On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs. We agree with the Appellate Division that a declaratory judgment action is an inappropriate vehicle to resolve this controversy because a pure matter of law is not involved and the administrative process has already been commenced (see, Hewlett Assoc. v City of New York, 57 N.Y.2d 356, 363; Harcel Liqs. v Evsam Parking, 48 N.Y.2d 503, 506; Slater v Gallman, 38 N.Y.2d 1).
Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE and HANCOCK, JR.