The opinion
Jerome A. Mirabito, Esq. City Attorney, Fulton
You informed us that a property owner in your city made application for a zoning change, which was fully processed in accordance with the procedure established by the city charter and was denied. The same person, without change in circumstances, desires to make a second application for the same zoning change. You ask whether the city must entertain the second application. There is no provision in the charter permitting the filing of a second application.
Security of persons and property require that determinations by administrative agencies should be given as much finality as is reasonably possible (see, Matter of Evans v Monaghan, 306 N.Y. 312 , 323-324 [1954], cited in Venes v Community School Board, 43 N.Y.2d 520 [1978]). The rule of res judicata is applicable to administrative determinations as well as to the courts whenever consistent with the purposes of the tribunal, board of officer ( ibid .). The common law doctrine of res judicata is designed to prevent the relitigation by the same parties of the same claims or issues ( Venes v Community School Board, supra ). Departures from the rule in the administrative law field appear to arise from the peculiar necessities of a particular case or the nature of the precise power being exercised, rather than from any general distinction between courts and administrative tribunals ( Matter of Evans v Monaghan, supra ).
In our opinion, the city department with jurisdiction over requests for zoning changes need not entertain the same application a second time. The matter has been decided after a public hearing, you indicate that there has occurred no change in circumstances to warrant a new application, and the charter does not authorize a second application. We note that the property owner may appeal an administrative decision to the courts in accordance with Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules.