This study performs a textual and comparative analysis of the plans and policies which guide redevelopment in the District of Columbia's Southwest neighborhood. It does so in an attempt to resolve conflicts between the public and District officials and developers over how development ought to occur, with each asserting that their respective plans are in the best interests of the public. It takes as its starting point two central questions: 1) to what degree are the core plans and policies sustainable according to international standards? And 2) what are the primary challenges to sustainable development in the District? By comparing the plans and policies to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal through the theoretical lenses of critical sustainability and Lefebvrian "right to the city" thought, this study finds that the District's plans do not adequately reflect basic standards of sustainability, especially with regard to the social equity pillar of sustainability. It also finds that collective decision-making processes result in plans which are more deeply sustainable, but that such plans are generally not afforded the legal backing given plans developed more tightly by officials and other elite stakeholders. It ends with thoughts on how the District might leverage collective decision-making processes to improve the ability of its plans and policies to meet the social, economic, and environmental well-being of its citizens.