the right of petition and prompt response. Likewise, Article 41 of the Constitution regulates that we must all find redress by resorting to the laws, in a prompt, complete manner, without denial and in strict accordance with the laws</i>”. On the point of the right of petition and prompt resolution, as well as the right to prompt and complete access to justice, the jurisprudence of this Chamber is copious, according to which it has been determined that Article 27 of the Political Constitution enshrines the right of petition and prompt resolution, which consists of a faculty that the administered have to make petitions before public authorities. Such petitions before the Administration can be divided into simple petitions and those that tend to have something recognized or granted: the former can be protected as a direct violation of Articles 27 or 30 of the Constitution, by the simple expiration of the legal deadline to resolve, as stipulated in Article 32 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction; the latter, when not resolved within the legal deadline, constitute administrative delay and delay of justice, hence they are amenable to amparo protection for violation of Articles 27 and 41 of the Magna Carta. However, from the documentation provided by the petitioners (folios 23, 49 to 54, 62 to 72), it is not possible to determine a violation of the rights protected in the aforementioned regulations. Note that those procedures, directed to the Municipality of Santa Ana, refer to the opposition by several neighbors to a possible modification of the regulatory plan that would allow converting the lands where the respondent companies are located into an industrial zone. As well as the opposition to the Corporación de Supermercados Unidos expanding the warehouses it already has in the place. Regarding the first point, the Mayor of Santa Ana reported that the Municipality is working on a comprehensive reform of the Regulatory Plan (folio 258). From this, it can be deduced that the administrative procedure itself has not concluded, and for its definitive resolution, it is necessary to take into account all the procedures, evidently including those referred to above, so it is not possible to argue a lack of response. While regarding the other point, the procedure for which was presented on August 27, 2004 (folio 49), the General Secretary of SETENA reported that there is a file, 732-2004-SETENA, called Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., in which the expansion of the warehouses was sought, but a withdrawal of action occurred, wherefore the file was archived by resolution No. 2299-2005-SETENA of September 6, 2005 (folio 173). The foregoing means that this opposition lacks current interest because the process they objected to was dismissed many years before this amparo was filed. Under this context, it is considered that the noted constitutional violation, regarding the documented procedures, has not occurred.

**X.- Conclusion.** As no injury to the fundamental rights alleged by the petitioners, attributable to the respondents, is verified, this appeal is declared without merit, but not without first making three formal notices: <u>first</u>, to the Minister of Health so that she verifies compliance with the sanitary order No. ARSSA-1583-09 issued against Constructora MECO S.A. The <u>second</u> formal notice is to the General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Director of Geologías y Minas, and the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, so that they take note of the recommendation made by the General Manager of the Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA), in protection of the water resource of the zone. <u>Third</u>: In relation to vehicular traffic and the maintenance of local public roads, the Municipality of Santa Ana must adopt the necessary measures to avoid nuisances to the neighbors.

**Por tanto:** The appeal is declared without merit. Let the Minister of Health, the General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, the Director of Geologías y Minas and the Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, and the Municipality of Santa Ana take note of what is indicated in the last considering clause.

Ana Virginia Calzada M. Presidenta Gilbert Armijo S. Ernesto Jinesta L.

Fernando Cruz C. Rodolfo E. Piza R.

Ricardo Guerrero P. Enrique Ulate C.

Res. Nº 2010-011946 SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las once horas y veintiséis minutos del nueve de julio del dos mil diez.

Recurso de amparo interpuesto por Minor Jiménez Guevara, mayor, soltero, diseñador, cédula de identidad número 1-0948-0235; Rolando Pérez Alpízar, mayor, soltero, planificador, cédula de identidad número 1-0892-0422; Jorge Cordero Chacón, mayor, soltero, contador, cédula de identidad número 1-1019-0604; Mayobeth Gutiérrez Avalos, mayor, casada, ama de casa, cédula de identidad número 7-0092-0582; María Josefa Gómez Aguirre, mayor, casada una vez, enfermera, cédula de identidad número 9-0072-0985; Priscilla López Santiesteban, mayor, técnica dental, divorciada, cédula de identidad número 1-0636-0814; Marcela Luna Tortós, mayor, casada una vez, maestra, cédula de identidad número 1-0903-0879; Hilda Hermencia Choque Flores, mayor, casada una vez, ama de casa, de nacionalidad colombiana, cédula de residencia número 117000309401; Ruth Marina Mahechea Martínez, mayor, casada una vez, ama de casa, de nacionalidad colombiana, cédula de residencia número 117000886420; Cecilia Quesada Villalobos, mayor, divorciada, profesora, cédula de identidad número 6-0124-0984; Martha Barrantes García, mayor, soltera, contadora pública, cédula de identidad número 2-0574-0444; Rosaura Fregui Sequeira, mayor, soltera, artesana, cédula de identidad número 1-0588-0098; Silvia Natalia Silesky Cháves, mayor, soltera, farmacéutica, cédula de identidad número 1-0995-0196; Edgar Antonio Pérez Rojas, mayor, casado una vez, ingeniero en informática, cédula de identidad número 1-0787-0602; Hortencia Elizondo Fernández, mayor, casada una vez, ama de casa, cédula de identidad número 9-0098-0663; Luis Montiel Araya, mayor, contratista, casado una vez, cédula de identidad número 5-0218-0829; Meibol Salazar Elizondo, mayor, casada una vez, secretaria, cédula de identidad número 1-0678-0764; Bernard Silesky Meneses, mayor, casado una vez, pensionado, cédula de identidad número 9-0012-0141; Jairo Leal Cabalceta, mayor, casado una vez, operador de maquinaria pesada, cédula de identidad número 5-0292-0096; José Antonio Salazar Zamora, mayor, casado una vez, publicista, cédula de identidad número 1-0943-0996; Gonzálo Pacheco León, mayor, unión libre, pensionado, cédula de identidad número 1-0314-0504; Roxana Valverde Rivera, mayor, casada una vez, costurera, cédula de identidad número 1-0969-0997 y María Rocío Morales Varela, mayor, soltera, enfermera, cédula de identidad número 6-0239-0687: todos vecinos de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, contra la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., la Constructora MECO S.A., el Ministro de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, la Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, la Ministra de Salud, el Alcalde y el Presidente del Concejo, ambos de la Municipalidad de Santa Ana, el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, el Director de Aguas y el Director General de Geología y Minas, ambos del Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones y el Gerente General del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA).

Resultando:

1.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las siete horas treinta minutos del veinte de enero del dos mil nueve, (folios 1 a 9), los recurrentes interponen recurso de amparo contra la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., el Ministro de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, la Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, la Ministra de Salud, el Alcalde y el Presidente del Concejo Municipal, ambos de la Municipalidad de Santa Ana y la Constructora MECO S.A. y manifiestan que son vecinos de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, ubicada en Pozos de Santa Ana. Refieren que desde 1994 se instaló en la zona la empresa Constructora Meco, S.A. con un tajo, bodegas y oficinas administrativas. Que dicha zona es -según el Plan Regulador- calificada como "zona residencial de alta densidad", lo que implica que ese lugar no es apto para la operación de industrias, bodegas, aserraderos y otras actividades que provoquen molestias al vecindario. De hecho existe una declaración del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo que indica que no ha otorgado permisos de construcción en agosto de 1994 para actividades industriales en esa zona. Con ocasión de la existencia del tajo, los vecinos de la zona sufren contaminación por polvo y contaminación sónica por el constante paso de vehículos pesados las 24 horas, amén de que los suelos están inestables como consecuencia de la extracción del material. A pesar de que Constructora Meco ha redactado cartas sobre las cosas buenas que ha hecho, tales como colocar tapas de alcantarillas, comunicarle a sus vehículos que no transiten por el vecindario, comprar e instalar rótulos para ese mismo fin, lo cierto es que los vehículos siguen transitando, y han destrozado nuevamente las calles que circundan el residencial. Aseguran que han presentado varias gestiones ante la Corporación Municipal accionada, tendentes a señalar las múltiples molestias que la citada empresa les ha ocasionado por años, pero no han resuelto sus reclamos. Señalan que la Municipalidad de Santa Ana contrató un estudio de índices de fragilidad ambiental y éste explica claramente que Constructora Meco se encuentra operando sobre el manto acuífero de roca magmática de potencial moderado, razón por la que no recomienda que en esa zona haya ningún tipo de actividad que la ponga en riesgo de contaminación. En dicho estudio se señala que la zona de Constructora Meco sufre ya de "alto grado de impacto ambiental" y visto desde Google Earth parece observarse el nivel friático expuesto. Agregan que la comunidad de Bosques de Santa Ana se encuentra justo al lado de Constructora Meco, y sobre lo que el índice de fragilidad ambiental llama: "los mantos acuíferos más importantes del Valle Central", por lo que lo más sensato sería eliminar la actividad minera de la zona. Además de que cabe destacar que en la década pasada, la intención de colocar el relleno sanitario en esta misma propiedad hoy de Constructora Meco, fue frenada por la fragilidad ambiental, que se encuentra en peligro nuevamente, a su juicio. Por otra parte, aducen que desde hace varios años la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos instaló en la zona un local comercial con bodegas, a pesar de que, como lo han sostenido, la zona es residencial, y por ende, no se pueden ubicar industria o comercio en ese lugar. Aseguran que el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo otorgó permisos a la referida corporación, contrario a lo preceptuado en el plan regulador. Dicha empresa no ha confinado las molestias que producen sus actividades comerciales, situación que se agrava por la inercia de los recurridos que no han dado una solución efectiva al problema de contaminación que acusan. Indican que los hechos antes expuestos son de conocimiento de las autoridades recurridas, ante las cuales se hicieron las gestiones administrativas que correspondían y a algunas se les ha manifestado las molestias, pero lo cierto es que esas entidades no han resuelto los problemas Mart han ofrecido, han archivado las molestias como si las soluciones fueran definitivas, sin dar seguimiento a las acciones y sin exigir soluciones definitivas, como eliminar las fuentes del problema. Estiman que se han violentado su derecho constitucional a la salud y el derecho a obtener una resolución definitiva por parte de las instituciones estatales.

2.- Informa Norman Coto Kikut, en su condición de representante de Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. (folios 139 a 146), que la autorización de ubicación de las bodegas de CSU en Santa Ana fue otorgada por la Dirección de Urbanismo del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, mediante nota UR-326 del 2 de abril de 1993. El oficio que autoriza el uso del suelo menciona Ana no denegó la ubicación de las bodegas de CSU en el sitio, pues aprobó los planos, porque consideró, como lo hizo el INVU, que no ocasionaría ninguna molestia a los vecinos del lugar. A la fecha las bodegas de CSU no causan ninguna molestia a los vecinos, pues se ha cumplido con el confinamiento de ruido. La bodega por sí no genera ruido, no hay máquinas. Es una bodega pasiva donde se recibe y distribuye mercadería sin ningún tipo de procesamiento industrial, sin máquinas o equipos, por lo que no existe ninguna molestia. Su representada no es responsable de la contaminación, daño a las aceras o a las vías públicas ubicadas cerca de las bodegas de la empresa, pues corresponde al MOPT o a la Municipalidad del lugar repararlas. Los vecinos no pueden atribuir el daño a su representada, los camiones no son propiedad de la empresa sino de terceros que tienen derecho a circular por las vías públicas aledañas a la empresa y por cualquier otra vía pública. La empresa también es usuaria de las carreteras y los vecinos no pueden impedirle el uso. Además, por esas calles transitan decenas de camiones, no propiedad de CSU, pues esa vía comunica San Antonio de Belén con Santa Ana y Santa Ana con Guachipelín de Escazú. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado.

