Kingston’s Noise Ordinance Exists But Is It Being Enforced?

Click on image to hear construction noise after 6:00pm.

By Rebecca Martin

Imagine being jolted awake at 7:00 a.m. on a weekday by the sound of heavy machinery and the persistent, high-pitch truck backup alarms—not once, but week after week for months. This is the reality for at least one Midtown Kingston resident, who is dealing with the ongoing noise from new construction in their neighborhood. They report that construction often begins before the city’s legally allowed start time, disrupting early mornings and weekends. The noise ordinance specifies the maximum decibel levels allowed, yet construction regularly exceeds those limits on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. Despite filing complaints with the Kingston Planning Department, contacting their Common Council representative, and calling the Kingston Police Department multiple times, the noise persists.

Under Kingston’s municipal code, construction is allowed to take place Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., excluding holidays. If a developer or contractor wishes to work outside of those hours, they must apply for a special permit and demonstrate an “unreasonable hardship” that justifies the exception. This safeguard is meant to protect residents from excessive noise and disruption during times traditionally reserved for rest.

In this case, it appears that these special permits are being issued without requiring proof of hardship, and that 7:00 a.m. start times are regularly approved. This is happening despite a previous decision by the city’s Laws and Rules Committee, which, as we understand it, reviewed and declined a proposal to change the official start time to 7:00 a.m., maintaining the 8:00 a.m. start as a standard that best serves the interests of Kingston’s residents. (Minutes from the January 2018 meeting are not readily available on the City of Kingston’s website).

These claims point to a significant gap between what the ordinance requires and how it is being implemented. The result, the resident says, has been ongoing exposure to high-decibel construction noise for 55 or more hours per week, with limited opportunities for relief. They also report calling the Kingston Police Department on multiple occasions when work began before 8:00 a.m., and that in many instances, police intervened and stopped the work, suggesting that violations had, in fact, occurred.

This situation raises broader concerns about the city’s enforcement mechanisms. Is it appropriate for the police to be solely responsible for responding to construction noise violations? Officers already carry heavy workloads, and their presence may not be the most effective or proportional response to ongoing quality-of-life issues like this. There may be a need for additional oversight, accountability, or alternative avenues of enforcement within the Building Department or other city structures.

Importantly, the Planning Department and Planning Board must ensure that construction plans are reasonable and feasible within the allowed hours and decibel levels so that “emergencies” like excessive rain in the spring do not constitute a “hardship.” Permitting exceptions without scrutiny not only undermines the ordinance, it also places the burden on residents to prove that something is wrong. 

It’s important to recognize that managing noise on construction sites—and adhering to the city’s noise ordinance hours—helps protect construction companies from fines, lawsuits, and reputational damage. The cost of doing business should include investments in site preparation and noise-reducing measures. While many construction companies worry about costs, staying compliant with noise regulations can prevent bigger problems down the road.

There is growing research on the psychological effects of chronic noise exposure, showing a strong correlation with increased stress, sleep disruption, anxiety, and even increased rates of violent crime. This isn’t just a matter of inconvenience—it’s a public health issue. 

This experience mirrors other complaints we’ve heard in recent years and highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in how construction permits are managed. The core issue remains: residents have a right to quiet enjoyment of their homes, and if city departments are issuing permits that conflict with the law—or failing to require the documentation the law demands—residents deserve to know.

We’ve seen firsthand that individual residents can drive meaningful change when it comes to noise issues. In 2021, Kingston resident Lisa Darling confronted a different kind of disruption: the relentless sound of high-pitched backup alarms coming from a nearby NYS Department of Transportation (DOT) facility operating through the night. When she first raised the issue, she was told nothing could be done. But through persistence, collaboration with neighbors, and support from local and state officials, Darling succeeded in persuading the DOT to pilot—and ultimately adopt—quieter, OSHA-approved white noise alarms. Her advocacy didn’t just bring relief to her neighborhood; it led to a policy change affecting 60 DOT facilities statewide. Her story is a powerful reminder of what’s possible when residents speak up, stay engaged, and push for solutions through the right channels.

The point isn’t to stop construction or block development. It’s to ensure that progress doesn’t come at the expense of the people who already live here. Ordinances like Kingston’s construction noise rules exist to protect public health and community livability. If they are being ignored or circumvented, then residents have every right to ask why and to demand better.

