BOTSS ROGERS TUES 4PM VEN III.pdf

8/12/2019 BOTSS ROGERS TUES 4PM VEN III.pdf

1/30

Understanding & ModelingRisk in a World of Increasing

2013 CoreLogic, Inc. Proprietary & Confidential

Howard Botts, PhD VP, Chief ScientistDavid Rogers VP Product Management


2/30

Making Accurate Underwriting, Actuarial &Claims Modeling Decisions

Given the dynamic weather and market conditions within the US, its critical for

and pricing decisions.

The two components critical to accurate risk understanding are:

Highly granular geospatial hazard risk models

Ob ectives for toda s discussion:

Overview of Flood Loss

The need for parcel level risk assignment

FEMA Flood Zones

Flood Risk Outside FEMA Zones Flooding-Sewer Backup



3/30

Flood Losses:

Average % of US Property Damage from River Flooding and Flash Flooding are very close:49.1% vs. 50.9%.

Annual Riverine Flood Losses vs. Flash Floodin Lossesin the United States from 1995 to 2012

(Data Source: Office of Climate, Water, Weather Services, NOAA)



4/30

n ense a n aPercent Increase since 1958 to 2011

7%7%

45%45%

26%26%

2013 CoreLogic, Inc. Proprietary & Confidential Source: NCSU, NOAA & NCDC


5/30

Importance of


oca on ccuracy


6/30

The most extensive and current parcel boundary map in the U.S.

There are an estimated 144.3

million privately owned parcels inthe U.S.

CoreLogic has converted and

normalized about 138 million

parcels

This is combined with an innovative

and proprietary geocoding engine

Together, these tools go beyond

county, zip or estimated accuracy

to enable property level:

Geocoding accuracy

Risk assessment

Risk concentration

Granular and accurate results



7/30

eoco e ompar son



8/30

n erstan ngStorm Surge Risk &


n an oo ng s


9/30

Storm Sur e ScoreMultiple simulations and variables for each

category of storm to derive a range of storm surge

hei hts includin :

Wind speed Hurricane speed

Direction (track)

Barometric pressure

Tide

Bathymetry (water depth)

Surge height range aggregated for each

category and then superimposed on elevation

data.

Barriers (impediment to flow) identified and

used to truncate surge polygons.

Final polygons attributed with risk values


ranging from 1 (Low) to 5 (Extreme).


10/30

Storm Surge Risk at the Parcel Level



11/30

2013 Storm-Sur e Inundation VersusFresh-Water Flooding



12/30

FEMA Flood Zones vs. Storm Surge Inundation



13/30

Manhattan Surge Inundation & Subway Entrances


Category 1 Inundation Category 3 Inundation


14/30

Elements of Flood Risk ScoreFlood Elevation

Property Elevation

Distance to Floodver oo ng Source

Flood Zone Geometry

Coastal Flooding

Riverine and Coastal

Hydraulics

oas a mpac

Levee Impact

Dam Im act

2013 CoreLogic, Inc. Proprietary & ConfidentialPond and Lake Flooding

Localized Flood Hazards


15/30

oo s core na ys s: e wesFlood in Cedar Rapids

This is an example FRS

analysis

The land parcels were

co ore y oo r s ra ng

Property risk lined up with

the inundation boundary

from FEMA nicely

A large number of

properties beyond X500

were rated as Moderate



16/30

as oo an asemen oo

as an asemen oo con nues o expan

the reach of CoreLogic Flood products

flash flooding at a 10m National grid cell level

methodology for the propensity for basement

floodin at a 10m National rid cell level



17/30

omponen s o as oo s o e

Water Shed Hydrology

Surface Flow Dynamics

Land Use

Soil Infiltration

Vegetation Coverage

Vegetation Changes

Rainfall Intensity

Land Characteristics

Depression Areas

Wildfire Burns

2013 CoreLogic, Inc. Proprietary & Confidential 17

Impervious Cover


18/30

a ers e y ro ogy

From digital elevations to watershed hydrology

Hydro-science vs. grid technology: handling trillions of grids

Internationall a licable

DEM Flow



19/30

e er a ona a er a c men r

Terrain and hydrologic conditions form the foundation for the extreme floodevents.

When severe meteorological events occur catastrophic f lood disaster can result.


