The range of benefits offered by a CBA has been widely studied in the scientific literature and at conferences to raise awareness among developers, local authorities and communities fighting the benefits of CBAs.  Melanie Majors, Executive Director of Longfellow Community Council, explained why her group`s CBA has focused heavily on urban planning. “CBAs represent what this community has in terms of priorities and challenges,” she said. “In Greater Longfellow, our priority is to have this community worth living.” The CBA contract model allows each CBA to be tailored to the needs of the municipality, the size and nature of the proposed development, as well as the relative bargaining power of community groups and the developer. The developer itself can provide benefits, or a CBA may require the developer to impose CBA provisions on its tenants, suppliers and contractors. As a general rule, CBA employment quality standards, local hiring programs and affordable housing requirements.  According to historians Chudacoff and Smith (2005), the physical “local degradation” visible during the Great Depression confirmed the link between the crisis and the cost of physical degradation to policy makers. Thus, after the Great Depression, policy makers tried to solve the “problems” of poverty and slums that manifested themselves in dense and crime-ridted neighbourhoods. These served as negative economic markers for declining real estate values, underutilization and “economic responsibility to the municipality” (Weiss, 1980). During this period, urban renewal was considered a public theme. As a general rule, negotiations begin between a CBA coalition and a developer after a project is announced, but before government approval.
However, there are examples of legal requirements of the CBA that are related to grants that impose municipal performance standards for land in certain districts. For example, developers participating in the Atlanta Beltline project who opt for the use of tax-raising funding must integrate the community`s benefits through a development or financing agreement.  This article discusses the impact of a local regulatory mechanism and how the use of an alternative to the ULURP process in New York allows residents to have a voice in the making of New York City. In Part I of this article, I will study the traditional players who have historically marked regulatory policy in New York and how this policy “makes” the city. In Part II, I will analyze the first CBA in New York and its impact on the participation and representation of local interest groups in the case of Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn. In particular, I will review the criticism of the project and say that the CBAs are capable of representing the interests of the local community, but that they were not reliable in this particular case in New York.