3.- Informa bajo juramento Jorge Rodríguez Quirós, en su condición de Ministro a.i. de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (folios 153 a 160), que en la zona existen dos concesiones mineras. Según consta en el Registro Nacional Minero, en el expediente administrativo 2366, se otorgó concesión a nombre de Orlando Ramírez González, otorgada mediante resolución R-034-95-MIRENEM de las nueve horas cuarenta minutos del 23 de marzo de 1995, por un plazo de 25 años a partir de la aprobación del Estudio de Impacto Ambiental. Esa aprobación fue notificada a la interesada por resolución No. 064 de las ocho horas quince minutos del 20 de junio de 1995, a las diez horas treinta y cinco minutos del 26 de junio de 1995, fecha a partir de la cual corre el plazo otorgado. Por resolución No. 221 de las ocho horas quince minutos del 3 de febrero de 1997 se aprobó cesión del derecho de concesión a favor de la empresa EDM DE COSTA RICA S.A., notificada a las nueve horas cuarenta minutos del 12 de febrero de 1997. Por resolución No. 1925 de las ocho horas quince minutos del 7 de diciembre de 1999 se aprobó contrato de arrendamiento de la concesión a favor de CONSTRUCTORA MECO S.A., notificada a las once horas treinta minutos del 10 de diciembre de 1999. De igual manera, consta en el Registro Minero el expediente administrativo 2479 a nombre de la empresa EDM DE COSTA RICA S.A., donde se otorga concesión de explotación de cantera mediante resolución R-061-97-MINAE de las doce horas quince minutos del 5 de febrero de 1997, por un plazo de 20 años a partir de la aprobación del Estudio de Impacto Ambiental, aprobación que fue notificada a la interesada mediante resolución No. 431-97-SETENA de las doce horas cincuenta minutos del 9 de julio de 1997, fecha a partir de la cual corre el plazo otorgado, sito en Honduras, distrito 3 Pozos, Cantón 9, Santa Ana de la Provincia de San José. Por resolución No. 1924 de las ocho horas del 7 de diciembre de 1999 se aprobó contrato de arrendamiento de la concesión a favor de CONSTRUCTORA MECO S.A., resolución que fue notificada a las once horas treinta y dos minutos del 7 de diciembre de 1999. Refiere lo informado por la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental. Señala que respecto a los tajos que se ubican cerca del río Virilla, y principalmente debido al episodio que ocurrió hace unos años en la zona, con relación a los mantos acuíferos, la Dirección de Geología y Minas, ha requerido a los concesionarios de las inmediaciones la presentación de estudios hidrogeológicos. Agrega que los argumentos esgrimidos contra Supermercados Unidos no son de su competencia, no obstante, es importante lo expuesto en oficio SG-AJ-167-2008-SETENA. Señala que en el aspectos como el presente. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado.

4.- Informa bajo juramento Jorge Arturo Sánchez Zúñiga, en su calidad de Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo (folios 165 a 168), que esa Institución otorgó el uso de suelo a favor de Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. en abril de 1993, para la instalación de un centro de acopio para granos no perecederos y abarrotes, considerando que se ubicaba en una zona de crecimiento urbano según el Plan Regulador de Santa Ana, y que el terreno No. SJ 17213-91, contaba con características especiales como lo es su tamaño (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) y para lo cual los retiros mínimos debían ser 15 m de las colindancias, frontal de 52m sobre la carretera principal y un retiro posterior de 35 metros, lo que por sí mismo permite y garantiza un confinamiento de molestias. No obstante, ese uso de suelo no autoriza la construcción del local, ni los permisos constructivos y de funcionamiento, lo que corresponde a la Municipalidad del lugar y al Ministerio de Salud. Este último en lo que respecta al funcionamiento sanitario. Con respecto a la actividad del tajo que realiza Construcción MECO, queda demostrado según fotocopia certificada adjunta del expediente administrativo, que el INVU no otorgó ningún permiso o autorización, así se demuestra en oficios UR. 646 del 6 de junio de 1994, UR.952 del 28 de julio de 1994, PE-301-94-C del 17 de agosto de 1994, UR-M-061 de fecha 18 de febrero de 1997. Es importante señalar que en los oficios PE-301-94 y UR.952-94 fue señalado por su representada que el uso es no conforme y se señala en ellos, que la anomalía le ha sido informada a la Municipalidad, la cual ha tomado las acciones sin ningún resultado. Además se manifiesta: “Lo que corresponde sería que la Municipalidad ordene el cierre de la obra y de no darse esto, que se acuse por desacato a la autoridad lo que podía ser penalizado con cárcel”. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado.

5.- Informa bajo juramento Sonia Espinoza Valverde, en su calidad de Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folios 171 a 174), que los hechos aludidos en el presente recurso de amparo se encuentran relacionados con los alegados en el expediente número 08-014565-0007-CO. Según se indica en el oficio número SG-AJ-1232-2008-SETENA del 7 de noviembre del 2008, la empresa Constructora Meco S.A., es la arrendataria de dos tajos en Pozos de Santa Ana, cuyos Estudios de Impacto Ambiental fueron aprobados para los expedientes 198-94 y 058-97. La aprobación del primero se debió al artículo 5 de la sesión No. 6 del 24 de mayo de 1995, emitido por la Comisión Nacional de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental (CONEIA). La del segundo a la resolución número 431-97 del 9 de julio de 1999, de esa Secretaría. En cuanto a la zonificación en la que actualmente se encuentra el proyecto, se determina que ello es competencia de la Municipalidad de Santa Ana. De igual forma, es importante hacer la aclaración de que la aprobación del Estudio de Impacto Ambiental es una condición o cualidad del proyecto, que implica el escenario de armonización del mismo con su entorno, y dicha aprobación no exime al desarrollador del trámite a cumplir ante otras autoridades, en este caso la Municipalidad, de conformidad con las competencias y normativa vigente. En lo que respecta a la alegación de contaminación sónica, por polvo y en torno a las calles, señala el resultado de la inspección realizada el 18 de febrero del 2009 por parte de esa Secretaría (con el fin de contestar el recurso y dar cumplimiento a la medida cautelar ordenada por la Sala). Enfocando a las bodegas de la corporación de supermercados mencionada, se informa lo siguiente: 1. Dichas bodegas no disponen de viabilidad ambiental. 2. Existe un expediente, el 732-2004-SETENA, denominado Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., en el cual se pretendía la ampliación de las mismas, pero medió un desistimiento, por lo cual se archivó el expediente por resolución número 2299-2005-SETENA del 6 de setiembre del 2005 y tampoco la ampliación cuenta con la aprobación de la SETENA. 3. Según se indica en la resolución número 1630-2004-SETENA, del 5 de octubre del 2004, la bodega original fue “construida desde hace aproximadamente 10 años”. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado.

6.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las catorce horas veinticinco minutos del veintitrés de febrero del dos mil nueve, (folio 179), Sonia Espinoza Valverde, en su calidad de Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, indica que aporta copia del expediente 058-97 que por error no se presentó cuando rindió el informe.

7.- Informa bajo juramento Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos, en su calidad de Viceministra de Salud (folios 180 a 183), que según información brindada por la Directora del Área Rectora de Salud de Santa Ana, quien por competencia de territorio conoce el caso, el 12 de setiembre del 2008 se valoraron las instalaciones de la Empresa MECO, encontrándose las mismas adecuadamente cubiertas sin acumulo de agua. En ARSSA-1477-08 en visita del Gestor Ambiental del Área Rectora de Salud, indica no detectar problemas sanitarios en el momento de la visita. En ARSSA-153-09 en visita efectuada el 19 de febrero del 2008, por Marco Tulio Alvarado Godoy, Técnico de la Salud 2 de la Oficina de Protección al Ambiente Humano, indica no comprobar problemas sanitarios. Se está solicitando medición sónica al Dr. Guillermo Flores Galindo, para monitorear el plan de mitigación a la contaminación sónica, implementado por la empresa de Bodegas de Supermercados Unidos. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado pues las operaciones tanto de las Bodegas del Max por Menos como las del Tajo E.D.M., se encuentran en orden desde el punto de vista legal y no se detectaron problemas desde el punto de vista sanitario en visita que se realizara.

8.- Informa bajo juramento Audrys Esquivel Jiménez, en su calidad de Presidente del Concejo Municipal de Santa Ana (folios 252 a 254), lo acordado en sesión ordinaria No. 68 del 28 de agosto del 2007 y en sesión extraordinaria No. 53 del 24 de julio de 2008. Señala que el caso en cuestión forma parte de toda una situación de tensión existente entre el sector industrial y el habitacional, que califica la región este del Área Metropolitana de San José, donde debe reconocerse que originalmente estaba destinada para uso industrial y sus servicios, y con el pasar del tiempo la presión por otro usos, tanto habitacionales como meramente comerciales, fue cediendo y diversos Concejos Municipales fueron “flexibilizando” su posición y aceptando nuevos desarrollos residenciales, a pesar de que la zona no calificaba como tal. Se dio así un error histórico de autorizar urbanizaciones en zonas que estaban destinadas a la industria. Actualmente la Municipalidad va a iniciar su fase final de discusión y aprobación de las reformas al Plan Regulador donde se pretende adoptar alternativas a una situación difícil y donde apenas se están confeccionando para su incorporación a dicho Plan, los índices de fragilidad ambiental, razón por la cual resulta absolutamente impropio, inconveniente e inoportuno referirse a unos elementos técnicos que se encuentran en la fase de elaboración y análisis preliminar.