If you are experiencing similar issues, for now, you can report noise violations by calling the Kingston Police Department’s non-emergency line at (845) 331-1671. You can also contact the City Planner’s office at (845) 334-3957 or email planning@kingston-ny.gov. Finally, consider reaching out to your Common Council representative to share your concerns and request that the issue be addressed at the policy level.

As always, we encourage residents to engage with their local government, ask questions, and push for transparency. Your voice matters—and your peace of mind does, too.

VIDEO: City of Kingston Police Commission Meeting 11/15/17

The following video was captured from yesterday’s City of Kingston Police Commission Meeting on November 15th, 2017.  Brought to you by KingstonCitizens.org thanks to the Kingston News.

Thanks to the City of Kingston for moving the meeting to council chambers so to accommodate more citizens that evening.

Video #1:  City of Kingston Police Commission: PUBLIC SPEAKING (Click on image to review video)

 

Video #2:  City of Kingston Police Commission: Debate
(Click on image to review video)

Video #3:  City of Kingston Police Commission: Fabian Marshall Describes Incident
(Click on image to review video)

Fabian Marshall and the Kingston Police Commission.

 

CITIZEN CALL TO ACTION

  1. Request that the City of Kingston condemn police brutality in the City of Kingston.
  2. Request that the City of Kingston Police Department:
    • Provide a summary of changes that have been made to the City of Kingston Police policies and procedures since the Fabian Marshall incident in 2015;
    • Provide an action plan for continued improvements to the Department’s policies and procedure;
    • Provide an overview of trainings completed by Department personnel on an annual basis, as well as a  comprehensive description of the Department’s sensitivity training.
  3. As per Citizen Action of the Hudson Valley’s Petition  VIEW
    • Stop data by race and ethnicity, and use of force data including pepper spray and taser use;
    • Inform the public on the complaint process, including a detailed overview of the process beginning with the submission of a complaint form and through the Police Commission review, ruling, and if applicable, appeal;
    • Provide information on selection guidelines and term limits of Kingston Police Commission;
    • Release of information on the number of investigations into complaints against members of the department concerning domestic violence, excessive force, coercion, and verbal abuse, and the results;
    • Release of an immediate process to begin creating a community policing model that includes non-appointed members of the community as a civilian oversight board which would;
      • Conduct investigations into all cases in which a department member discharges his or her firearm, stun gun, or taser in a manner which potentially could strike an individual, even if no allegation of misconduct is made;
      • Systematically review reports and footage to conduct investigations into complaints against members of the department concerning domestic violence, excessive force, coercion, and verbal abuse, even if no allegation of misconduct is made;
      • To investigate the the conduct of members of the Department concerning any investigative category, (excessive force, sexual misconduct, a false arrest, or illegal search or seizure, and/or committed another civil rights violation or tort.) even in the absence of a civilian complaint, when, based on information and belief.

 

 

Tomorrow, the Kingston Police Commission will assemble for their monthly meeting to be held at 4:00 pm at Kingston City Hall at 420 Broadway in Kingston, council chambers (top floor). We are told that there will be a sign-up for citizens to speak at the beginning of the meeting, so please plan to arrive at 3:45 to do so and to secure a seat.  

As part of the agenda, the Police Commission will be reviewing a complaint filed by City of Kingston resident Fabian Marshall for discussion of an incident that occurred in 2015. 

According to the Daily Freeman VIEW, “Fabian Marshall, 27, was found guilty Friday of obstructing governmental administration, a misdemeanor, following a jury trial before City Judge Lawrence Ball. The trial began last Wednesday. The case against Marshall dates to September 2015, when members of the Kingston Police Department were responding to a report of an assault on Broadway, the District Attorney’s Office said in a press release. The release said officers tried to interview Marshall, who was in the same area of the reported assault and matched the description of the assailant, but that he refused to comply, became uncooperative and fought with police.”

The event was captured on a police cam and cellphone which was fortunately released for the public to review. (GRAPHIC)

“…officers tried to interview Marshall, who was in the same area of the reported assault and matched the description of the assailant, but that he refused to comply, became uncooperative and fought with police.”

Interviewed?

Being innocent of the alleged crime, Marshall seems uncertain as to why he was being approached by the police officer who acted in an aggressive manner without an explanation at the onset.

Uncooperative?

Marshall doesn’t appear to pose any danger to the officer carrying a gun and a taser.  In the video, it is alleged that he is tasered 21 times. One time, in this case, was too many.