LAND-LOCKED FLOATING HOUSE

The following information contains some frequently asked questions and answers regarding the Winston Land-Locked Floating House....

Q. If increased numbers of people remain in their Winston floating homes during flood events, would they not be cut off from needed services; power, water, and food, and require rescue?

A. Winston does not encourage people to remain in the floating homes during actual floods, although the WLFH is equipped with emergency self-contained water, power, and sanitary systems. During flash floods, many people have been forced to remain in their homes and wait for rescue operations. This will not be necessary in a floating home because each structure is provided with a small boat for self-rescue. The technology promises to minimize risks of residents and emergency responders. It will dramatically reduce costs to taxpayers, federal, state, and local governments.

Q. Will any human intervention be required to prepare the WLFH for an unexpected flood?

A. No. If occupants are away from their homes for a short while or an extended vacation, all systems will perform automatically.

Q. What would happen if a piece of debris such as a large boulder or log should settle under the house as the floods recede?

A. The clearance and flexibility of the pontoons would allow them to fold around a 4 foot object without causing damage or become out of level. If the object is larger than 4 feet, the WLFH can be simply jacked up to a height where the object can be removed, and gently lowered.

To view even more Questions and Answers,
please see below.

WINSTON LAND-LOCKED FLOATING HOUSE

FEMA, HUD, US Corps of Engineers, Regional Flood Plain Managers, newspaper and television reporters, political leaders, and the general public have asked many questions concerning the Winston Land-Locked Floating House (WLFH) technology. Winston International believes these questions should be answered publicly.

Q. The National Flood Insurance Program has designated a number of flood mitigating factors which FEMA considers as effective as the WLFH. They ask, "why should we take chances with this new technology?"

A. Existing mitigating factors are not as effective as the WLFH because:

1. The floodproofing systems contained in the WLFH consist of well-tested technology which has proven successful in a variety of structures. The underside of the lowest floor is designed to rise four feet above the highest recorded 500 year flood levels in any geographical area. This precludes it from any possible damage to interiors, furniture, or any other possessions including vehicles, due to water saturation. The exterior of the house is protected by heavy plastic bumpers from debris and large impacts, such as logs and ice flows. FEMA and NFIP regulations limit protection of houses by permanently elevating floor heights to 1' above 100 year levels, during and after floods. This FEMA limitation has not changed in 22 years. Floods in the Mississippi/Missouri basin, California, Washington, Oregon, Georgia, Texas, Florida, Ohio River basin, and other areas have exceeded this NFIP limitation. Many flood-swollen rivers have crested over 10' above previous 100 year limits in recent flood events.
2. FEMA approved flood-zone homes constructed on raised fill, could collapse as floods erode the fill dirt under the structure. If the homes were built on FEMA regulated stationary walls, pilings, or columns, there is no scour undermining protection, and these houses run the very real danger of foundation undermining through liquefication. This will cause total structure collapse and these permanently raised homes will require retrofitting or replacing again after future floods. During the Georgia, Florida, and Texas floods, soils became liquified under buildings, causing foundation failure and collapse of walls and roofs. For this very reason, homes floated in chunks down the flooded Ohio River and other area rivers. If there is no soil liquefication, FEMA methods are limited to permanently set flood levels which have predicted chances of being too low in future floods. The WLFH is currently the only technology that can effectively protect against repeating floods.

3. The WLFH concrete anchorage systems are placed well below normal foundation depths, and below the level of liquefication and scouring. Flood damage could be limited to landscape retrofitting.

Q. Are WLFHs designed to withstand lateral forces greater than NFIP standards?

A. Yes. Computer test results show that tested WLFH designs exceed all NFIP requirements for flood current, wind, and other velocities. Test criteria included: 20' of flood height, 6 feet per second of current flow, and 80 mph wind forces, all applied simultaneously, with no listing effects.

Q. Are WLFH models capable of withstanding flash floods?

A. Yes. The connections of the telescoping piers have been designed to withstand extreme flood, wind, and seismic forces. The flotation pontoons are constructed in catamaran configurations to allow currents and eddies to pass rapidly through the system without obstruction. The WLFH system is the only technology compared with FEMA allowable mitigating systems, other than actual relocation of damaged houses to higher elevations, which can withstand both extreme "riverine" and "coastal V-zone" floodplain forces.

Q. Can two and three story WLFH models withstand these forces as well as one story models?

A. Yes. Winston developed software can establish the requirements for all the systems required to floodproof 2 and 3 story structures under extreme conditions.