9.- Informa bajo juramento Gerardo Oviedo Espinoza, en su condición de Alcalde Municipal de Santa Ana (folios 256 a 265), que el Plan Regulador de Santa Ana fue publicado en la Gaceta No. 74 del 19 de abril de 1991; sin embargo, con el no fue publicado el mapa de zonificación que es la expresión gráfica del texto reglamentario. El mapa de zonificación fue publicado en La Gaceta No. 137 del primero de julio del 2001. A los tajos (hoy administrador por Constructora MECO S.A.) les fue autorizada la concesión minera tramitada bajo los expedientes administrativos No. 2366 y 2479 en los años 1995 y 1997, respectivamente. Concesiones otorgadas por el MIRENEM (hoy MINAET) sin consultarle a la Municipalidad y sin exigir como requisito un certificado de uso de suelo. De igual forma la actividad de bodegas del Más x Menos fue autorizada con anterioridad a la publicación de los mapas del Plan Regulador. Las vagonetas, cisternas y demás vehículos de carga pesada deben transitar únicamente por las carreteras que son nacionales y la vía principal de acceso al sector, no así por las calles internas de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. El parqueo de maquinaria y equipo que utiliza la empresa MECO es parte de la actividad de extracción y venta de agregados de construcción que desde 1995 cuenta con la Concesión Minera No. 2366 y con licencia comercial otorgada por acuerdo municipal adoptado en la sesión ordinaria No. 3 del 12 de mayo de 1998. Esa Municipalidad está trabajando en una reforma integral del Plan Regulador y en la Sesión Ordinaria No. 60 del 03 de julio del 2007, el Concejo había acordado que el sector en donde se ubican los tajos y las bodegas de Más x Menos, se establezca como zona industrial y de negocios en la cual los usos de extracción y bodegas serían conformes. Aclara que la zona que se proponía fuera industrial y de negocios, contempla únicamente los lotes en donde están ubicados los tajos y las bodegas que son de gran tamaño y no tienen construcciones, mientras que la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana permanece como Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad. En Sesión Extraordinaria No. 53 celebrada el jueves 24 de julio de 2008, fueron atendidos los denunciantes que junto con otros vecinos de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, realizaron una exposición sobre los problemas que sufren a causa del tránsito pesado y el Consejo acordó lo siguiente: “Para que se revoque el acuerdo que consta en el acta de la sesión ordinaria No. 60 celebrada por este Concejo Municipal el 03 de julio de 2007 y se modifique la zona industrial y de negocios en Pozos, por un uso acorde con el uso residencial que tiene ahora (Residencial de Alta Densidad). Para que se faculte a la Comisión de Ordenamiento Urbano y Plan Regulador, a dictaminar sobre la recuperación ambiental de la zona”. Las autorizaciones municipales para que operen los tajos, fueron dadas por acuerdo del Concejo Municipal cuando estando publicado el Reglamento de Zonificación no lo estaba el correspondiente mapa, que es la expresión grafica que permite ubicar cada zona y su extensión. De igual forma ocurrió con la autorización dada para el funcionamiento de las bodegas del Más x Menos. Sin embargo, por tratarse de usos existentes no conformes con la Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad, la Municipalidad no ha autorizado el crecimiento o ampliación de estas actividades. Ahora bien, en este caso no se hace mención a la vista proporcionada por Google Earth toda vez que la misma se encuentra desactualizada y ha sido elaborada por una empresa ajena a esa Corporación Municipal, siendo que, no se puede en ese sentido, garantizar su veracidad respecto de la realidad actual. Finalmente, en lo que respecta al tema de los índices de fragilidad ambiental, es necesario destacar que dicho estudio contratado al señor Allan Astorga, aún no ha sido entregado de manera completa por el mismo, razón por la cual no ha sido conocido ni aprobado por parte del Concejo Municipal ni la administración. En este sentido, es necesario reiterar que con los mencionados índices de fragilidad se propondrá una reforma integral al plan regulador, lo cual aún no ha ocurrido. Señala que el expediente 08-14565-0007-CO versa sobre este mismo tema. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

10.- Informa Magda Verdesia Solano, en su condición de Representante Legal de Constructora MECO S.A. (folios 267 a 270), que si se observa con detenimiento, los recurrentes en ningún momento acusan daño ambiental alguno, no podría ser de otra forma pues conforme consta en la realidad de los hechos, no ha habido alguno. Cualquier variación que la calificación de la zona pudiera tener en el futuro, no pueden tener efectos retroactivos en perjuicio de derechos adquiridos.

11.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las diecisiete horas veintinueve minutos del veintidós de mayo del dos mil nueve, (folios 286 y 287), Norman Coto Kikut en su condición de representante de la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indica que de conformidad con la respuesta rendida por el Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones y por la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA), solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso de amparo respecto a su representada.

12.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las diecisiete horas veintinueve minutos del veintidós de mayo del dos mil nueve, (folios 288 a 290), Norman Coto Kikut en su condición de representante de la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indica que de conformidad con la respuesta rendida por el Presidente del Concejo Municipal y el Alcalde Municipal de Santa Ana, solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso de amparo respecto a su representada.

13.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las diecisiete horas veintinueve minutos del veintidós de mayo del dos mil nueve, (folios 291 a 293), Norman Coto Kikut en su condición de representante de la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indica que de conformidad con la respuesta rendida por la Viceministra de Salud, solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso de amparo respecto a su representada.

14.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las diecisiete horas treinta minutos del veintidós de mayo del dos mil nueve, (folios 294 y 295), Norman Coto Kikut en su condición de representante de la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A., indica que de conformidad con la respuesta rendida por el INVU, solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso de amparo respecto a su representada.

15.- Mediante resolución de las catorce horas cincuenta y seis minutos del 10 de julio del 2009 (folios 296 a 298), se le previno al Ministro de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones y a la Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, referirse a lo apuntado por los recurrentes sobre el supuesto riesgo de contaminación del manto acuífero en razón de las labores que efectúa la Constructora Meco S.A., tomando en cuenta además que el Estudio Hidrogeológico y de Riesgo de Contaminación de Cantera suscrito por Roberto Protti, a que hacen referencia y que consta en la certificación del expediente administrativo aportada, data de enero del 2002.

16.- Informa Sonia Espinoza Valverde, en su calidad de Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folios 302 a 305), que los Índices de Fragilidad Ambiental (IFA) es sólo uno de los requisitos que deben presentarse a esa Secretaría como parte de la planificación ambiental del uso del suelo estipulados en el Manual de Instrumentos Técnicos para el proceso de Evaluación del Impacto Ambiental (Manual de EIA) –Parte III- Decreto No. 32967-MINAE, para poder optar por la Viabilidad (Licencia) Ambiental. Que los argumentos esgrimidos por los recurrentes no constan ni son de recibo por parte de la SETENA, ya que esa Institución desconoce los alcances de los Índices de Fragilidad Ambiental contratados por la Municipalidad de Santa Ana, debido a que aún no han sido remitidos ni mucho menos analizados por el personal técnico de esa Institución. Por otra parte y en referencia a la vulnerabilidad de contaminación de acuíferos, producto de las actividades realizadas por el Tajo, se debe indicar que el Estudio de Impacto Ambiental para este proyecto fue presentado ante la Comisión Interinstitucional de Evaluación y Control de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental el día 03 de noviembre de 1994, previo a la creación de la SETENA y a los instrumentos que hoy día se utilizan en el proceso de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental; no obstante, se presenta en este documento el capítulo de aguas subterráneas y la vulnerabilidad de contaminación, donde menciona en su página 30, que dentro de las formaciones geológicas que componen el área de proyecto por estar formadas de materiales de baja conductividad y permeabilidad, no existe peligro de contaminación a materiales más permeables, como pudieran ser las lavas subyacentes que pudieran tener capacidad acuífero. Como complemento y parte del proceso de actualización de información del expediente administrativo llevado en la SETENA, consta la remisión por parte del desarrollador del Estudio Hidrogeológico de Riesgo de Contaminación que fue aprobado por la Dirección General de Geología y Minas, que circunscribe el área donde se desarrollan las labores de explotación del Tajo Santa Ana, el cual comprendió para su elaboración una fase de campo donde se realizaron perforaciones para fortalecer el análisis realizado; en el cual el Hidrogeólogo Roberto Protti certifica según la estratigrafía del acuífero, que el basamento rocoso local conforma una barrera negativa o de no flujo debido a la baja permeabilidad de las rocas volcánicas, lo cual concuerda con los datos aportados en el Estudio de Impacto Ambiental. Se indica a la vez que la SETENA programará a la mayor brevedad otra inspección de campo por parte de funcionarios del Departamento de Auditoría y Seguimiento Ambiental, con el fin de continuar con el proceso de monitoreo de las actividades del tajo. En cuanto a las responsabilidades conexas del desarrollador, la SETENA certifica el día 15 de julio del año en curso mediante SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA que la Viabilidad (Licencia) Ambiental del proyecto Tajo Santa Ana se encuentra vigente, así como que los compromisos ambientales asumidos por parte del desarrollador como lo son los informes ambientales y el mantener al día el monto de garantía ambiental. Solicita declarar sin lugar el recurso.

17.- Informa Jorge Rodríguez Quirós, en su condición de Ministro de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (folios 339 a 346), en similares que la Secretaria General de SETENA (folios 302 a 305). Agrega que en cuanto a las responsabilidades conexas del desarrollador, la SETENA certifica el día 15 de julio del 2009 mediante SG-AJ-606-2009-SETENA que la Viabilidad (Licencia) Ambiental del proyecto Tajo Santa Ana se encuentra vigente, así como que los compromisos ambientales asumidos por parte del desarrollador como lo son los informes ambientales y el mantener al día el monto de garantía ambiental. En cuanto a la actividad minera de la zona del conflicto, informa cuales han sido las labores realizadas por parte de la Dirección de Geología y Minas, que es el ente competente para regular la actividad minera. Respecto a la actuación del Despacho Ministerial que la empresa arrendataria presenta una serie de informes de monitoreo de los pozos. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

18.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las quince horas diez minutos del dieciocho de agosto del dos mil nueve, (folios 396 y 397), Magda Verdesia Solano en su condición de representante de la Constructora Meco S.A., indica que tal y como se hace en el punto e) de las “Conclusiones” 629-2009 de 27 de julio del 2009, no es cierto que haya “nivel freático afirmación es extraída de un informe sin base científica, que fue elaborado sin visita al lugar ni análisis de campo y a partir de una observación Google Earth. Lo primero es irresponsable y lo último es una fuente no confiable, por ser ligera y superficial.

19.- Mediante resolución de las doce horas cincuenta y nueve minutos del 18 de setiembre del 2009 (folios 402 y 403), se le previno a la Viceministra de Salud rendir la medición sónica del actuar de la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos y de la Constructora Meco S.A.

20.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las quince horas treinta y un minutos del treinta de setiembre del dos mil nueve, (folios 406 a 410), Ana Cecilia Morice Trejos en su condición de Viceministra de Salud, informó en cuanto a la medición sónica a Supermercados Unidos lo indicado mediante oficio URS-RCS-2011-09 del 29 de setiembre del 2009. Con respecto a la inspección que realizara a varios tajos en la zona de Pozos de Santa Ana, el Ing. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto de la Unidad Rectoría de la Salud de la Región Central Sur, informó el resultado mediante oficio URS-RCS-2009-2009 de fecha 29 de setiembre del 2009. Con fundamento en las inspecciones realizadas tanto por el Lic. Luis Fernando Retana Segura, y por el Ing. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto, funcionarios de la Unidad Rectora de la Salud de la Región Central Sur, la Dra. Ana Cecilia Víquez Pérez, Directora del Área Rectora de Salud de Santa Ana, mediante oficio ARSSA-1598-09 del 29 de setiembre del año en curso, solicita a la Dirección de Ingeniería de Tránsito del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, realizar una inspección de flujo vehicular de maquinaria y vehículos pesados en las inmediaciones del Residencial Bosques de Santa Ana, específicamente frente a las Bodegas de Más por Menos, esto por escapar de la competencia del Ministerio de Salud. Además se le giró la Orden Sanitaria No. ARSSA-1583-09 al señor Marco Alfaro Vega, Encargado del Tajo EDM de Costa Rica, Constructora MECO S.A., otorgándosele un plazo de 10 días para que presente un plan donde se establezcan las fechas en que se realizarán los estudios indicados por el Ing. José Mario Gutiérrez Soto, de la Unidad Rectoría de la Salud de la Región Central, en el oficio URS-RCS-2009-2009 fechado 29 de setiembre del presente año. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

21.- El Magistrado Fernando Castillo Víquez se inhibió de conocer este asunto el 22 de marzo del 2010 (folio 418).

22.- Mediante resolución de las trece horas cuarenta y tres minutos del 24 de marzo del 2010 (folio 419) el Presidente interino de la Sala aceptó la inhibitoria del Magistrado Fernando Castillo Víquez y dispuso se solicitara su sustitución a la Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia.

23.- El 25 de marzo del 2010 se comunicó por parte de la Oficina de la Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia que se designó al Magistrado Enrique Napoleón Ulate Chacón para conocer de este amparo.

24.- Mediante resolución de las once horas treinta y seis minutos del 13 de abril del 2010 (folios 422 a 425), se amplió el recurso contra el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, el Director de Aguas y el Director General de Geología y Minas del Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones y el Gerente del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento.

25.- Informa Bernal Soto Zúñiga, en su condición de Gerente General del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) (folios 430 a 433), que en esa Dependencia no se encuentra registro de ningún trámite para efecto de funcionamiento del Tajo a que se refiere este amparo. Tampoco SENARA ha revisado, aprobado o avalado estudios hidrogeológicos específicos para la operación del tajo en cuestión. El Tajo de Constructora Meco S.A. se encuentra físicamente ubicado en la margen izquierda del Río Virilla. Según información que se deriva de estudios hidrogeológicos realizados o registrados en el SENARA, hasta la fecha la margen derecha del Río Virilla se caracteriza por la presencia de grandes y productivos acuíferos superpuestos, originados y desarrollados dentro de las formaciones rocosas de origen volcánico de Colima (Intra-Cañón), Barva y Tiribí (Avalancha Ardiente). Estos son aprovechados como pozos y captaciones en manantiales, todos de gran capacidad productiva (ejemplo La Valencia, La Libertad, Puente de Las Mulas y Potrerillos). Sin embargo, estos acuíferos descargan hacia el Río Virilla y no hay comunicación hidráulica entre acuíferos en ninguna dirección entre sus márgenes. La extraordinaria calidad de estos acuíferos en la margen derecha del Río Virilla es consecuencia de la conjugación de factores hidrogeológicos particulares, basta extensión y homogeneidad de las unidades de roca, en particular las que favorecen la recarga y flujo, las características hidrodinámicas favorables (transmisividad, coeficiente de almacenamiento, posición de las capas sellos, conductividad hidráulica) y otros. Está condición cambia completamente en la margen izquierda (sur) del río Virilla, pues aunque algunas litologías de la margen derecha aparecen en la izquierda, su extensión es muy limitada y no cuentan con áreas de recarga adecuadas o comunicación con flujos laterales. Los acuíferos cuando existen, son de cualidades pobres, poco extensos, de baja calidad hidrodinámica y productividad. La excavación del profundo cañón del río Virilla, ha penetrado hasta más abajo del techo de las rocas de Colima Inferior, lo que ha dejado totalmente expuesta la Formación Avalancha Ardiente (Colima Superior, Puente de Mulas). Con ello ocurre el drenaje de su acuífero hacia el río y descontinúa la comunicación hidráulica con la margen izquierda. No hay posibilidad de que ocurra flujo entre ambas márgenes y mucho menos de izquierda a derecha. La escasa recarga de los pequeños acuíferos de la margen izquierda (Pozos, Honduras de Santa Ana, Uruca) se realiza por medio de la infiltración dentro de las pequeñas cuencas colectoras de los cerros (Alto Las Palomas, Coyote, Real de Pereira) y los Aluviones del Río La Uruca. La Unidad de Colima Superior no conforma un acuífero importante, por cuanto el cañón del Río Virilla se constituye en una barrera natural que impide el flujo en cualquier dirección (de la margen derecha a la izquierda y viceversa). Asimismo el área de cobertura de estos depósitos volcánicos en la margen izquierda es tan pequeña que no existe posibilidad significativa de recarga y el volumen de agua que contienen depende únicamente de la infiltración de las lluvias. Es por ello que en el tajo este material se encuentra seco. Bajo esa unidad apenas presenta un nivel de saturación parcial estacional a una profundidad de alrededor de los 25 metros (según estudio hidrogeológico realizado bajo la dirección profesional del geólogo Roberto Protti en el año 1996), suspendido o colgado sobre un paleo-suelo que caracteriza el techo de Grifo alto. En el Estudio Hidrogeológico y de Riesgo a la Contaminación (2002) concluye también que las rocas de Grifo Alto, en particular en sus niveles inferiores fracturados y no alterados, originan un acuífero local de bajo potencial, de tipo semi-confinado a freático. Con el método de Foster y Hirata GOD, el índice de vulnerabilidad de la contaminación acuífera del acuífero local de Grifo alto es 0,15 de baja a muy baja. Como conclusiones: 1. Aunque los materiales volcánicos que aparecen en la margen izquierda (tajo en estudio) son los mismos que la margen derecha donde se desarrollan acuíferos muy importante (Puente de Mulas), los acuíferos no son iguales, mientras en la margen derecha son muy productivos, en la izquierda debido a sus pequeñas áreas de recarga, provocan que no se encuentran saturados y solo genere acuíferos pequeños de bajo potencial. 2. El agua llovida que se infiltra en el tajo, drena una parte hacia el río Virilla y otra alimenta al acuífero inferior que se desarrolla cerca de la Formación Grifo Alto de bajo potencial acuífero. 3. La determinación de la vulnerabilidad de la formación Grifo Alto (base del tajo) aportada por el Geólogo Roberto Protti en los estudios realizados, se hizo con una sola prueba de conductividad hidráulica, que en conjunto con los datos de porosidad, tipo de roca y acuífero, permite clasificar al acuífero con una vulnerabilidad baja. 4. Se recomienda para efectos de valorar la situación actual, realizar más pruebas de conductividad hidráulica y recalcular los tiempos de tránsito y la vulnerabilidad intrínseca del acuífero. Además, se debe realizar un inventario de posibles focos de contaminación en el desarrollo de extracción del tajo y tomar medidas para no permitir la infiltración de sustancias contaminantes al acuífero. 5. Se recomienda además, la instalación de piezómetros en el tajo, con el objetivo de verificar el nivel de agua subterránea y su relación con las cotas o niveles de construcción del modelo de flujo para el monitoreo continuo de las aguas subterráneas. En el proceso de construcción de los piezómetros se pueden dejar previsto para el muestreo de la calidad del agua. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

26.- Informa José Francisco Castro Muñoz, en su condición de Director de la Dirección de Geología y Minas del Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (folios 434 a 439), que a la fecha no existen dentro de los organismo que por ley es el competente para determinar la existencia de contaminación ambiental, en la que se indique que la empresa no puede realizar labores debido a un problema ambiental. Tampoco existe oficio por parte de la Municipalidad de Santa Ana en la que se les comunique la suspensión de labores debido al incumplimiento de la empresa a las obligaciones ante el ayuntamiento. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

27.- Informa bajo juramento Ricardo Sancho Chavarría, en su condición de Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (folios 442 a 449), que el Tajo Meco no se encuentra dentro del Área de Reserva Acuífera de Puente Mulas demarcada por el AyA. Según el informe denominado “Derechos de uso de aguas o sitios de Aprovechamiento para Abastecimiento poblacional por regiones operativas de Acueductos y Alcantarillados”, el Taja Meco se encuentra ubicado en la margen izquierda del rió Virilla a una distancia en línea recta de 880 m del Túnel 1 de Puente Mulas, a 850 m en línea recta del Túnel 2 Puente Mulas y a 785 m en línea del Túnel 3 Puente Mulas. Estos aprovechamientos del AyA se encuentran aguas arriba del Tajo Meco y en la margen derecha, por lo tanto no son afectados por esta actividad debido a que los Túneles de Puente Mulas se localizan en una zona de Descarga del acuífero Colima Superior al Río Virilla. Agrega que en relación al aprovechamiento de Fuente Potrerillos-AyA, ubicado en la margen derecha del Río Virilla el Tajo Meco, se encuentra en la margen izquierda a una distancia de 2 km. Por lo tanto este aprovechamiento no se ve afectado por la actividad de ese tajo, el cual se encuentra captando el Acuífero Colima Inferior. Por lo tanto, la actividad del Tajo Meco no afecta los aprovechamientos para abastecimiento público y la Zona de Reserva Acuífera del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

28.- Informa bajo juramento José Miguel Zeledón Calderón, en su condición de Director de la Dirección de Aguas del MINAET (folios 456 a 458), que en la margen izquierda del río Virilla no se ha comprobado que aflora el acuífero de Colima como lo señalan los recurrentes. Lo anterior basado en estudios hidrogeológicos presentados ante la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA) y los estudios realizados por el Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) y el Gobernments of Great Britain (BGS) en dicha zona. Que sí es cierto que en la margen derecha del río Virilla afloran una gran cantidad de manantiales que se han generado en rocas lávicas fracturadas pertenecientes al acuífero de Puente de Mulas y que conjuntamente con pozos de agua son captados por el AyA. El tajo de Constructora Meco se ubica en la margen izquierda del río Virilla actuando el cañón de éste como una barrera negativa a las actividades que se generan en la margen izquierda de dicho río. Señala que no es posible a través del sistema Google Earth determinar el nivel freático expuesto a que hacen referencia los recurrentes. Lo que se observa es una laguna originada por la gran cantidad de lluvia, que debido a la presencia de Formación Grifo Alto, el cual es de baja conductividad y permeabilidad, no permite que estas aguas drenen y se mantengan por cierto tiempo en el sitio. Que tal y como se observa en el mapa de zonas de restricción y de veda declaradas por el AyA, los acuíferos del Valle Central más importantes se ubican en la margen derecha del Río Virilla. Las zonas que se ubican en la margen izquierda del río Virilla no son zonas acuíferas de tanta relevancia como lo aseveran los recurrentes, sino más bien se trata del acuitardo Grifo Alto. Además del estudio hidrogeológico de riesgo de contaminación, el hidrogeólogo Roberto Protti Quesada realizó perforaciones para certificar la estratigrafía del acuífero en donde se comprobó que el basamento rocoso actúa como una barrera negativa debido a la permeabilidad de las rocas volcánicas. En la visita de campo realizada por parte de funcionarios de la SETENA, el día 18 de febrero del 2009, según oficio No. ASA-509-SETENA, no constan hallazgos que determinen la exposición de ningún afloramiento en el área de la cantera. Señala que tanto la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA), como la Dirección General de Geología del Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (MINAET), aprobaron los estudios de viabilidad ambiental, los estudios hidrogeológicos, los de vulnerabilidad al acuífero y los de tránsito de contaminantes. Asimismo se tienen programadas visitas de campo y de monitoreo al tajo por parte del Departamento de Auditoría y Seguimiento Ambiental de la SETENA para verificar el cumplimiento de las disposiciones contenidas en la resolución de la SETENA a la empresa minera. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso.

29.- En los procedimientos seguidos se ha observado las prescripciones legales.

