Does the Pacific Park Conservancy, which governs Atlantic Yards open space, have Directors from "civic groups active in park matters," as required? Unlikely.

As I've written (link), questions persist about the oversight of "Pacific Park," the 2.7-acre (for now) open space on the southeast block of the project, which has required significant maintenance in less than a year, due to--take your pick--the inability to manage dogs, or the inability of dog owners to stay off

Aug. 15, 2024 (top), April 25, 2025 (bottom).
Photos: Norman Oder

the grass.

The Pacific Park Conservancy, at least for now, has a somewhat distracted and distanced main Member, Atlantic Yards Venture, the project developer controlled by Greenland USA. 

The latter has since November 2023 been on the verge of losing six railyard development sites to foreclosure, though it still controls B1, the unbuilt tower once slated to loom over the arena, and Site 5, the parcel catercorner to the arena, and wants to be part of a much larger project there.

Who's in charge?

As I wrote in 2019, according to the bylaws, the Conservancy initially has two Members, the Pacific Park Owners Association, which represents owners of extant buildings, and Atlantic Yards Venture.

For several years, until all eight acres of open space are completed, the developer will appoint seven directors, while the Owners Association will appoint just one. After the project is completed, the Association appoints up to eight directors.

Well, now. Even though the developer has appointed directors representing other landlords/developers,  there's something of a vacuum, since Greenland has pulled back.

July 12, 2025

What about the public?

There's even more of a vacuum because the Directors who are supposed to represent the public have either not been appointed or drifted away.

That includes the three local Community Boards, and a non-voting Director, representing the city Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR).

Nor have "civic groups active in park matters" gotten much of a voice, since that seems to have been reinterpreted or, less charitably, downplayed.

Let's back up.

According to the 2009 Modified General Project Plan, from Empire State Development (ESD), the state authority that oversees/shepherds the project:

The Conservancy or other not-for-profit entity will be governed by a board, which will include representatives of the Project Sponsors, civic group(s) active in park matters, the owners of surrounding properties and, on an ex officio basis, the local community boards and DPR. The initial program and planning for the open space will be subject to the reasonable approval of ESDC, consistent with the Design Guidelines and any material modifications thereto will be subject to the reasonable approval of the City.(Em

(Emphases added)

Similarly, the Conservancy's 2017 filing with the Internal Revenue Service states:

Conservancy Board of Directors will include Public Representatives 

In accordance with the MGPP, the Conservancy is governed by its Board of Directors ("Board"), which includes representatives of the public, through appointments by the local Community Boards, and a local governmental department, through an appointment of a non-voting member of the Board by the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation ("DPR"), as well as civic groups active in park matters, to be appointed by ESDC. The Conservancy's governance was established so as to ensure that the operation ofPacific Park is for the benefit ofthe general public. 

Involved in parks?

The bylaws state that "Up to two (2) Directors, who must be involved in civic group(s) active in park matters at the time of their appointment, shall appointed by ESD."

So, does the Pacific Park Conservancy Board have representatives of "civic group(s) active in park matters"? I'm not so sure about that.

Evidence suggests it has--or, at least, has had--representatives who have experience in park matters. That's not the same as representing civic groups.

As I wrote in 2019, ESD's two appointees were Alyson Beha, the authority's VP of Real Estate Development & Planning, an urban planner who once worked at New Yorkers for Parks, and Suma Mandel, a lawyer who was then General Counsel and VP of Strategic Partnerships for Brooklyn Bridge Park.

Earlier this year, I compared the boards from 2022 and 2023, drawing on the Conservancy's IRS filings.

Despite superficial differences, the two lists actually pretty close, since only nine active directors are described both years, with five seven additional directors and officers oddly listed in 2022 as "former."


The "former" include a representative of the Department of Parks and Recreation, Martin Maher.

We don't know the current list of Directors because it hasn't been made public by ESD. The Conservancy doesn't have a website. I'll update what I learn upon the next public filing.

Previous discussion

ESD's David Viana, Assistant VP, Community Relations, said at a March meeting of the (purportedly) advisory Atlantic Yards Community Development Corporation (AY CDC) that ESD had "two representatives, myself and one other person" on the Conservancy, though he didn't specify the other person.

Does Viana, an urban planner, have experience with parks? Surely. 

Does he represent "civic groups active in park matters"? Unlikely. 

Even if he does, would his job be more to represent ESD's interest--harmony with the developers and owners--than those civic groups?

At that meeting, Viana was reminded that the Conservancy is supposed to have representatives from DPR and the three Community Boards. Were they on the board?

"Outreach has been done to them previously," Viana said, not specifying the year. "They have not sent representatives."

Let's see if we get an update at the next meeting of the AY CDC, which--after a postponement--presumably should be scheduled soon.