Thompson Center: Will we sell it, lose it? Or figure out a way to forget it

My father has devoted his professional life to architecture and construction and has had a hand in the erection of several prominent Chicago downtown structures.
 

Old state building will live longer than Thompson Center

Which is how I can claim to have set foot inside the building now known as the Thompson Center (although it once also carried the brand of State of Illinois Center) long before its official opening in 1985.

HE WORKED FOR one of the companies involved in the building’s erection (keep your silly giggle to yourself) and I remember the day he took me along to the construction site.

I still remember walking around the grounds (while wearing a helmet) and checking out the development of a frame for what is a 16-story building. I even got to walk along a steel beam for a few feet without seriously injuring myself. Yes, I'm pretty sure that things are more stringent these days and somebody would be in serious trouble if my father permitted me to try to do that today.

I also can remember my father taking me along during the renovation of the Chicago Hilton & Towers Hotel (and seeing the luxury rooms stripped down to the drywall) and to the dedication ceremonies for the building we will always think of as the Sears Tower – the original Mayor Daley being present is my lasting memory.

But in my mind, that one day at Clark and Randolph at what was yet to become the state government building in Chicago sticks in my mind the most. And is a large part of the reason why the Thompson Center has always been a building of significance in Chicago. To me, at least.

WHICH IS WHY a part of me is astounded at the negative reputation the structure has developed (other than that some people will feel compelled to whine about anything). And at reports that the building that has barely been with us for a third of a century is endangered. The former state government building in Chicago is approaching a century of age, and no one is talking about tearing down the Bilandic Building (as it's now known).

Gov. Bruce Rauner has made it clear he’d just as soon be rid of the structure, claiming state government would somehow make money off its sale and demolition. Although there also is a sense he thinks that doing away with a Chicago base for state government would reduce the Democratic Party influence over the state.

Because there are those people who get all worked up that Springfield isn’t treated as the be-all-and-end-all of the state of Illinois. Which makes this yet another issue that Rauner and Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, quarrel over.

Does 'Big Jim' need new namesake building?

The building’s future also came up last week when the Landmarks Illinois group issued its list for this year of historic structures that are in danger of disappearing.

THE BUILDING COULD be lost because of the state officials who don’t think it worth maintaining, and the group said, “Demolition as part of a sale devalues the civic and cultural advances displayed in (architect) Helmut Jahn’s groundbreaking post-modern design and the opportunities for a development that could integrate the building.”

Personally, I always thought there was something intriguing about the blue-and-salmon color scheme and the outer shell of the building. Its shape stands out amidst the landscape of downtown Chicago. Nobody would mistake the Thompson Center for any other building.

Although from the inside, the building can appear to be a bit shrill and sometimes cheaply constructed. And sound does tend to echo about the building, making it possible for people on the upper floors to hear the ruckus of those who stop off in the basement concourse level to check out the mass of fast food available there.

The latter observations were ones I made in later years when, while working for the now-defunct City News Bureau, I was once a reporter-type person assigned to the press room that used to exist on the building’s ninth floor.

I ONCE LEANED on a wall in just such a way that the drywall collapsed – and a palm-sized hole in the wall was developed. Although I have to admit that when state Central Management Services crews found out, they quickly repaired the damage.

So what is destined to happen to the structure? Will it merely become a part of a list including the Sherman House hotel of what used to exist across the street from Chicago City Hall?

Thompson Center's moment of glory?

Will future generations watch the 1986 film “Running Scared” (starring actors Billy Crystal and Gregory Hines as two of the most unconvincing Chicago cops you'll ever see) and wonder how anyone could dream up the scenes (cocaine bags being dropped from 16 stories high onto the floor of the rotunda) shot at the Thompson Center?

And what will become of Monument with Standing Beast – as in the DuBuffet sculpture whose odd appearance has long confounded people as they enter the structure where “the people’s business” is done in the Second City. Perhaps it will get historic landmark status -- reminding people of what once was at the site long after the structure has been demolished and turned into just another generic high-rise building

  -30-

Losing the Thompson Center?

We’re still a long ways away from seeing the Thompson Center state government building in Chicago torn down and turned into an annex of the Trump Building a few blocks away.

Will Bilandic Bldg. have longer legacy than Thompson?

After all, the Illinois General Assembly would still have to sign off on any plan to sell the structure to a real estate developer – who could then tear down the 30-year-old building and erect something else (possibly gaudy) in its place.

CONSIDERING THE CURRENT mood of the state Legislature when it comes to all things gubernatorial, it wouldn’t surprise me if the Democratic majorities that dominate both the state Senate and Illinois House of Representatives were to reject the plan purely out of spite.

It will be disguised by the Chicago-based legislators as a desire to maintain the physical presence of Illinois state government within the state’s (by far) most significant city.

Which actually wouldn’t be a bad reason. For a part of me wonders how much Gov. Bruce Rauner is motivated to take this action by a desire to reduce the level of influence that Chicago has over state government operations.

Take away a building that some view as an alternative work place to the Statehouse in Springfield and make some think that the capital city itself doesn’t matter much.

SCATTER THOSE STATE employees who do need to be Chicago-based around various downtown buildings so they quit thinking of themselves as a force. And you also strengthen the morale of those state workers at the Capitol – who often complain about being dissed by their Chicago-based colleagues.

This intersection won't be as political if Gov. Rauner gets his way

I’m sure that when Rauner earlier this week threw out the suggestion that some Chicago-based employees would have their jobs transferred to Springfield, it burned the bottoms (so to speak) of many state workers who would never accept such a move.

Which could make for a round of hiring to get downstate-oriented workers within state government! Politically, it helps make sense to bolster the level of influence Rauner would have over state government.
 

Remember the 'cocaine' scattered on the floor?

Although in terms of providing actual service to constituents (which theoretically is the only reason government exists to begin with), it’s kind of short-sighted.

NOW AS SOMEONE who once did a two-year stint representing the now-defunct City News Bureau in the press room at the state building (when the structure was only about five years old and also got a tour of by my father back when it was a construction site), I’ll admit I’ll miss the building. The same as I miss the old Sun-Times Building with all its own barge-like lack of style right on the Chicago River.

But I’ll also admit to noticing the level of decrepitness the structure has achieved in recent years. Famed architect Helmut Jahn admits his concept of an urban take on the open-air space under a Capitol rotunda has been allowed to go to seed. I don’t know if I’d feel the same level of sentiment if I had to work there now.

But that doesn’t mean the state shouldn’t have a strong physical presence in Chicago. Although I wonder if this means the Bilandic Building (that houses the appellate and Supreme courts in Chicago) could revert back to its old “State of Illinois Building” status.

With a few stray agencies scattered around the Loop. And most people thinking of state government solely when they visit their local driver testing facility to get their licenses or license plates renewed.

SO PERHAPS IN the long run, it won’t impact many people. Although I wonder what happens when a future governor who thinks a little more long-range than the current occupant of the Executive Mansion does decides Illinois needs its own building in Chicago?

Will we be scouring the city for a location – when the perfect site right across the street from both City Hall and the old State Building is taken by a developer who turns it into an over-glorified shopping center with condos on top?

A historic relic of the future?

And if the Thompson Center really does disappear, then what happens to that black-and-white blob of a sculpture by Jean Dubuffet that has sat outside the structure for decades.

Auction it off to the highest bidder (some overly-wealthy individual who’s willing to buy anything)? Or perhaps move it to the Chicago History Museum – put it in the entrance right before you get to see the dioramas of “historic” Chicago.

  -30-