Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Incentives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Concord hears request for 3-year, 85% economic development grant from Nickelock Paving
Summary
Nickelock Paving requested a three-year, 85% economic development grant tied to a planned 30-job manufacturing project in Concord; city staff presented project investment, job and revenue estimates during a public hearing, with further review and questions from council.
Nickelock Paving Stones LLC asked the Concord City Council on Tuesday to renew a three-year, 85% economic development grant for a proposed manufacturing facility at 3010 Newtown Way SW that the company says would create 30 full‑time jobs and represent an estimated $10,550,820 investment in real and personal property.
The request was presented during a public hearing by a representative identified as James of Cabarrus Economic Development, who said the company “has been a leading manufacturer and retailer of premium hardscape supplies for more than 50 years.” James said the project would include “the manufacturing of concrete pavers, splitting of retaining walls and other landscape products for manufacturing wholesale distribution” and that the proposed average wages for the new positions would be above the current county average wage.
Council was told the current request reflects a reduced investment estimate compared with the company’s 2023 projection. James said the company’s 2023 estimate had been about $22 million and that the city’s analysis for this renewal is based on an updated $10.5 million projection. He provided an estimated three‑year grant amount of $98,926 and said the net revenue to the city during the grant term is “over 17,000.”
The matter was presented as a public hearing “pursuant to an NG CNC general statute 1 58 7 dot 1,” language used by the mayor when opening the hearing. No formal vote or motion on the grant appeared in the record of the meeting excerpt provided. Council members asked no substantive follow‑up questions during the segment captured in the transcript.
Next steps described by staff would typically include council consideration of the grant ordinance or incentive agreement following the public hearing; the transcript does not record a final council decision or a motion on this item during the excerpt.
The council meeting record shows the project location, estimated job creation, investment figures and the proposed grant percentage and term as the central facts under consideration. The transcript does not include written terms of any incentive agreement, performance requirements, or an executed vote approving or denying the grant.
