This thesis will argue that Rivertown has failed to meet expectations because it is part of a broader neoliberal development system that privileges corporate and wealthy interests while in the development process and does not directly address the needs of the community. This development model continues to be perpetuated due to a powerful urban regime that can extract resources from vulnerable communities while using the normative rhetoric of economic progress to justify their extraction. The Rivertown development in Chester, Pennsylvania, has failed to live up to expectations and provide benefits to its community despite receiving millions in public funding. At the heart of this failure is the neoliberal development model, where financial shareholders are prioritized and supported by public funding while the primary stakeholders, those living in the community being developed, are marginalized. Across America, especially in post-industrial urban cores, predatory development is crippling any chance of a sustainable future. By critiquing Rivertown, this paper hopes to offer a counter to the largely uncontested neoliberal policies and the systems that sustain and reproduce it. It will first establish an alternative framework utilizing decolonial theory and a comparative analysis with Benton Harbor, Michigan, to analyze the policies that have led to Rivertown and understand the roles of actors and finances that were involved. Methods of research include local newspaper and public document investigation, as well as examining return on investment and employment, two of the central promises that Rivertown has failed in delivering to Chester. This thesis, while focused on Chester and Rivertown, carries the potential for a wider critique of contemporary urban development strategies and pinpoint how they are being reproduced.