Boulder - 1,000 yr. storm event carried an huge amount of rainfall in the canyonareas, rush out f rom mountain areas, flooded the city of Boulder, and led to

catastrophic losses over $2 Bill ion.


20/30

ou er as oo ng xamp e



21/30

2013 Boulder Flood Study:FFRS can add the severity and hydraulic factors to FRS

This location is in the AE zone. FRS rated the inundation risk at the site as Very High.

FFRS rated the site as High on flash flooding risk (FFRS = 71), presenting the dynamic

aspect of the flood.

o an ra e a arge oca on as g , o amage wou e g er

than purely inundation flood losses. From the photo, sediment transport and

hydrogeological erosion at this site are extremely significant.



22/30

2013 Boulder Flood Study:

The FEMA flood map was developed based on river miles but not dry land. FEMA

puts the site in a X zone and FRS rated this site as Low inundation flood risk

Flash Flooding at Utah Park in Aurora, Co

FFRS rated the Utah Ball Park as Extreme flash flooding risk site (FFRS = 91)

FFRS is a comprehensive tool. A tennis court nearby wasnt inundated. FFRS ratedthe site as Low (FFRS = 19). FFRS accurately captured the flood risk in the area

=

19

Tennis CourtRis

Risk = 91


Very LowLowModerateHighVery HighExtreme


23/30

2013 Boulder Flood Study:Mississippi Ave and Kenton Ave, Aurora, CO on Sept. 12, 2013.

FEMA put the site in a X zone and FRS

rated this site as Very Low riverine

inundation risk (FRS = 10)

FFRS rated the site as Very High flashflooding risk (FFRS = 79).

flash floods than a 100 yr. flood event in

the river.



24/30

2013 Boulder Flood Study:6th Ave and Bill ing Ave, Aurora, CO

Site is in X500 Zone, and FRS rated the

site as High inundation risk (FRS = 50)

FFRS rated the site as High flash

flooding risk (FFRS = 69)

From the isolated footprint of the flood on

,

was from flash flooding.



25/30

Flash Flooding Study: Case #6Flash flood at the front of Century 3 Chevrolet Dealer from Lebanon Church Road, West Mifflin, PA

Site is in X Zone, and FRS rated the site as Very Low inundation risk (FRS = 10)

FFRS rated the site as Very High flash flooding risk (FFRS = 85)

The site is in a de ression area ca tured b the flash floodin model.

FAC = 152

Depression

Pin Point40.348954, -79.938412



26/30

Intense RainfallIntense Rainfall

Slope

Land-use

Slope

Land-use

Flood Risk Score

Flash Flood Risk

Flood Risk Score

Flash Flood Risk

Land-Use

Watershed Hydrology

Land-Use

Watershed Hydrology

Off Systems

Soil Type

Off Systems

Soil Type


opograp y epress onsopograp y epress ons


27/30

y ro og c o en a or asemen oo ngThe higher the surface runoff accumulation and groundwater exchange, the higher

basement flooding potential. Frequent runoff accumulation on the land surface will

maximize the inflow to underground sewer system if the connectivity exists.

If the point (A) is on a high flow accumulation area, the potential is a function of the flowaccumulation. 10m national flow accumulation dataset is the most detailed hydrology in the United

States.

If the point (B) has a distance to a high flow accumulation area, the potential is a function of both the

flow accumulation and the distance. Beyond a certain distance threshold (such as 200m), the

potential becomes zero.



28/30

o n ra on o en a orBasement Flooding

Hydro features of soil types provides the element

that defines soil infiltration capability from surfacewater into the underground soil.

rates:

A (high infiltration rates),

B (moderate infiltration rates),

B/D (moderate to slow infiltration rates),

C (slow infiltration rates),

C/D (slow to very slow infiltration rates),

very s ow n ra on ra es



29/30

ree overage o en a orBasement Flooding

basement flooding:

Significant tree coverage caneffectively store and slow downsurface flow and increase waterinfiltration into theunderground.

Root intrusion could increasechance of pipes leaking andcreate cracks that allow moresurface water flowing into thesewer system, leadingbasement flooding.

roo n rus on appens n

sewer collection pipes, theblockage could slow down theflow and increase the chance ofsewer backu .



30/30

Q&A Session & Thank You

2013 CoreLogic, Inc. Proprietary & Confidential 30

Documents

BOTSS ROGERS TUES 4PM VEN III.pdf