The story of the 79 condominium units proposed for 152 Three Mile Harbor Road and 33 West Drive lived many lives in just the week since it was presented to the East Hampton Town Board on Dec. 2, but it appears now to be fully dead.
On Monday afternoon, Kirby Marcantonio, one of the four partners who were in contract to buy the land, and who then sought to have it rezoned, said in a phone call that he wouldn't be going forward with the project.
"The four of us finally had a chance to get together Monday morning and think about all we had done and put into the project. The majority felt, and I agreed, that this was something that was probably a bit outside of our desired goals in life. We simply agreed that this was not the right time to do the project."
As for the land?
"We told the sellers that things haven't panned out the way we hoped," he said. "It's only fair to let them find some other way of using that property. It might have cost us a little money, but we hope it hasn't cost them any inconvenience."
By Monday afternoon, an online petition against the project, started by Carolyn Snyder, owner of Round Swamp Farm, had gathered more than 2,700 signatures, after the town board considered last week a proposed rezoning of the two parcels near her national bicentennial farm (family-owned for 200 years, that is).
The petition claimed that "a private developer" — Mr. Marcantonio and his partners — "has been working behind the scenes with the Town of East Hampton" and has been "exploiting a loophole in the Town Code that will allow them to destroy a 175-year-old farmhouse, acres of centuries-old trees, and meadowland."
Saying action was happening "behind the scenes" seemed to place a sinister spin on the usual process.
"The Planning Department welcomes inquiries," Tina Vavilis LaGarenne, the town's planning director, said in an email. "Applicants, developers, and residents are all welcome to speak with our planners to discuss their projects and questions. For larger or more complicated projects, we encourage discussion, and preliminary application meetings are commonplace."
As of Monday afternoon, she could not confirm that Mr. Marcantonio's plans had been officially pulled.
Tied to the rezoning petition requested by Mr. Marcantonio were plans to build a 79-unit condominium complex with 160 parking spaces and its own sewage treatment plant. Perhaps adding to the conspiratorial vibe was the fact that Mr. Marcantonio's three partners in the project, known as Tanbark Creek L.L.C., were never named.
His group was in contract to buy the land, roughly six and a half acres in all, for $5.5 million and estimated it would cost another $30 million to develop the housing. (Tanbark Creek was a deep creek.)
He refused to name them in an email exchange this week, allowing only that "the other partners are friends of mine. No stellar names, no hedge fund creeps, no billionaires. Just people who know that helping to do good here can be a good business model."
Also caught in the confusion over the application was Councilman Ian Calder-Piedmonte, who found himself confronted by angry residents in the hallway after the Dec. 2 meeting when he hadn't given the initial proposal a hard no. He said his position on Mr. Marcantonio's original plan was more nuanced than he was given credit for.
"Before any decision could be made, questions from the planning department, the attorney's office, and the public would have needed to be addressed," he wrote in a text. "The planning board would have been required to provide formal comments, and a properly noticed public hearing would have had to be held before the town board."
"It was encouraging to see strong public engagement and to hear the community's concerns," he continued. "This is the purpose of public meetings, and in this case the process worked and led to an outcome aligned with the public's input."
Supervisor Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, Councilwoman Cate Rogers, and Councilman David Lys indicated at that meeting that they weren't interested in changing the zoning on the parcels to give Mr. Marcantonio's project any life beyond its drawings.
Ahead of a meeting last Thursday, the town even decided to issue a statement to try and clarify matters.
"At the Dec. 2, 2025, work session, the town board paused discussion on the request to consider an affordable housing overlay district at 152 Three Mile Harbor Road and 33 West Drive," wrote Patrick Derenze, the town's public information officer. "There was no consensus on the town board to move forward with this petition. As a result, there is no further action or discussion planned."
Nonetheless, at that meeting last Thursday, after yet another resident, Michelle Clark, spoke out against the project, Mr. Marcantonio, speaking during its public portion, urged the board to reconsider the petition and to hold a public hearing.
"Here we are eight months later, tens of thousands of dollars spent, drawings done, engineering and traffic studies finished, and we're told, without a public hearing, that basically we should stop the process. Why is it that we should not go forward to a public forum?" he asked.
He also announced changes to the project. "Instead of 79 units, we'll go for 60. That's the code," he said. Fewer units meant less land was needed, and he proposed only one access to the development, at 152 Three Mile Harbor Road, removing the possibility of extending West Drive. With an extra acre and a half of land, he suggested it might be taken up by an "up-and-coming entrepreneurial farmer." Finally, instead of creating 100-percent work-force housing, he said the developers would "sell 20 percent of the project for truly affordable housing, as per the town's regulations."
"I believe that we've acknowledged the issues, we've responded to the neighborhood's fear, and improved the product," he said. "I look forward to a full discussion under those terms in the coming weeks at a public hearing."
But that was all before the project was canceled on Monday.
Mr. Marcantonio said his other work-force housing project at 350 Pantigo Road is still on track.
"It's in front of the planning board on Dec. 17, and hopefully we'll get preliminary approval that night," he said. "We don't expect any big changes. We own that one. It's ours, and we'll be pushing that son of a gun."
