NORTH PROVIDENCE – Town Council members say there’s no way they’ll go along with the new plan from a developer seeking to build more than 90 housing units at the former public safety complex property at 1967 Mineral Spring Ave.
North Providence Council President Dino Autiello is declaring that it’s time for a do-over after many years of back-and-forth discussions.
“It’s very simple: It’s time to just put the public safety facility back up for sale,” he told The Local Insider.
Autiello said that stance is based on the fact that the council doesn’t believe the original purchase and sale agreement signed by Mayor Charles Lombardi with developer Douglas Construction was valid, because they never voted for it.
“It’s time to move on. We tried,” he said, adding that he stands firmly behind the decision of the council to oppose the previous proposal for self-storage toward the rear of the property, especially as they’ve heard from residents how glad they are, after seeing another similar storage facility going up on Douglas Avenue, how they din’t go along with it. That Douglas Avenue facility was approved a dozen years ago before the storage boom, he said.
Autiello said they were never in favor of storage, and always wanted another plan. He and the attorney for the council were aggressive about reaching out and asking Douglas Construction and Nicholas Durgarian to bring them back a new proposal out of good faith, he said, because he had put some money into plans. He eventually came back with the proposal for 94 housing units.
“We don’t want that much housing there,” said Autiello.
Durgarian, meanwhile, characterizes the drawn-out process as councilors allowing him to spend significant money on various plans, while choosing against termination of the contract.
Autiello says the town isn’t in default on any obligations to Durgarian, as they never approved a deal with him as required by the town’s charter.
The Planning Board originally approved a master plan for self-storage at the rear of the property, away from Mineral Spring Avenue, and two commercial buildings fronting on the main thoroughfare.
Councilor Ron Baccala, who has remained the most outspoken councilor against self-storage use from the beginning, says he doesn’t know how Durgarian can tell them what he’s going to do with the property, since a sale never went through. He said he doesn’t agree with 90-plus units of housing, nor did the town originally agree to sell the property to Durgarian for that purpose.
As for the legal terms facing the town in this standoff, he’s not sure, said Baccala, but Durgarian hasn’t taken ownership of the land, and it still belongs to the town.
The council’s opposition to self-storage was correct, said Baccala, and the situation with such developments has only gotten worse since then.
The councilman said it’s time for everyone to take a deep breath and think about decades down the road, when none of them are still around, what type of development they’re going to leave for future generations to deal with. He said it’s not OK to stick future residents with an unwanted burden. If Durgarian wants to propose some type of “work, play, stay” developments with high-end condos similar to lofts developed on Branch Avenue in Providence, with retail space on the lower floors, then he would be in favor of it.
“I think that works in that area beautifully,” he said.
Durgarian didn’t respond to a request for comment this week.
Mayor Charles Lombardi said he’s been focused from the beginning on bringing in a bank and a high-end restaurant to the front spaces on Mineral Spring Avenue. He’s not the biggest fan ever of self-storage, he said, but consideration of it should center on where it is proposed. Based on his business sense and the limited impact it would have had here, sandwiched between commercial buildings and some 200 existing apartments and a group home, it would have made sense, said the mayor.
Apartments, he said, will have a far more taxing impact on services.
“What do you have that’s better?” he asked. “It went to the Planning Board and they supported it.”
Lombardi said he spoke with Baccala and told him that while he’s not a big proponent of storage, it made sense here given the low traffic expectations.
“That’s the reason I thought the commercial in the front and the two-story storage in the back was the best possible agreement the town could make for revenue,” he said.
The town has lost many thousands of dollars in revenue as a result of this project not moving forward in the six years since he signed a purchase and sale agreement with Durgarian, he said.
Tax Assessor Angelina Broccoli provided numbers this week showing what the revenues would have been had the property been developed.
Because the land and buildings on it are town-owned, they are currently tax-exempt, she said. Overall taxes lost in 2024 and 2025 were $132,808, and in 2026, $69,164, for a combined $201,873 over three years. For 2022 and 2023, the total lost was $144,652, she said, for a grand total of $346,625.
Factoring in development of storage, restaurant, and bank, she said, the total lost revenue from 2022-2026 would be $507,073.
Town officials have been in agreement that the property represents a significant opportunity that shouldn’t be missed to generate future tax revenue while creating a development that helps the town.