Redacta el Magistrado Ulate Chacón; y,

Considerando:

I.- Del amparo contra sujetos de derecho privado. La Sala Constitucional, y en casos similares a este, ha desarrollado los alcances de lo dispuesto en el artículo 57 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, respecto al recurso de amparo contra sujetos de derecho privado. En efecto, este proceso no sólo procede contra las acciones y las omisiones de los sujetos de derecho público que violen o amenacen violar cualquiera de los derechos fundamentales, sino también contra las acciones u omisiones de sujetos de derecho privado, cuando actúen o deban actuar en ejercicio de funciones o potestades públicas, o se encuentren de derecho o de hecho, en una posición de poder frente a la cual los remedios jurisdiccionales comunes resulten claramente insuficientes o tardíos, para garantizar el pleno disfrute de los derechos consagrados en la Constitución Política, como en los Instrumentos Internacionales en materia de Derechos Humanos vigentes en la República ( al respecto consúltese la Sentencia No 2000-03337 de las 19:26 de 25 de abril de 2000). En el caso concreto resulta evidente que la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos S.A. y la Constructora MECO S.A., como sujetos de derecho privado, se encuentran en una situación de poder con respecto a los tutelados, frente a los cuales los remedios jurisdiccionales comunes pueden resultar insuficientes o tardíos, para hacer valer los derechos que consideran vulnerados. Por este motivo, la Sala Constitucional debe conocer sobre el fondo del presente proceso de amparo.

II.- Objeto del recurso. Los recurrentes, vecinos de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, ubicada en Pozos de Santa Ana, refieren que desde 1994 se instaló en esa zona la empresa Constructora Meco, S.A. con un tajo, bodegas y oficinas administrativas, a pesar de que dicho sitio es una "zona residencial de alta densidad" según el Plan Regulador, lo que implica que ese lugar no es apto para la operación de industrias, bodegas, aserraderos y otras actividades que provoquen molestias al vecindario. Con ocasión de la existencia del tajo, sufren contaminación por polvo y contaminación sónica por el constante paso de vehículos pesados las 24 horas, amén de que los suelos están inestables como consecuencia de la extracción del material. La comunidad de Bosques de Santa Ana, agregan, se encuentra justo al lado de Constructora Meco, y sobre lo que el índice de fragilidad ambiental llama: "los mantos acuíferos más importantes del Valle Central", por lo que lo más sensato sería eliminar dicha actividad minera. Por otra parte, aducen, desde hace varios años la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos instaló en la zona un local comercial con bodegas, a pesar de ser una zona residencial, y por ende, no se pueden ubicar industria o comercio en ese lugar. El Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, reclaman, otorgó permisos a la referida corporación, contrariando lo preceptuado en el plan regulador. Dicha empresa no ha confinado las molestias que producen sus actividades comerciales, situación que se agrava por la inercia de los recurridos que no han dado una solución efectiva al problema de contaminación. Por ello acusan se les ha violado su derecho constitucional a la salud y a obtener una respuesta administrativa definitiva, y no soluciones temporales, reclamando conculcados los artículos 27 constitucional, que tutela el derecho de petición y pronta respuesta, así como el artículo 41, pues considera que no han encontrado respuesta a sus gestiones administrativas.

III.- Hechos probados. De importancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos, sea porque así han sido acreditados o bien porque el recurrido haya omitido referirse a ellos según lo prevenido en el auto inicial:

a. La empresa Constructora Meco S.A., es la arrendataria de dos tajos en Pozos de Santa Ana, cuyos Estudios de Impacto Ambiental fueron aprobados para los expedientes 198-94 y 058-97. La aprobación del primero se debió al artículo 5 de la sesión No. 6 del 24 de mayo de 1995, emitido por la Comisión Nacional de Estudios de Impacto Ambiental (CONEIA). La del segundo a la resolución número 431-97 del 9 de julio de 1999, de esa Secretaría (informe a folios 153 a 160).

b. La Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA) y la Dirección General de Geología del Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones (MINAET), aprobaron los estudios de viabilidad ambiental, los estudios hidrogeológicos, los de vulnerabilidad al acuífero y los de tránsito de contaminantes del Tajo Meco (informe a folios 456 a 458).

c. En la entrada del Tajo Meco hay una área de parqueo (previo) para las vagonetas que esperan ser cargadas que está ubicada dentro de la propiedad de la compañía MECO, por lo que no se obstaculiza la vía pública en ningún momento (informe a folios 171 a 174), d. En la zona de tránsito de la maquinaria no se observaron manchas de aceite en el suelo, lo que indica que a simple vista la maquinaria está en buen estado (informe a folios 171 a 174).

e. Las fuentes de ruido, humo, polvo y gases son múltiples en la zona aledaña a la empresa MECO, por la gran cantidad de industrias y otras actividades productivas cercanas y el alto tránsito de vehículos y maquinaria pesada, aunada al mal estado de la calle que separa la zona industrial de los residenciales vecinos (informe a folios 406 a 410).

f. En el Tajo Meco no se encontraron evidencias de contaminación por polvo proveniente de las actividades propias del tajo, por estar confinadas geográficamente por considerables desniveles y hay vigilancia constante del tapado de los camiones de transporte de materiales y se riegan a menudo las zonas de tránsito del tajo (informe a folios 406 a 410).

g. El ruido en la zona de proceso es característico de este tipo de actividad, donde se procesa material rocoso de un tamaño mayor a una menos, pero al alejarse del lugar, cerca de la zona urbanística, no se percibe ruido (informe a folios 171 a 174).

h. El Tajo Meco no se encuentra dentro del Área de Reserva Acuífera de Puente Mulas demarcada por el AyA (informe a folios 442 a 449).

i. La actividad del Tajo Meco, que se ubica en la margen izquierda del Río Virilla no afecta los aprovechamientos para abastecimiento público y la Zona de Reserva Acuífera del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (informe a folios 442 a 449).

j. El tajo de Constructora Meco se ubica en la margen izquierda del río Virilla actuando el cañón de éste como una barrera negativa a las actividades que se generan en la margen izquierda de dicho río (informe a folios 456 a 458).

k. Los acuíferos del Valle Central más importantes se ubican en la margen derecha del Río Virilla y los que se ubican en la margen izquierda no son zonas acuíferas de tanta relevancia (informe a folios 456 a 458).

l. Aunque los materiales volcánicos que aparecen en la margen izquierda (tajo en estudio) son los mismos que la margen derecha donde se desarrollan acuíferos muy importantes (Puente de Mulas), los acuíferos no son iguales, mientras en la margen derecha son muy productivos, en la izquierda debido a sus pequeñas áreas de recarga, provocan que no se encuentran saturados y solo genere acuíferos pequeños de bajo potencial (informe a folios 430 a 433).

m. En la margen derecha del río Virilla afloran una gran cantidad de manantiales que se han generado en rocas lávicas fracturadas pertenecientes al acuífero de Puente de Mulas y que conjuntamente con pozos de agua son captados por el AyA (informe a folios 456 a 458).

n. La Dirección de Urbanismo del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, mediante nota No. UR-326 del 2 de abril de 1993, otorgó el uso de suelo a favor de Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., para la instalación de un centro de acopio para granos no perecederos y abarrotes (informe a folios 165 a 168).

o. El uso de suelo a favor de Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A. se otorgó al considerarse que se ubicaba en una zona de crecimiento urbano según el Plan Regulador de Santa Ana, y que el terreno No. SJ 17213-91, contaba con características especiales como lo es su tamaño (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) y para lo cual los retiros mínimos debían ser 15 m de las colindancias, frontal de 52m sobre la carretera principal y un retiro posterior de 35 metros, lo que permite y garantiza un confinamiento de molestias (informe a folios 165 a 168).

p. La actividad de bodegas del Más x Menos fue autorizada con anterioridad a la publicación de los mapas de zonificación del Plan Regulador de Santa Ana, que se hizo según La Gaceta No. 137 del primero de julio del 2001, a pesar de que el Plan citado se publicó en la Gaceta No. 74 del 19 de abril de 1991(informe a folios 256 a 265).

q. Por tratarse de usos existentes no conformes con la Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad, la Municipalidad de Santa Ana no ha autorizado el crecimiento o ampliación de las actividades de las bodegas del Más x Menos (informe a folios 256 a 265).

r. Es una bodega pasiva donde se recibe y distribuye mercadería sin ningún tipo de procesamiento industrial, sin máquinas o equipos, por lo que no existe ninguna molestia (folios 139 a 146), s. En visita efectuada por la Oficina de Protección al Ambiente del Ministerio de Salud el 19 de febrero del 2008, no se detectaron problemas desde el punto de vista sanitario en las Bodegas del Max por Menos (informe a folios 180 a 183, documento a folio 186).

t. La medición sónica programada para el día 25 de setiembre del 2009 no se realizó debido a que la Sra. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, propietaria de la vivienda, manifestó que no era necesaria toda vez que no se estaba generando ruido en este momento, ya que es intermitente, pues los vehículos (vagonetas y vehículos de tránsito pesado), transitan con diferentes rangos de tiempo (informe a folios 406 a 410).

u. En visita efectuada por la Dirección Regional de Rectoría de la Salud Región Central Sur del Ministerio de Salud el 25 de setiembre del 2009, en las Bodegas de Supermercados Unidos no se estaba generando ruido alguno (informe a folios 406 a 410, documento a folio 407).

IV.- Sobre el fondo. En este caso, los recurrentes argumentan afectación en sus derechos fundamentales debido al proceder por hechos diversos de dos entidades de derecho privado, a saber, la empresa Constructora Meco S.A. y la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos, por lo que se analizara la actuación de cada una en forma separada, excepto en cuanto a los derechos tutelados en los artículos 27 y 41 de la Carta Magna, que se hará en forma conjunta. Sin embargo, de previo se considera de merito reiterar que la Sala ha subrayado el necesario equilibrio entre el desarrollo del país y el derecho al ambiente. La Sala reconoció el derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, como derecho fundamental, antes de haberse operado la reforma constitucional del artículo 50, con una interpretación sistemática, material y evolutiva de los artículos 6, 11, 69 y 89, dando respuestas distintas a la contraposición entre intereses privados (libertad de empresa) e intereses colectivos, estableciéndose como principios de orden constitucional la protección, preservación y explotación racional de los recursos forestales (Sentencia No. 2233 del 28 de mayo de 1993). También se ha reconocido la presencia de intereses difusos para legitimar la acción en aras de proteger el ambiente, cuando se deba reaccionar frente a actos u omisiones ilegítimos, porque precisamente la violación más frecuente al medio ambiente se produce por la inercia de las autoridades públicas en realizar los actos necesarios para protegerlos (Sentencia No. 3707 de las 15 horas del 30 de julio de 1993 y No. 4422 de las 10:30 horas del 7 de setiembre de 1993). Asimismo, la Sala ha resaltado la necesidad de una toma de conciencia en el ámbito gubernamental y en las actividades privadas de la importancia del ambiente para la salud humana. La vida humana es concebida como el fundamento, la condición necesaria y determinante de la existencia de la persona. Todo ello dentro de la economía nacional, regional y mundial, por medio de la conservación de la naturaleza y de la vida misma en su más amplia acepción (Sentencia No. 4423 de las 12 horas del 7 de setiembre de 1993). De ese modo, al operar la reforma de los artículos 46 y 50 constitucionales se consolida en la constitución formal el derecho a la protección de la salud, ambiente, seguridad e intereses económicos de los consumidores. Queda claro que la protección al ambiente debe encaminarse a la utilización adecuada e inteligente de sus elementos y en sus relaciones naturales, socioculturales, tecnológicos y de orden político (desarrollo sostenible), para con ello salvaguardar el patrimonio al que tienen derecho las generaciones presentes y futuras. Por ello, el objetivo primordial del uso y protección del ambiente es que a través de la producción y uso de la tecnología, se obtengan no solo ganancias económicas (libertad de empresa) sino un desarrollo y evolución favorable del ambiente y los recursos naturales con la persona humana, esto es, sin que se cause daño o perjuicio:

"Esta Sala también ha reconocido, que tanto el derecho a la salud como a un ambiente libre de contaminación, sin el cual el primero no podría hacerse efectivo, son derechos fundamentales, de modo que, es obligación del Estado proveer a su protección, ya sea a través de políticas generales para procurar ese fin o bien, a través de actos concretos por parte de la Administración. El desarrollo sostenible es una de esas políticas generales que el Estado dicta para ampliar las posibilidades de que todos puedan colmar sus aspiraciones a una vida mejor, incrementando la capacidad de producción o bien, ampliando las posibilidades de llegar a un progreso equitativo entre un crecimiento demográfico o entre éste y los sistemas naturales. Es el desarrollo sostenible, el proceso de transformación en la utilización de los recursos, orientación de las inversiones, canalización del desarrollo tecnológico, cambios institucionales y todo aquello que coadyuve para atender las necesidades humanas del presente y del futuro" (sentencia número 1763-94, de las dieciséis horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del trece de abril de mil novecientos noventa y cuatro).

La Sala ha indicado que el ambiente, debe ser entendido como un potencial de desarrollo para utilizarlo adecuadamente, debiendo actuarse de modo integrado en sus relaciones naturales, socioculturales, tecnológicas y de orden político, ya que, en caso contrario, se degrada su productividad para el presente y el futuro y podría ponerse en riesgo el patrimonio de las generaciones venideras. Los orígenes de los problemas ambientales son complejos y corresponden a una articulación de procesos naturales y sociales en el marco del estilo de desarrollo socioeconómico que adopte el país. Por ejemplo, se producen problemas ambientales cuando las modalidades de explotación de los recursos naturales dan lugar a una degradación de los ecosistemas superior a su capacidad de regeneración, lo que conduce a que amplios sectores de la población resulten perjudicados y se genere un alto costo ambiental y social que redunda en un deterioro de la calidad de vida; pues precisamente el objetivo primordial del uso y protección del ambiente es obtener un desarrollo y una evolución favorable al ser humano. La calidad ambiental es un parámetro fundamental de esa calidad de vida; otros parámetros no menos importantes son salud, alimentación, trabajo, vivienda, educación, etc., pero más importante que ello es entender que si bien la persona humana tiene el derecho de hacer uso del ambiente para su propio desarrollo, también tiene el deber de protegerlo y preservarlo para el uso de las generaciones presentes y futuras, lo cual no es tan novedoso, porque no es más que la traducción a esta materia, del principio de la "lesión", ya consolidado en el derecho común, en virtud del cual el legítimo ejercicio de un derecho tiene dos límites esenciales: Por un lado, los iguales derechos de los demás y, por el otro, el ejercicio racional y el disfrute útil del derecho mismo. Nuestro país ha dependido y seguirá dependiendo, al igual que cualquier otra nación, de sus recursos naturales y su medio para llenar las necesidades básicas de sus habitantes y mantener operando el aparato productivo que sustenta la economía nacional, cuya principal fuente la constituye la agricultura y, en los últimos años, el turismo, especialmente en su dimensión de ecoturismo al cual se suman el agroturismo y el turismo rural comunitario. El suelo, el agua, el aire, los recursos marinos y costeros, los bosques, la diversidad biológica, los recursos minerales y el paisaje, conforman el marco ambiental sin el cual las demandas básicas -como espacio vital, alimentación, energía, vivienda, sanidad y recreación- serían imposibles. De igual modo, nuestra economía también está íntimamente ligada al estado del ambiente y de los recursos naturales. Por otro lado, las metas del desarrollo sostenible tienen que ver con la supervivencia y el bienestar del ser humano y con el mantenimiento de los procesos ecológicos esenciales, es decir, de la calidad ambiental y de la sobrevivencia de las otras especies. Hablar de desarrollo sostenible en términos de satisfacción de las necesidades humanas presentes y futuras y del mejoramiento de la calidad de vida es hablar de la demanda de los recursos naturales a nivel individual y de los medios directos o de apoyo necesarios para que la economía funcione generando empleo y creando los bienes de capital, que a su vez hagan posible la transformación de los recursos en productos de consumo, de producción y de exportación. La declaración que se hizo en la Cumbre de la Tierra en 1992, se proclamó y reconoció la naturaleza integral e independiente del planeta, ello significa la aceptación de ciertos principios que informan la transición de los actuales estilos de desarrollo a la sostenibilidad. Los Estados signatarios, entre los que figura Costa Rica, se comprometieron, dentro de la preservación del desarrollo sostenible, a la protección sobre todo del ser humano. Se partió del principio de que toda persona tiene derecho a una vida saludable y productiva en armonía con la naturaleza; se incluyó el derecho de las generaciones presentes y futuras a que el desarrollo se realice de modo tal que satisfaga sus necesidades ambientales y de progreso; se mantuvo la potestad soberana de los Estados de explotar sus recursos, recalcando su responsabilidad de asegurar que las actividades que realicen dentro de su jurisdicción y control no causen daños ambientales a otros Estados o áreas más allá de los límites de su jurisdicción nacional. Establecieron el deber de los Estados de cooperar en la conservación, protección y restauración del ambiente y sus responsabilidades comunes en ese sentido; de ese modo la cooperación internacional en la promoción y apoyo del crecimiento económico y el desarrollo sostenible permitirá abordar mejor los problemas de la degradación ambiental. Pero además se debe señalar que en consonancia con lo dispuesto en el artículo 50 de la Constitución, la Ley Orgánica del ambiente establece la responsabilidad de quien contamine el ambiente o le ocasione un daño (artículo 2 inciso d). El daño o contaminación al ambiente puede producirse por conductas de acción u omisión y les son imputables a todas las personas físicas o jurídicas que las realicen (artículo 98) y se considera solidariamente responsables a los titulares de las empresas o a las actividades que causen los daños sea por acción o por omisión (artículo 101).

V.- Acerca de la empresa Constructora Meco S.A. Respecto a esta compañía, los recurrentes, quienes son vecinos de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, ubicada en Pozos de Santa Ana, refieren que desde 1994 se instaló en la zona con un tajo, bodegas y oficinas administrativas, a pesar de que dicha área es -según el Plan Regulador- una "zona residencial de alta densidad", lo que implica que ese lugar no es apto para la operación de industrias, bodegas, aserraderos y otras actividades que provoquen molestias al vecindario. De hecho existe una declaración del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, que indica que en agosto de 1994 no otorgó permisos de construcción para actividades industriales en esa zona. Con ocasión de la existencia del tajo, sufren de contaminación por polvo y contaminación sónica por el constante paso de vehículos pesados las 24 horas, amén de que los suelos están inestables como consecuencia de la extracción del material y las calles que circundan el Residencial están destrozadas. Agregan que la comunidad de Bosques de Santa Ana se encuentra justo al lado de Constructora Meco, y sobre lo que el índice de fragilidad ambiental llama: "los mantos acuíferos más importantes del Valle Central", por lo que lo más sensato sería eliminar la actividad minera de la zona. La anterior disconformidad que plantean los recurrentes y prácticamente por los mismos hechos, ya fue de conocimiento de esta Sala, en razón del recurso de amparo No. 08-014565-0007-CO que interpusieron María Antonieta Alegría de García y Roberto Rafael Alegría Rodríguez, también vecinos de la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana. Ese amparo se declaró sin lugar mediante sentencia No. 2009-003342 de las doce horas catorce minutos del 27 de febrero del 2009, bajo las siguientes consideraciones:

“…. V.- Pues bien, en el caso presente se discute si la omisión de las autoridades accionadas (a saber, la Dirección de Geología y Minas del Ministerio del Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, la Municipalidad del Cantón de Santa Ana, el Ministerio de Salud, y el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía) con respecto a las denuncias planteadas sobre los presuntos problemas de contaminación ambiental que origina la actividad desplegada por la empresa Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, en un tajo aledaño a la Urbanización Bosques de Santa Ana, vulnera o no el derecho de los amparados a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado. Sobre el particular, las autoridades del Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía en su informe bajo juramento han señalado que la explotación del tajo aludido cuenta con la viabilidad ambiental y con los permisos correspondientes, luego de haber realizado los estudios de impacto ambiental necesarios (ver folio 73), lo cual se deduce del contenido de los expedientes N°198-94 y 058-97. Pero también ha afirmado bajo juramento el Ministro de Ambiente y Energía que “al día de hoy se encuentra al día con sus compromisos ambientales, como lo es el monto de la garantía ambiental la cual se encuentra vigente y en la presentación de los informes regenciales (véase informe a folio 37), y que no existe ninguna comunicación por parte de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental ni de la Dirección de Geología y Minas en el sentido que dicha empresa deba suspender sus actividades (ver informe a folio 37).

VI.- De otro lado, la Ministra de Salud en su informe señaló que el 7 de noviembre de 2008 se realizó una inspección en el sitio indicado por los recurrentes, advirtiéndose que la empresa recurrente cuenta con los permisos necesarios para el desarrollo de su cometido, así como las condiciones físicas adecuadas, no encontrándose ninguna anomalía (ver informe a folio 43). Finalmente, las autoridades de la Municipalidad del Cantón de Santa Ana en su contestación –que es dada bajo la solemnidad del juramento, con oportuno apercibimiento de las consecuencias, incluso penales, previstas en el artículo 44 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional– indicaron que los permisos que disfruta la empresa Constructora MECO, Sociedad Anónima, son anteriores a la entrada en vigencia del Plan Regulador del Cantón de Santa Ana (véase informe a folio 46), con lo que la Sala aprecia que constituye un asunto de mera legalidad dilucidar si tales permisos aún permanecen vigentes pese al contenido del plan regulador del lugar, lo cual ha de ser ventilado ante los tribunales ordinarios, mediante el ejercicio de las acciones y los procedimientos que el ordenamiento establece con ese propósito.

