Impact studies underscore the strong divide on Sixers arena. City Hall must now step into the breach. | Editorial

If either the Philadelphia 76ers or opponents of the team’s plans for a new downtown arena hoped the release of studies exploring the impact of the proposed development would conclusively end the two-year-long debate over the project, they were disappointed.

Instead, the studies released Monday — detailing the likely economic, transportation, design, and cultural repercussions of building the arena in Market East — provide both advocates and detractors of the planned venue with data that support their preexisting positions.

In the absence of any conclusive data in the studies for or against the project, this moment is an opportunity for Mayor Cherelle L. Parker and City Council to act as brokers in a compromise that would enhance Market Street while protecting adjacent residents and businesses.

For opponents of the arena, the strongest case against has always been the potential negative impact on Chinatown, a distinctive and beloved neighborhood that has been the site of a series of disruptive construction projects throughout its history.

As Inquirer reporting and the impact studies make clear, Chinatown business owners and residents are united in apprehension at the idea of being negatively impacted by another megaproject on their borders.

» READ MORE: Sixers arena proposal should not be a zero-sum game | Editorial

While some Chinatown businesses stand to benefit from the additional foot traffic and customers an arena would bring, most would not, the studies found. Additionally, the neighborhood has a high number of business owners, landlords, and customers who live in the suburbs and drive into Chinatown to shop, work, and socialize, which would be impacted by additional vehicle traffic.

Community members also do not want the neighborhood to lose its distinctive cultural elements and become just another restaurant district. They want it to remain a complete neighborhood where people with limited English proficiency can live and work without being otherized.

Supporters of the arena, meanwhile, will point to the studies to buttress their arguments for building the venue. The design study includes some constructive criticism of the project but ultimately concludes that a sports and concert facility is appropriate for the location in size and scale. It also notes improvements the development team has already made to the proposal.

The transportation study found that there is more than enough parking in the immediate vicinity to handle incoming arena traffic. It also found that locating an arena in Center City atop Jefferson Station would increase the share of guests arriving via public transportation while advising that the team include the cost of transit fares in ticket prices to encourage use.

Locating the arena in Center City — within walking distance of hundreds of thousands of residents with disproportionately high disposable incomes and two of the largest employment centers in the region — would lead to more people getting to and from events on foot, something that rarely happens at the South Philadelphia sports complex. Between fans taking SEPTA and others walking, thousands of fewer cars could be on the road for games and events at 76 Place at Market East when compared with the Wells Fargo Center.

The studies also suggest that the Philadelphia media market can sustain two arenas and would attract another 50-plus ticketed events to the city. The report cites other markets that have two or more successful arenas, including Minneapolis and Phoenix.

That finding runs counter to the claims of Comcast Spectacor, which owns the Wells Fargo Center — where the Sixers are currently a tenant — and has said the Philadelphia market is too small and too poor to sustain two similar venues.

Despite its opposition to the proposal, it is ultimately Comcast Spectacor that set the city on the path to two arenas. The company sold the Sixers for $300 million in 2011 to venture capitalists Josh Harris and David Blitzer. The team is now worth nearly $4 billion, according to Forbes magazine, and the organization is eager to own its own venue.

Still, solutions for design and transportation don’t answer the significant questions around the impact on Chinatown.

These impacts do not mean the city should let the team — and the millions of dollars of revenue they already generate for the city — move to Camden, which is waiting in the wings to grab a rebound should Philadelphia miss its shot.

But the negative effects on Chinatown mean City Council and the Parker administration can’t just say yes to the arena, either.

» READ MORE: A wake-up call for Comcast Spectacor’s Sports Complex dream proposal | Editorial

Instead, city officials should facilitate discussions among stakeholders. Specific concerns should be addressed, and mitigation strategies outlined. Any promises or concessions from the team would then be codified into law, with their certificate of occupancy as a condition of compliance.

As Councilmember Mark Squilla said in an interview with WHYY recently, the city has policy tools at its disposal to help Chinatown thrive into the next century. Many of these tools should be deployed with or without an arena, while others might require the Sixers to cover the cost.

After all, it is in the city’s interest for both Market Street and Chinatown to thrive.

If increased traffic and economic activity on Market Street is a threat to the existing business and residential community in Chinatown, then these threats must be mitigated. Bringing economic activity back to Market Street has been a civic priority since the Rizzo administration. Considering the street’s history as the historic center of commerce for the region, there must be a way to ensure profitable investment along the corridor and existing neighborhoods can coexist.

The long-awaited studies include no road maps to that elusive destination, so leadership from City Hall must now point the way.