Federal lifeline for Century, Consumers buildings might be a millstone instead

The federal government announced last week that it has begun the search for someone to preserve and redevelop downtown's dilapidated Century and Consumers buildings.

The move should signal a reversal of fortune for the two landmark skyscrapers — the feds originally wanted to wreck the buildings to create a security buffer for the nearby Dirksen Federal Building — but we have our doubts.

That's because the invitation to developers takes security concerns the federal government had previously used to justify demolishing the buildings and — wrongly, we think — repackages them as redevelopment guidelines.

As a result, what a developer can't do with the buildings is clearer than what they can do. And that means demolition or not, the result is likely the same: turning the southwest corner of State and Adams street into a pedestrian dead zone for the sake of the Dirksen.

"It really stops redevelopment of any significance," Chicago Loop Alliance President and CEO Michael Edwards said of the guidelines.

Pain in the appendix

The Century and Consumers buildings, at 202 and 220 S. State St., are among Chicago's earliest surviving skyscrapers.

Built in 1915, the 16-story Century building was designed by the noted architecture firm Holabird & Roche. The 22-story Consumers building, designed by Jenny, Mundie & Jensen, another leading firm, was completed in 1913.

The U.S. General Services Administration bought the buildings 20 years ago under a plan to put federal offices there but ended up leaving the skyscrapers empty — and shoddily maintained — after security issues about the structure and their proximity to the Dirksen were first raised.

The vacant buildings have cast a pall on State Street since.

By the way, the GSA received $52 million in 2022 through a federal earmark from Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin to demolish the buildings in favor of a landscaped security plaza.

But get this: The cash, which was awarded for that specific use, can't be legally repurposed to redevelop the buildings in a security-conscious way.

Meanwhile, the GSA's splashy request for qualifications for a developer to enter a long-term lease for the site talks up the city and downtown as a prime location with universities, big business, and connectivity to O'Hare and Midway airports.

"This RFQ is an excellent opportunity for a developer to make a strong impact in this iconic district of Chicago," GSA Deputy Regional Commissioner Robert Green said in a statement announcing the developer search. "The GSA is focused on providing a win-win solution for the community and the federal government.”

Sounds good. Then the agency undercuts all of this with the document's overly restrictive, security-centered Appendix A.

According to the appendix, the feds "must retain ownership interests [in the buildings] to achieve its security objectives, as determined by the government in its discretion."

And there's more. The buildings can't be reused as residences, hotels, places of worship, medical purposes — or any use "that requires access to outdoor areas."

The buildings' roofs can only be used for repair and maintenance. Workers and materials destined for the roof have to be cleared by security.

The GSA also wants no sight lines from the building into the Dirksen, the Quincy Street ramp leading to and from the courthouse, or Quincy itself — even though the east/west street-turned-plaza runs right by the south side of the Consumers building and is accessible to the public from State Street.

The government also seeks to prevent parking within the site and wants to require the federal law enforcement to have access to the rehabbed buildings' security system.

So a developer can't own the building or put in uses most likely to benefit downtown — all while Big Government watches from a quarter-block to the west.

What developer would agree to this? What tenant would pay to be located here?

The risk is the historic buildings would be saddled with non-public uses that turn them into little more than upturned bricks that add no vitality and life to State or Adams streets — or they sit empty for years more, awaiting a developer willing to jump and shimmy through all those federal hoops.

Responses to the RFQ are due Jan. 31. But the GSA would do well to think hard about the removal of Appendix A — stat.

Send letters to letters@suntimes.com

Get Opinions content delivered to your inbox. Sign up for our weekly newsletter here.

More about the Sun-Times Editorial Board at chicago.suntimes.com/about/editorial-board