VII.- Así, en lo que atañe a la tutela efectiva del principio precautorio y del derecho protegido en el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política, este Tribunal Constitucional no tiene por demostrada ninguna situación ilegítima actual que menoscabe el pleno goce de estos derechos, con sustento en el material probatorio que en esta ocasión han suministrado los actores. Por el contrario, de los informes aportados por las autoridades accionadas y de la prueba documental allegada a los autos, más bien se infiere que la actividad desplegada en el tajo aludido no supone problemas de contaminación ambiental, en cuanto al posible exceso de ruido o polvo. De modo que la actuación de los recurridos, lejos de vulnerar los derechos fundamentales de los promoventes, se adecua al Derecho de la Constitución. En virtud de lo expuesto, lo procedente es declarar sin lugar el recurso de amparo, sin perjuicio (desde luego) de arribar a una conclusión distinta en otra oportunidad con sustento en otros elementos de prueba.” Así, tomando en cuenta ese precedente reciente, se considera que no resulta de mérito analizar nuevamente los permisos otorgados a dicha empresa y que le han permitido trabajar en el Tajo de interés, así como lo referente al Plan Regulador. Además, se debe mencionar, este Tribunal ha indicado en casos anteriores, que no compete a una instancia como ésta verificar si un Estudio de Impacto Ambiental, estudio hidrológico, hidrogeológico o cualquier otro de naturaleza técnica fue bien preparado o no, por cuanto evidentemente se requiere de los conocimientos de especialistas en esas disciplinas, que no son propios de la función jurisdiccional de este Tribunal Constitucional (véase las sentencias No. 2004-009927 de las once horas un minuto del 3 de setiembre del 2004 y 2005-005790 de las diez horas cuarenta y un minutos del 13 de mayo del 2005). En el caso bajo estudio, la empresa concesionaria debió presentar diversos estudios técnicos para asegurar que el proyecto no produciría daño ambiental. Precisamente las entidades -en particular SETENA- encargadas de revisar dichos estudios, estimaron que los mismos sí cumplen con la información necesaria para evaluar y predecir el impacto de la explotación del tajo, y en razón de ello éste fue aprobado, otorgándose la Viabilidad Ambiental y los demás permisos citados anteriormente. En todo caso, si los promoventes consideran que los estudios no se realizaron de manera adecuada o estiman no se contemplaron todos los aspectos legales necesarios -por tratarse de empresas privadas contratadas por la empresa concesionaria-, y que el Plan Regulador de la zona no permite su operación, ello constituye un asunto que debe ser dirimido ante las instancias conocedoras de los aspectos técnicos en esta materia, y no ante la jurisdicción constitucional, en virtud de que se trata de un aspecto que escapa de la esfera de su competencia. Lo que sí compete a esta Sala, es determinar si con la aprobación de esta concesión, se produjo o existe la posibilidad de que se produzca un daño grave e irreversible en el ambiente, tal y como lo contempla la Convención de Río. Esto por cuanto es ineludible que toda actividad del ser humano en la Tierra implica un impacto en el ambiente (o un daño, pues lo altera de una u otra manera); no obstante, su relevancia para efectos de estudio consiste en que ese impacto debe ser grave o irreparable, como lo dispone dicha Convención. Al respecto, se tiene que en la entrada del Tajo Meco hay una área de parqueo (previo) para las vagonetas que esperan ser cargadas que está ubicada dentro de la propiedad de la compañía MECO, por lo que no se obstaculiza la vía pública en ningún momento. Además, en la zona de tránsito de la maquinaria no se observaron manchas de aceite en el suelo, lo que indica está en buen estado. Las fuentes de ruido, humo, polvo y gases son múltiples en la zona aledaña a la empresa MECO, por la gran cantidad de industrias y otras actividades productivas cercanas y el alto tránsito de vehículos y maquinaria pesada, aunada al mal estado de la calle que separa la zona industrial de los residenciales vecinos; sin embargo, en el Tajo Meco no se encontraron evidencias de contaminación por polvo proveniente de las actividades propias de éste, por estar confinadas geográficamente por considerables desniveles. Se constató que hay vigilancia constante del tapado de los camiones de transporte de materiales y se riegan a menudo las zonas de tránsito del tajo. Se ha informado, bajo la gravedad del juramento, que el ruido en la zona de proceso es característico de este tipo de actividad, donde se procesa material rocoso de un tamaño mayor a una menor, pero al alejarse del lugar, cerca de la zona urbanística, no percibe ruido. Bajo ese contexto, se considera que el amparo respecto a ese extremo no es procedente, toda vez que nuevamente no ha sido posible corroborar contaminación sónica y ambiental alguna producida por la actividad que se desarrolla en el tajo de interés. No obstante lo anterior y en base al principio precautorio, se deberá tomar nota de lo informado por la Viceministra de Salud en cuanto a que el Área Rectora de Salud de Santa Ana emitió la orden sanitaria No. ARSSA-1583-09 para que la empresa constructora realice dos estudios perimetrales de inmisiones, en época lluviosa y época seca, con el objetivo de determinar científicamente si las emisiones generadas por la empresa pueden afectar el vecindario (informe a folios 406 a 410, documento a folios 414 y 415). Además, deberá la Municipalidad de Santa Ana hacer lo propio en cuanto a las calles públicas cantonales respecto al tránsito vehicular y su mantenimiento, pues se evidencia de lo informado que hay cierta problemática por el alto tránsito de vehículos y maquinaria pesada, aunada al mal estado de la calle que separa la zona industrial de los residenciales vecinos, que independientemente de quien sean los actores productores, es lo cierto que son su responsabilidad.

VI.- En cuanto a la alegada contaminación de los recursos hídricos que sí es un elemento nuevo, es menester señalar que la jurisprudencia de la Sala es clara en reconocer el derecho al agua como un derecho fundamental, siendo así que junto con la realización de esfuerzos serios para su otorgamiento a la población, existe el deber de las instituciones públicas de hacer un uso responsable y comedido del recurso hídrico disponible, lo cual implica la necesidad de adquirir certeza del agua susceptible de explotación –disponibilidad- garantizando su otorgamiento presente y la futura sostenibilidad del servicio, evitando que con la utilización actual del recurso se produzca un riesgo ambiental que comprometa la existencia y dotación futura del líquido. Además, la Sala ha tenido oportunidad de pronunciarse de manera contundente y detallada sobre la protección que debe otorgarse al recurso hídrico nacional, clarificando tanto el marco normativo de protección, como las instituciones que conforman el sector hídrico, reconociendo y precisando el ámbito de competencias de dichas instancias y la trascendencia de sus actuaciones en materia de otorgamiento, aprovechamiento y protección del agua. Las aguas subterráneas se han convertido en el principal medio de abastecimiento público en la región Centroamericana, ya que la mayoría de las fuentes superficiales han sido contaminadas por la acción de la persona humana. En el caso concreto de Costa Rica, se estima que aproximadamente un setenta por ciento del agua que consumen a diario los habitantes del país proviene de las aguas subterráneas, situación que hace ver la importancia de proteger este recurso. También se ha señalado que … “A diferencia de la contaminación de las aguas superficiales que suele ser patente y visible, lo que permite tomar acciones ambientales tendentes a mitigarla o erradicarla, la de las aguas subterráneas, por su propia naturaleza, suele pasar inadvertida y se hace evidente cuando ha alcanzado grandes proporciones. Los mantos acuíferos por la lenta circulación de las aguas, la capacidad de absorción del terreno y otros factores, pueden tardar mucho tiempo en mostrar la contaminación. Adicionalmente, el gran volumen de las aguas contenido hace que las contaminaciones extensas tarden un lapso prolongado en manifestarse o bien cuando se trata de contaminaciones localizadas se detectan cuando fluyen en algún sitio de contaminarse, sin embargo cuando esta se produce su regeneración puede ser extraordinariamente lenta y en ocasiones es irreversible por el alto costo de los medios para hacerlo. Está demostrado que los intentos para reparar el daño producido por contaminación a un acuífero para lograr, de nuevo, niveles de potabilidad del agua no han tenido éxito, las tecnologías para su limpieza han contribuido poco a reducir el daño y los métodos son económicamente muy elevados. A lo anterior debe agregarse la falta de infraestructura organizacional, recursos materiales, financieros y humanos, en este último caso, debidamente capacitados para evaluar, medir y, en general, monitorear la calidad de esta agua y la dimensión exacta de su contaminación. La degradación y contaminación de los mantos acuíferos le impone al legislador y a las administraciones públicas la tarea urgente e impostergable de protegerlos…” (sentencia No. 2004-1923, de las catorce horas cincuenta y cinco minutos del 25 de febrero de 2004) (véase además, entre otras, las sentencias No. 2008-012109 de las quince horas y dieciséis minutos del 5 de agosto del 2008, No. 2008-014092, de las nueve horas veintiocho minutos del 23 de setiembre de 2008 y No. 2008-015657 de las once horas cuarenta y cinco minutos del 17 de octubre de 2008). En este caso ha sido posible constatar, de todos los informes rendidos por las autoridades públicas recurridas, que el Tajo Meco no se encuentra dentro del Área de Reserva Acuífera de Puente Mulas demarcada por el AyA. Que si bien su actividad se ubica en la margen izquierda del Río Virilla, no afecta los aprovechamientos para abastecimiento público y la Zona de Reserva Acuífera del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. Además, el cañón del río Virilla actúa como una barrera negativa a las actividades que se generan en la margen izquierda de dicho río. También ha quedado plenamente demostrado que los acuíferos del Valle Central más importantes se ubican en la margen derecha del Río Virilla y los que se ubican en la margen izquierda no son zonas acuíferas de tanta relevancia. Así, aunque los materiales volcánicos que aparecen en la margen izquierda (tajo en estudio) son los mismos que la margen derecha donde se desarrollan acuíferos muy importante (Puente de Mulas), los acuíferos no son iguales, mientras en la margen derecha son muy productivos, en la izquierda debido a sus pequeñas áreas de recarga, provocan que no se encuentran saturados y solo genere acuíferos pequeños de bajo potencial. Se aclara que en la margen derecha del río Virilla afloran una gran cantidad de manantiales que se han generado en rocas lávicas fracturadas pertenecientes al acuífero de Puente de Mulas y que conjuntamente con pozos de agua son captados por el AyA. Dentro de ese contexto, no es posible, como lo alegan los recurrentes, presuponer de forma alguna que los mantos acuíferos de la zona corren riesgo alguno de sufrir contaminación por los trabajos que realiza la Constructora MECO en la zona. Lo anterior no implica claro está, que las autoridades públicas recurridas consideren haber finalizado su labor, pues deben seguir coordinando y verificando las condiciones en las cuales se otorgó la concesión, y el cumplimiento del Estudio de Impacto Ambiental, debiendo tomar además las precauciones en el caso que así amerite. Véase que el Gerente General del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA) (folios 430 a 433), recomienda que para efectos de valorar la situación actual, se deben realizar más pruebas de conductividad hidráulica y recalcular los tiempos de tránsito y la vulnerabilidad intrínseca del acuífero. Además, realizar un inventario de posibles focos de contaminación en el desarrollo de extracción del tajo y tomar medidas para no permitir la infiltración de sustancias contaminantes al acuífero. También la instalación de piezómetros en el tajo, con el objetivo de verificar el nivel de agua subterránea y su relación con las cotas o niveles de explotación de roca.

