Limited Time Offer. Become a Founder Member Now!

Lakeville board conditionally approves settlement options in 9 Cross Street bedroom dispute

October 16, 2025 | Town of Lakeville, Plymouth County, Massachusetts


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Lakeville board conditionally approves settlement options in 9 Cross Street bedroom dispute
The Town of Lakeville Board of Health on Wednesday granted conditional approval for one of two settlement proposals in ongoing litigation over the number of bedrooms at 9 Cross Street, and set conditions for how the case can be resolved without a further contested hearing.

Town counsel Greg Corvo told the board the matter is in active litigation and that a judge had taken the issue under advisement after an injunction hearing earlier in the day. The dispute centers on whether a room the board has classified as a bedroom may legally be treated as a home office; the septic system as installed and inspected was designed for a three-bedroom dwelling while earlier plans and a real-estate listing had identified four bedrooms.

The board approved two alternative settlement routes, subject to documentation, inspection and review by the chair and the health agent: (A) the homeowners would alter interior features so the room lacks privacy (for example, expanding the opening to six feet, removing inner closet walls and leaving no door) and record a deed restriction limiting the property to three bedrooms in perpetuity; or (B) the owners would retrofit the septic with an innovative alternative denitrifying system approved by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and by the health agent, allowing the property to remain a four-bedroom home if plans and installation are approved.

Nicholas Gomes, attorney for the property owner, told the board the parties are seeking a short timeline so a family hoping to move in can finalize plans. “Let us work on the feasibility on our side,” Gomes said, asking for the shortest period to return to the board with a formal proposal.

Cam Goldstein, the listing agent for the prospective buyer, and the prospective buyer, Crystal Assayas, were present; Goldstein and Gomes described both technical and nontechnical options the parties were considering. Town counsel and board members said they would ask the court for a one-week postponement so the parties can pursue settlement negotiations.

The board’s motion allowed conditional approval of either option provided that (1) the chair and the health agent (identified in the meeting as Ed and the board health agent) review and sign off on the final agreement if the work and paperwork are completed before the board’s next meeting; (2) the as-built drawings and a final inspection are completed before a certificate of compliance is issued; and (3) a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice would be filed in exchange for the board’s acceptance of one of the settlement options. Board members said they would ratify any action taken by the chair and the health agent at the next meeting if necessary.

Earlier in the meeting the board also voted to continue discussion of 9 Cross Street into executive session after other business, then returned to the public record to take the conditional-approval vote described above. The board agreed that if the physical work and documentation are completed before the next meeting, the chair and health agent may approve and the board will ratify that action. The board emphasized it would not issue a certificate of compliance without receiving as-built drawings and conducting a final inspection.

Votes at a glance
• Reappointment: The board recommended that the Select Board reappoint Shailene Terrero as shared-service health specialist for Oct. 1, 2025–Sept. 30, 2026 (motion approved).
• Minutes: The board approved minutes as typed for July 16, Aug. 6 and Sept. 3, 2025 (motions approved separately).

All motions were taken by voice vote and recorded as in favor by members present.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Massachusetts articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI