Cuyahoga County design team details Garfield site plan, favors 3-plus‑story configuration for new jail

Cuyahoga County officials and the county's design team presented updated plans on Oct. 29 for a proposed detention center at the Garfield site, saying the design now centers on a lower‑rise building described by architects as effectively "three and a half stories" rather than a high‑rise.

The presentation, led by managing director Mark Applebaum of Project Management Consultants and Jeff Goodale of HOK, said the current schematic balances operational needs, daylighting and staff circulation while remaining below high‑rise thresholds. "It's 3 stories with additional structure above it," Goodale said, describing the configuration the team calls the project's "sweet spot."

Why it matters: the committee has repeatedly weighed whether to prioritize a highly vertical urban building or a lower, more sprawling campus. Designers said very low single‑story plans were impractical on cost and operations grounds, and fully high‑rise solutions (over the 75‑foot high‑rise code threshold) posed elevator and security complications. The team said the Garfield site—about 72 acres in total, with buildable portions smaller—gives room for stormwater basins, on‑site transit access and horizontal expansion. Applebaum reminded the committee the project was always intended to be expandable; core services (kitchen, laundry, sally port) were sized to allow future expansion to a 2,400 rated capacity even as initial housing is planned at 1,904 beds.

Design details presented by HOK described housing units stacked along a central spine with an elevator/core and corridors to move food, medical and other services vertically and horizontally. The architects emphasized DRC (Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction) standards: "units can only be 48 beds" and Ohio guidelines set a 100‑square‑foot standard for double‑bunked cells, which affect facility size. Goodale said roughly 15–20% of beds are being planned for acute behavioral health and detox needs and that more services will be delivered within housing units (medication, video visits, recreation).

Committee members pressed on operational tradeoffs: Councilwoman Sunny Simon asked why concerns about walking distances and elevator use had not been more prominent earlier in the process; designers replied that tours of other jurisdictions and detailed stakeholder workshops over the past two years informed the current approach. Sheriff and jail staff participation was evident: interim corrections chief Nestor Rivera confirmed the current jail already uses tablets, and designers said the plan includes both video and in‑person visitation options.

Site layout and ancillary uses: the plan shows staff and public parking separated, a large vehicle sally port sized for court‑transport buses, a central utility plant intended for county maintenance use, and reuse of an existing, vacant one‑story commercial building (former Aldi) for sheriff professional development. The team also said stormwater detention could be handled on the 72‑acre property without expensive below‑grade structures.

Open items and process: presenters and council members agreed to continue frequent design updates. Applebaum said some security‑sensitive details will require executive‑session briefings. Council members asked the administration to include the county prosecutor and chief judge in future sessions; the chair said the administration would ensure their participation. Designers also committed to follow up on ancillary questions raised in the meeting (bird‑safe glazing, lists of other large jails HOK has designed, and specific test‑fit drawings that included municipal police or court footprints).

The committee did not take formal action on the design today; members said they expected additional public briefings and technical sessions before any bonding legislation is introduced.