VII.- Acerca de la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos. Aducen los recurrentes que desde hace varios años la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos instaló en la zona un local comercial con bodegas, a pesar de que la zona es residencial, y por ende, no se puede ubicar industria o comercio en ese lugar. Aseguran que el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo otorgó permisos a la referida corporación, contrario a lo preceptuado en el plan regulador. Dicha empresa no ha confinado las molestias que producen sus actividades comerciales, situación que se agrava por la inercia de los recurridos que no han dado una solución efectiva al problema de contaminación que acusan. Al respecto, este Tribunal en reiteradas ocasiones ha indicado que, en consonancia con lo dispuesto en los artículos 169 y 170 de la Constitución Política, la Ley de Planificación Urbana No. 4240 del 15 de noviembre de 1968 establece la titularidad primaria en materia de planificación urbana corresponde a las municipalidades, lo cual ha sido plasmado en los artículos 15 y 19 de dicha ley. A tales entes les corresponde asumir la planificación urbana local por medio de la promulgación de los respectivos planes reguladores, haciendo efectiva la normativa que al efecto dicte el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, como institución encargada de la planificación urbana a nivel nacional. Esto último con la aclaración de que la Dirección de Urbanismo funciona como órgano asesor de las municipalidades a los efectos de preparar, aplicar y modificar el Plan Regulador municipal o local y sus Reglamentos antes de su adopción definitiva; sin embargo, ha dicho la Sala que lo expuesto debe entenderse como el límite formal de los grandes lineamientos, normas técnicas o directrices generales conforme a las cuales deben los gobiernos locales elaborar sus respectivos planes reguladores y los reglamentos de desarrollo urbano correspondientes, pues no es posible pretender que el Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano se elabore y ponga en práctica íntegramente por el Gobierno Central, sin la intervención directa de las municipalidades en esa materia. Ha estimado la Sala que tal situación atenta no sólo contra los más elementales principios de la lógica y la conveniencia, habida cuenta que se trata de los intereses particulares de cada cantón de la República, sino también contra los principios constitucionales del régimen municipal, establecido por nuestra Carta Fundamental en los artículos 168 a 175. En ese contexto, 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. Sobre la naturaleza jurídica de los planes reguladores, el criterio sostenido por esta Sala es que en razón de su contenido y de su eficacia u obligatoriedad general, debe estimarse que se trata de verdaderas normas jurídicas o leyes en sentido material, en vista de que reconoce derechos y establece obligaciones para los titulares y poseedores de los inmuebles ubicados en la circunscripción territorial del respectivo cantón. Asimismo, atendiendo al procedimiento de formación de estas regulaciones, se ha considerado que se constituye en manifestación de la democracia directa, en razón de que son elaborados y aprobados por las respectivas municipalidades, las que encuentran su razón de ser, precisamente en su conformación, esto es, por los munícipes o vecinos, en una circunscripción territorial determinada –cantón-, para la " administración de los intereses y servicios locales " (artículos 169 de la Constitución Política y 1° del Código Municipal) (véase la sentencia No. 2009-012515 de las dieciocho horas y tres minutos del 11 de agosto del 2009). Además, la ordenación urbana es una de las herramientas más importantes y trascendentales para la satisfacción de los intereses locales. Es la expresión normativa de la voluntad y de la planificación y diseño del desarrollo colectivo e individual, pero sin desprenderse del contorno nacional y de la unidad territorial y ambiental a la que pertenecen. La forma de planificar el desarrollo de actividades humanas tiene un impacto significativo en el ambiente, que podrá ser negativo o positivo según los usos y actividades que se autoricen. Ahora, en el presente caso y propiamente a la luz de las acciones u omisiones llevadas a cabo por las autoridades recurridas, se tiene que la Dirección de Urbanismo del Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, mediante nota No. UR-326 del 2 de abril de 1993, otorgó el uso de suelo a favor de Inmobiliaria Mas X Menos S.A., para la instalación de un centro de acopio para granos no perecederos y abarrotes. El uso de suelo se otorgó al considerarse que se ubicaba en una zona de crecimiento urbano según el Plan Regulador de Santa Ana, y que el terreno No. SJ 17213-91, contaba con características especiales como lo es su tamaño (5 Ha. 94.92 M2) y para lo cual los retiros mínimos debían ser 15 metros de las colindancias, frontal de 52 metros sobre la carretera principal y un retiro posterior de 35 metros, lo que permite y garantiza un confinamiento de molestias. Según se ha informado, la actividad de bodegas del Más x Menos fue autorizada con anterioridad a la publicación de los mapas de zonificación del Plan Regulador de Santa Ana, que se hizo según La Gaceta No. 137 del primero de julio del 2001, a pesar de que el Plan citado se publicó en la Gaceta No. 74 del 19 de abril de 1991. Sin embargo, por tratarse de usos existentes no conformes con la Zona Residencial de Alta Densidad, la Municipalidad de Santa Ana no ha autorizado el crecimiento o ampliación de las actividades de las bodegas del Más x Menos. Sobre esos extremos, en consonancia con lo indicado líneas atrás, es de merito señalar que constituye un asunto de mera legalidad dilucidar si los permisos que permiten la operación de las citadas bodegas, fueron otorgados conforme a Derecho, así como la prescripción o no de una eventual impugnación de éstos. Ello ha de ser ventilado ante los tribunales ordinarios, mediante el ejercicio de las acciones y los procedimientos que el ordenamiento establece con ese propósito.

VIII.- Ahora, en cuanto a la argumentada contaminación sónica, se tiene que se trata de un local comercial con una bodega pasiva donde se recibe y distribuye mercadería sin ningún tipo de procesamiento industrial, sin máquinas o equipos. Que en visita efectuada por la Oficina de Protección al Ambiente del Ministerio de Salud el 19 de febrero del 2008, no se detectaron problemas desde el punto de vista sanitario en las Bodegas del Max por Menos. Además, la medición sónica programada para el día 25 de setiembre del 2009 no se realizó debido a que la Sra. Ruth Mahecha Martínez, propietaria de la vivienda, manifestó que no era necesaria toda vez que no se estaba generando ruido en este momento, ya que es intermitente, pues los vehículos (vagonetas y vehículos de tránsito pesado), transitan con diferentes rangos de tiempo. Así como en otra visita realizada por la Dirección Regional de Rectoría de la Salud Región Central Sur del Ministerio de Salud el 25 de setiembre del 2009, no se estaba generando ruido alguno. De ello se colige que no ha sido posible determinar que las citadas bodegas sean generadoras de contaminación sónica como se argumenta por lo que no es posible endilgarle responsabilidad alguna a la empresa de derecho privado recurrida. Lo anterior no enerva la responsabilidad de la autoridades de salud de vigilar que los recurrentes no sean afectados por una posible contaminación de ese tipo pues no puede perderse de vista que es obligación del Estado que ante hechos como los acá señalados, se activen los mecanismos que sean necesarios para poner, eventualmente, a cubierto de manera anticipada el derecho a disfrutar de un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado así como el derecho a la salud, frente a posibles peligros, ello con la finalidad de, como se ha indicado, hacerlos perdurar para futuras generaciones.

IX.- En cuanto a los derechos de petición y justicia administrativa. Respecto a éstos los recurrentes alegan en el escrito de interposición del recurso, lo siguiente: “(…) Aunque presenten esta documentación no se podría obviar este recurso de amparo interpuesto, ni las múltiples cartas enviadas al Consejo Municipal firmadas por muchos de los vecinos de Bosques de Santa Ana, sobre las múltiples molestias que su empresa nos ha ocasionado por años, sin que las autoridades acojan de forma definitiva nuestro reclamo. (…) Los hechos antes expuestos, son de conocimiento del Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, la Municipalidad de Santa Ana, el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo y el Ministerio de Salud, instituciones ante las cuales se hicieron las gestiones administrativas que correspondían y algunas ante las cuales se les ha manifestado las molestias. Con el fin de terminar con la contaminación que sufrimos. Estas entidades no han resuelto los problemas expuestos y han acogido las soluciones temporales que constructora Meco y Wal Mart han ofrecido, han archivado las molestias como si las soluciones fueran definitivas, sin dar seguimiento a las acciones y sin exigir soluciones definitivas, como eliminar las fuentes del problema. Acudimos a esta Honorable Sala, porque consideramos que las instituciones recurridas violentan nuestro derecho constitucional a la salud, y el derecho a obtener respuesta definitiva, no soluciones temporales, por parte de las institucionales estatales. Consideramos que la inactividad administrativa contraviene lo dispuesto por el artículo 27 de la Constitución Política, que regula el derecho de petición y pronta respuesta. De igual manera el artículo 41 constitucional, regula que todos hemos de encontrar reparación ocurriendo a las leyes, de manera pronta, cumplida, sin denegación y en estricta conformidad con las leyes”. En punto al derecho de petición y pronta resolución, así como al de acceso a la justicia pronta y cumplida es copiosa la jurisprudencia de esta Sala, de conformidad con la cual se ha determinado que el artículo 27 de la Constitución Política consagra el derecho de petición y pronta resolución, el cual consiste en una facultad que tienen los administrados para realizar peticiones ante las autoridades públicas. Tales peticiones ante la Administración pueden dividirse en simples peticiones y las que sí tiendan a que se le reconozca o conceda algo: las primeras pueden protegerse como violación directa a los artículos 27 ó 30 constitucionales, por el simple vencimiento del plazo legal para resolver, según estipula el artículo 32 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional; las segundas, cuando no se resuelven dentro del plazo legal constituyen mora administrativa y retardo de justicia, de ahí que son amparables por violación a los artículos 27 y 41 de la Carta Magna. No obstante, de la documentación aportada por los recurrentes (folios 23, 49 a 54, 62 a 72), no es posible determinar la violación a los derechos tutelados en la normativa antes referida. Véase que esas gestiones, dirigidas a la Municipalidad de Santa Ana, se refieren a la oposición por parte de varios vecinos a una posible modificación al plan regulador que permitiría convertir los terrenos donde se ubican las empresas recurridas en zona industrial. Así como la oposición a que la Corporación de Supermercados Unidos amplié las bodegas que ya tiene en el lugar. Respecto al primer punto informó el Alcalde de Santa Ana que esa Municipalidad está trabajando en una reforma integral del Plan Regulador (folio 258). De ello se deduce que el procedimiento administrativo en sí, no ha concluido y para su resolución definitiva se hace necesario tomar en cuenta todas las gestiones, incluyendo evidentemente las antes referidas, por lo que no es posible argumentar falta de respuesta alguna. Mientras que en cuanto al otro extremo, cuya gestión fue presentada el 27 de agosto del 2004, (folio 49), informó la Secretaria General de SETENA que existe un expediente, el 732-2004-SETENA, denominado Centro de Distribución de C.S.U., en el cual se pretendía la ampliación de las bodegas, pero medió un desistimiento, por lo cual se archivó el expediente por resolución No. 2299-2005-SETENA del 6 de setiembre del 2005 (folio 173). Lo anterior significa que esa oposición carece de interés actual pues el trámite que objetaban fue desestimado desde muchos años antes que se interpusiera este amparo. Bajo ese contexto, se considera que la apuntada violación constitucional y respecto a las gestiones que se tienen documentadas, no se ha producido.

X.- Conclusión. Al no constatarse la lesión a los derechos fundamentales que alegan los recurrentes, atribuible a los accionados, se declara sin lugar este recurso, no sin antes hacer tres llamados de atención: primero, a la Ministra de Salud a fin de que verifique el cumplimiento de la orden sanitaria No. ARSSA-1583-09 dictada en contra de la Constructora MECO S.A. El segundo llamado de atención es para la Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, el Director de Geologías y Minas y el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, a fin de tomen nota de la recomendación que formuló el Gerente General del Servicio Nacional de Aguas Subterráneas, Riego y Avenamiento (SENARA), en protección al recurso hídrico de la zona. Tercero: En relación con el tránsito vehicular y el mantenimiento de las calles públicas cantonales, deberá la Municipalidad de Santa Ana adoptar las medidas necesarias para evitar molestias a los vecinos.

Por tanto:

Se declara sin lugar el recurso. Tomen nota la Ministra de Salud, la Secretaria General de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, el Director de Geologías y Minas y el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados y la Municipalidad de Santa Ana de lo indicado en el último considerando.

Ana Virginia Calzada M.

Presidenta Gilbert Armijo S. Ernesto Jinesta L.

Fernando Cruz C. Rodolfo E. Piza R.

Ricardo Guerrero P. Enrique Ulate C.