Q. Are automobiles in attached garages and utilities protected under the same flood conditions?

A. Yes. As a WLFH rises with the flood, it automatically levels itself, based on house and garage gross weights, by automatically controlled ballast devices. The house continues to remain level with no power requirements for the duration of the flood. Utility lines and pipes are contained in flexible tubing with automatic disconnects when floods reach pre-determined levels.

Q. Can mechanical items such as the telescoping piers be depended upon?

A. Yes. The entire WLFH system has been designed by professionals including architects, marine and structural engineers, using time-tested methods and weather-protected materials, and further tested by independent consultants who have proven the workability of the technology. The interior of the piers are permanently sealed and watertight, filled with lightweight, environmentally-safe lubricating oil, and coated on all adjoining surfaces with Dupont teflon-type material with a minimal friction coefficient of 0.04. Disconnect mechanisms are installed at each pier to enable immediate and simple periodic inspections. Manufacturers of component parts estimate pier life spans to be over 100 years. The piers are designed with maximum safety factors to withstand design forces.

Q. Why should this new technology be approved in floodplains where it might negatively impact designated watersheds?

A. The WLFH will not retain or dam moving currents, because it allows the flood waters to flow unobstructed under and around the frame of the house. As the floods recede, the water flows naturally away from the house without collecting against the house. Drainage systems under the house control any residual ponding after flooding without effecting natural water storage areas.

Q. Is the WLFH effective against seismic action?

A. Yes. The WLFH structural and floodproofing systems are designed to withstand the highest seismic requirements of Zone 4 of national building codes, the required zone for California and the Alaska Aleutian Islands. The foundations of Winston homes are built into the structural frames of each home and do not depend on concrete foundations. Shear problems due to friction are not effected by Seismic ground waves because the structural frame has no contact with friction-causing earth. Also, the WLFH has been designed to mitigate permafrost and bentonite action.

Q. How do the costs of this system compare with allowable systems?

A. A comparison was made of relative costs using FEMA's allowable mitigating factors of houses elevated on permanent walls, piers, piles, columns, posts, and relocating houses to higher properties. The costs of FEMA mitigating factors were established from costs given in the FEMA publication "Design Manual for Retrofitting Flood-prone Residential Structures". Inflation factors supplied by the National Consumer Price Index were added from the year each unit was constructed to the present. These costs were compared to Winston floodproofing methods which are in addition to the actual house construction costs. In all cases, the WLFH floodproofing methods were less costly than the listed FEMA examples. (Additional costs of Winston's flotation systems, which replace conventional concrete foundations, is estimated at 10 to 15% of total building construction costs.)

Q. Until a flood comes, how do we know it will float?

A. The flotation systems are designed according to laws of physics and all forces relative to buoyancy, gravity, and nautical factors. A WLFH will automatically go into flotation when one inch of flood water surrounds the building exterior. The floating homes have been developed by Naval Architects to float in the same manner as ships, floating docks, houseboats, and floating bridges. The first Winston prototype will be located in a controlled flood environment under simulated conditions, and all internal WLFH systems will be laboratory tested to failure. These tests will give positive evidence of the workability of all Winston flotation systems.

Q. According to conference report language of Title V, Public Law #103-325, is it Winston's position that prototypes of uninhabited structures will be dismantled after testing is completed?

A. Yes. However, these tested prototypes will be neither inhabited nor uninhabited structures because they are experimental products. All prototype models are designed to exceed national building codes. Local building permits will be required only after prototype tests are approved. Building officials from all agencies will be invited to inspect the prototype testing.

Q. Would local governments be required to provide additional utility infrastructure to meet the demand, thereby increasing potential disaster recovery costs?

A. Winston does not encourage additional construction in flood-prone areas until the technology has been proven on replacement housing under actual flood conditions, which will reduce rather than increase disaster recovery costs. Utility infrastructures to resist floods have now been developed.

Q. If increased numbers of people remain in their Winston floating homes during flood events, would they not be cut off from needed services; power, water, and food, and require rescue?

A. Winston does not encourage people to remain in the floating homes during actual floods, although the WLFH is equipped with emergency self-contained water, power, and sanitary systems. During flash floods, many people have been forced to remain in their homes and wait for rescue operations. This will not be necessary in a floating home because each structure is provided with a small boat for self-rescue. The technology promises to minimize risks of residents and emergency responders. It will dramatically reduce costs to taxpayers, federal, state, and local governments.

