Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Awos Siting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ocean Shores airport advisers agree to proceed with FAA-recommended AWOS site; city to cover small funding gap
Summary
At its June 30 meeting the Ocean Shores Municipal Airport Advisory Committee agreed to move forward with the FAA’s recommended location for an automated weather station (AWOS). FAA will fund most design costs, but WSDOT declined a 2.5% share, leaving the city to absorb about $5,600–$5,607.
The Ocean Shores Municipal Airport Advisory Committee on June 30 agreed to proceed with the FAA-recommended location for a new automated weather observing system after FAA staff and a meteorologist identified a single practical siting option.
The decision matters for flight safety and emergency response: committee members said a functioning AWOS would improve approach information for pilots and emergency services. “It looks like the $213,000 (design) from FAA is there,” Scott said, and “the city contribution actually is gonna be $5,600.” Scott also reported that Washington State Department of Transportation review did not approve the 2.5% share the committee expected, leaving the airport budget to cover an additional roughly $5,607.
Committee members weighed a trade-off: one alternate location already designated for future hangars could be lost if the AWOS were sited there. “If we put it [the AWOS] there, that’s gonna blow away any chance we have for future hangars,” Jerry Davis said, urging preservation of apron real estate. Members discussed FAA concerns about siting in wet or low-lying areas to avoid dew-point measurement errors and rejected locations east into the swamp or north near the berm for those reasons.
The committee examined a satellite image and the airport layout plan provided in a June 17 staff email and deferred to FAA technical guidance on the instrument footprint and tower height. Chair summarized the group’s practical concern about taxiway clearance and future aircraft wingspan, but members noted the FAA site selection already accounts for operational object-free areas.
There was no formal recorded roll-call vote on the item; members agreed in discussion to move forward and to confirm the committee’s support in a letter to Melanie, who circulated the AWOS siting options. Scott said the next steps include a visual site check before the committee sends a written confirmation and the airport will absorb the small local share shortfall if outside partners do not provide funds.
Next procedural steps: staff will notify Melanie of the committee’s support for FAA option 2, schedule a short site visit, and track the small budget amendment needed to cover the declined 2.5% contribution. Public comment was not recorded at the meeting.
