Driving along Bragg Boulevard toward Fort Bragg, motorists might notice a brick building with red paint and a large black number 4 printed inside a white circle. Upon closer inspection, passersby may discern the building’s state of disrepair: several missing sections, exposed building materials and unfinished masonry.
Gaping holes where doors and windows should be. Exposed cement sheathing with a few pads of insulation sporadically laid over it. Steel poles left in the dirt, rusting in the sun. Piles of dirt scattered here and there. Surrounded by a chain-link fence and several “no trespassing” signs, the unfinished fire station blends in with the run-down motel beside it.
The building is Fayetteville’s new Fire Station No. 4, located about half a mile north of the intersection of Bragg Boulevard and Sycamore Dairy Road and about a mile north of the Bragg Boulevard Flea Market. When the Fayetteville City Council greenlit its construction in May 2022, the station was expected to be completed in December 2023, according to court documents. The station was intended to replace the old Fire Station No. 4, built in 1960 and in need of modernization.
The unfinished fire station is one of several recent projects the City of Fayetteville has had to pause because of issues with contractors it ultimately sued. Others include the Mazarick Park Tennis Center and the Mable C. Smith Community Center, as well as a new hotel and parking garage along Hay Street downtown.
More than a year past its completion date, the fire station is far from done. What went wrong?
The matter is now tied up in the courts. An ongoing lawsuit between the City of Fayetteville, the station’s general contractor, the architect and 14 other involved parties, including numerous subcontractors, details a cascade of alleged problems. The parties are blaming each other for everything from design flaws and defective work to project delays and payment disputes.
Events leading up to the lawsuit
The city entered into a $9.4 million contract with the W.B. Brawley Company in June 2022 for the construction of Fire Station No. 4.
After repeated delays, notices of defaults and inspection reports showing inadequate work, the city issued its first notice of default to Brawley in December 2023, when the project was supposed to be completed. The notice informed Brawley of the city’s belief it had failed to fulfill one or more significant obligations required by their agreement, according to the lawsuit. The city sent Brawley another default notice in March 2024, and officially terminated its contract with the company the following month.
In the termination letter, the city said Brawley failed to meet the construction schedule, resulting in significant project delays, and did not provide adequate manpower or resources to overcome these delays or perform the work properly. The city also said Brawley repeatedly performed defective work and failed to correct defective work in a timely manner despite receiving multiple notices. At the time the termination letter was issued, the city claimed the project was four months past its set completion date, yet only 55% to 65% done.
“Time after time, Brawley has performed defective work and failed to correct the defects,” the termination letter says. “Moreover, in several instances Brawley has proceeded to ‘cover up’ defective work before remediation or before giving the project architect an opportunity to observe any remediation to confirm that the defects were actually corrected.”
Overview of city’s complaint
The city sued Brawley on Sept. 15, 2024, over the contractor’s alleged breach of the contract. The lawsuit alleged that “Brawley’s mismanagement of the project and/or its acts or omissions otherwise, resulted in repeated and nearly continuous delays to the timely completion of the project and its interim milestones.”
The city also alleged Brawley failed to pay its subcontractors and suppliers for work and materials on the project.
In addition to suing Brawley, the city pursued legal action against Travelers, its surety bond company on the project. Surety bond companies guarantee that the company performing the service will fulfill obligations of a contract and make up for any losses if the contract is breached.
The city’s complaint states that Travelers refused to pay for the city’s losses on the breached contract. A letter from Travelers to the city, dated July 29, 2024, confirms that Travelers refused to pay the performance bond and argued that the remaining contract balance was sufficient for the city to complete the contract.
The city described Travelers’ response as “inadequate, unreasonable and unfair and made in bad faith.”
In an email from the city’s legal counsel to Travelers on August 26, 2024, the city said the remaining contract balance of $5 million was not sufficient to cover the cost of the project’s completion, which would be $9 million. Notably, this is about the same value as the initial contract with Brawley.
Brawley’s response
Brawley responded to Fayetteville’s allegations with a counterclaim against the city and the city’s architect, Stewart Cooper Newell Architects (SCNA), on Oct. 7, 2024. In the counterclaim, Brawley alleges it was not in breach of contract at the time of the termination, and that the city had instead breached the contract. The city failed to uphold its side of the agreement, Brawley claimed, by providing a poor design, not paying correctly or on time, not granting justified time extensions and ultimately terminating the contract improperly based on problems caused by its design firm.
The design, Brawley argued, was extremely complex due to the addition of various elements to the Pre-Engineered Metal Building (PEMB). A PEMB is a metal structure that has been pre-made at a factory and is shipped to a building site to be put together by the construction workers.
Brawley said cumbersome additions, including a catwalk, shoebox and training columns, weren’t compatible with the pre-manufactured design. Brawly further claimed SCNA knew the design was problematic and was warned by the prototype PEMB designer, Star Building Systems, but didn’t inform construction bidders.
“Neither Star nor any of the listed, approved PEMB manufacturers were willing to participate in the project because of these additional elements the PEMB structure, as well as how SCNA was trying to incorporate numerous architectural design elements into the PEMB structure,” the counterclaim states.
Brawley claims the design issues were further exacerbated by SCNA’s significant administration problems. SCNA allegedly refused to approve Brawley’s updated design plans on time, delayed inspection reports and blocked communication between Brawley and SCNA’s engineer of record. An engineer of record responsible for the overall design and construction of the project’s structural elements, and approving any changes to the initial design.
SCNA, in response, denied Brawley’s allegations, arguing that the firm’s design was sufficient and blaming Brawley and its subcontractors for submitting deficient designs, failing inspection and performing faulty work.
What’s next?
As all parties have refused to admit fault, the lawsuit has only become more complicated, amounting to a standoff.
W.B. Brawley has now sued 11 of its subcontractors on the project, alleging that if the company is found responsible the liability should be passed onto them for failing to perform adequate work. SCNA has done the same with its structural engineering subcontractor, Taylor & Viola Structural Engineers, trying to shield itself from legal action in the case SCNA is held liable.
The city, meanwhile, is still working with Travelers to get the bond money, according to Loren Bymer, the city’s marketing and communications director.
“We are still working with the bonding company at the moment,” Bymer told CityView last week. “We will continue the project with or without them depending on how the conversations transpire. We don’t have a definitive timeline yet, but will let you know as things progress.”
The project appears to be coming back to life. On Wednesday, CityView observed a few workers walking around the property. A City of Fayetteville truck pulled into the driveway, and the driver got out and surveyed the scene.
Government accountability reporter Evey Weisblat can be reached at eweisblat@cityviewnc.com or 216-527-3608.
Did you find this story useful or interesting? It was made possible by donations from readers like you to the News Foundation of Greater Fayetteville, a 501(c)(3) charitable organization committed to an informed democracy in Fayetteville and Cumberland County.
Please consider making a tax-deductible donation so CityView can bring you more news and information like this.