Q. Will any human intervention be required to prepare the WLFH for an unexpected flood?

A. No. If occupants are away from their homes for a short while or an extended vacation, all systems will perform automatically.

Q. What would happen if a piece of debris such as a large boulder or log should settle under the house as the floods recede?

A. The clearance and flexibility of the pontoons would allow them to fold around a 4 foot object without causing damage or become out of level. If the object is larger than 4 feet, the WLFH can be simply jacked up to a height where the object can be removed, and gently lowered.

Q. Are there other advantages of building the WLFH in floodplains?

A. Yes. The WLFH technology in floodplains could:

1. Allow people to preserve their personal possessions and remain in their homes without waiting for government bailouts,

2. Eliminate major costs of moving communities to higher elevations and paying overvalued replacement costs,

3. Allow property development in flood plains while allowing beautiful homes to be built on normal grades rather than on unsightly and dangerous elevated foundations,

4. Allow minor levee systems to continue but at greatly reduced costs.

5. Eliminate the need for more wetland protection measures which will lead only to more regulations.

6. Invite private insurance companies to write coverage on low-risk structures and reduce FEMA's role of spending billions of dollars in taxpayers money for damage replacement, AND

7. Permit new technology on privately owned property which can be productive during non-flood periods, and allow the developed water storage properties to drain effectively.

Q. What were the reactions of Government Branches and Agencies to the WLFH system?

A. 1. The Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government responded to the WLFH by adding Conference Language to the 1994 National Flood Insurance Act which expected FEMA "to be accommodating to the testing of such [floodproofing] technologies." This Act was signed into law by the President, September 23, 1994.

2. FEMA's initial response to the WLFH, less than one week after receiving preliminary marketing information from Winston, was complete negation. This opinion has not altered to this date.

3. HUD applauded the WLFH concept because they felt it could drastically reduce the replacement of damaged homes during recurring floods.

4. The US Army Corps of Engineers expressed the opinion that the WLFH could be used in back-bay areas along coastal regions. Both the Corps and HUD felt that this system could save 70% of the flood damaged structures in these areas. The Corps also suggested a location for Winston to construct a prototype, which was between two of their dams in Oklahoma where they could control flood flows directly.

Q. What causes the house to float?

A. Attached to the underside of the floor system are a series of recycled HDPE (heavy duty plastic), air-filled pontoons, similar in shape to a catamaran hull. As one inch of flood water inundates the exterior of a WLFH, the house goes into flood mode.

Q. Will Winston International provide insurance policies and warranties against flood damage?

A. Yes. Lloyds of London has committed to Winston to underwrite WLFH protected homes subject to successful prototype testing. First year premiums will be included in the sale of each house to cover flood related damage. Each home is under warranty and will be inspected by Winston maintenance personnel after each flood. A part of this inspection will include Winston's patented pier-disconnect system.

Q. Why don't we just force people out of the floodplains and locate them to higher ground as FEMA is attempting to do?

A. Most people do not want to leave their homes for many reasons. They should not be forced to move from their own property in a free country by bureaucratic decree. The best reason for not moving all of the people in the floodplains is, the federal budget and the taxpayers CANNOT AFFORD A COST OF THIS STAGGERING NATURE! 93% of people currently living in floodplains are not covered by flood insurance. FEMA's plan to expand the Flood Hazard Boundary Map, and their policy of forcing people out of flood-prone areas to higher elevations, could expand the federal deficit by trillions. FEMA says it would mean 10,000,000 homes at a cost of $75,000 minimum, plus the purchase of inflated property, will eventually need to come through Congressional appropriation. This translates into 750 billion dollars plus the millions of families living in present flood-designated areas, who FEMA insists must also be moved. The WLFH may not be used to replace all of these homes, but if this technology is used, every house saved is one that will not be charged to the taxpayers. The WLFH is achievable and will make vast stretches of rich land more productive.

The WLFH IS AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME!

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The preceding questions were asked by the following individuals, agencies, and their staffs. The answers were supplied by Winston design staff, executives, engineering and testing consultants.

Senator Patty Murray

Senator Slade Gorton

Senator Hank Brown

Congresswoman Linda Smith

Congressman John Kasich

Congressman Chris Shays

Senator Robert Dole

Former Director of HUD Jack Kemp

Senator Connie Mack

Senator Ben N. Campbell

Senator Tom Harkin

Senator Kit Bond

Senator Mark Hatfield

Senator Ted Stevens

Senator Daniel Inouye

Michael Hirsch, Office of the General Counsel, (FEMA Program Law Attorney)

Federal Emergency Management Agency

James L. Witt, Director

Cliff Oliver, Ch. Engr, Floodplain Mit.Div.

Robert Volland, Div. Director, Mitigation

Richard T. Moore, Assoc. Dir., Mitigation

Dept of Housing & Urban Development

David Engel, Chief Special Project Branch

US Army Corps of Engineers

Robert Plott, Chief Engineer

State of Alaska

Jake Lestenkof, Commissioner, DMVA

Gary R. Brown, Hazard Mit. Ofcr.,

State of Washington

Dennis Anderson, Mitigation Manager

Martin E. Best, Administrator, Flood Div. Wa State Emergency Mgmt Assn.

State of Wisconsin

Tommy G. Thompson, Governor

State of Hawaii

Benjamin J. Cayetano, Governor

State of Montana

James F. Greene, Dis & Em. Svcs Div

State of Alabama

Lee Helms, Director Emerg. Mgt. Agency

State of Vermont

Howard Dean, Governor

George L. Lowe, Director,

Dept of Public Safety

State of Louisiana

William J. Croft, Assistant Director

Office of Emergency Preparedness

State of Texas

George W. Bush, Governor

John Ivey, Regional Director, Association of State Floodplain Mgrs

Tom Millwee, Coordinator, Div of Em Mgt

Bobby Burnett, President

Coldwell Banker, Van Schaak & Co.,

Englewood, CO

Pat Woodward

KMGH, ABC Channel 7, Denver, CO

Veronica Landsworthy

Discovery Channel, WDTD, Florida

Emily Langley, News Reporter

KOMO-TV, Seattle, WA

Dan McLeister, Sr. Editor

Professional Builder Magazine

Bob Cashen, News Reporter, Knight-Ridder

News in Motion, Washington, DC

Bryan Johnson, Feature Editor,

KOMO-TV Viewpoint, Seattle, WA

Judith Anne Gunther, Contributing Editor

Popular Science Magazine

Bill Dietrich, Science Rep., Seattle Times

Susan Warren, Staff Reporter,

Wall Street Journal, Texas Edition

Justin Warner, Staff Reporter,

New Scientist, London, England

Jolane Abrams, Free Lance Writer

San Jose Mercury News

Shelley Benson, Managing Editor,

Magazine of Sigma Chi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Winston International Executives provided answers and explanations to the preceding questions. The other listed independent consultants edited Winston personnel answers and statements for accuracy and objectivity to items relative to their particular disciplines.

Professional Consultants

Richard Etsel, P.E, Marine Architect

Victor Kimsey, P.E., Structural Engineer

Greg Gilda, P.E., Structural Engineer

Terrence C. Watson, R.A., CAD Specialist

Ray Fox, P.E., ASCE, Dean of Engineering, Georgetown University

Pacific Testing Laboratories, Inc.
Seattle, WA

(Computer Testing Agency)

CLE Group, Inc./AEA, Inc.*

(Consulting Test Analysts)

Frank Jarnot, P.E., Senior Engineer,

Analytical Engineering Associates, Inc., Bothell, WA Branch

John Derugeris, P.E., President & CEO of CLE Group, Inc.

Robert E. Jones, P.E., Regional Manager, AEA, Inc.

Johnson/Coastline, Associates*

(Consulting Seismic Analysts )

Michael Wray, P.E., S.E., Office Manager

Everett, WA Branch

*CLE Group, Inc. is the parent Company of AEA and Johnson/Coastline Associates

All images on this website are copyrighted or can be used by Winston International and may not be copied, reproduced or electronically stored without the express written consent of Winston International.

LAND-LOCKED FLOATING HOUSE

Home

Proposed Prototype Test

FEMA OBJECTIONS TO WLFH

Washington Post Article

Desist From the Corps

Who is Winston?

Homes & Buildings

Emergency Housing

Garden Housing

Our Mission

How It Works

View the Basic Structural Design

See Different Designs of the Land-Locked Floating House

Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994

Published Articles About the Land-Locked Floating House

Engineering & Testing

Questions & Answers

FEMA Evaluation

Watch A Video

Chronology

The Winston Team

Contact Us

Providing Innovative, Safe and Affordable Housing