CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Introduction and Background

Transportation asset management dates back several decades, evolving in response to changing infrastructure needs, advancements in technology, and shifts in policy and funding priorities. The evolution of transportation asset management includes the following themed eras:

• Emergence of Asset Management Concepts (1960s–1970s): The foundational principles of asset management began to emerge in the 1960s and 1970s, primarily in the context of private sector infrastructure management (Fayek 2016). Organizations in sectors such as utilities and manufacturing pioneered the adoption of asset management practices to optimize the life-cycle performance of their physical assets. These concepts were readily applied to the transportation sector.
• Adoption in the Public Sector (1980s–1990s): During the 1980s and 1990s, government agencies, including DOTs, started recognizing the potential benefits of asset management for managing public infrastructure more effectively (O’Connor et al. 2006). Initially, asset management concepts were applied in discrete areas such as pavement management and bridge maintenance.
• Development of Asset Management Systems and Performance Measurement (1990s–2000s): The 1990s and early 2000s witnessed the development and implementation of formal asset management systems by DOTs (AASHTO 2008). These systems integrated data collection, analysis, and decision-making processes to optimize the management of various infrastructure assets. During this time, there was also a growing emphasis on performance measurement and accountability in asset management (FHWA 2015). DOTs began establishing performance measures and targets to assess the condition, reliability, and safety of transportation assets, aligning with broader policy goals.
• Expansion of Asset Classes (2000s–present): Over time, there has been a broadening of the asset classes included in asset management frameworks (Vanier et al. 2014). While pavements and bridges were initially the primary focus, DOTs have expanded their scope to include ancillary assets such as signage, lighting, and roadside amenities, recognizing their importance to overall transportation system performance.

Through these historical developments, transportation asset management has evolved into a strategic discipline that aims to optimize the performance, resilience, and sustainability of transportation infrastructure assets, contributing to the efficient movement of people and goods and supporting economic development and quality of life. These goals have been supported and enforced by legislation. Legislative actions, such as the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 and its successors, including the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) and the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), provided support and funding for asset management initiatives (FHWA 2012a). This continued

with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), passed in 2021, which extended considerations for asset management to include extreme weather and resilience in life-cycle planning and risk management processes and analyses. These laws mandated the adoption of asset management practices and tied federal funding to compliance with asset management requirements.

Additionally, technologies and collections of effective practices have evolved to support transportation asset management. Advances in technology, including geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing, and data analytics, revolutionized asset management practices by enabling more comprehensive data collection, analysis, and visualization (WSDOT 2018). DOTs increasingly leveraged technology to improve asset inventorying, condition assessment, and predictive modeling. Further, DOTs worldwide have engaged in knowledge sharing and collaboration to exchange best practices and lessons learned in asset management (Gordon et al. 2012). Organizations such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) have developed standards and guidelines to promote consistency and effectiveness in asset management practices globally.

This synthesis report focuses on information relative to managing ancillary assets at DOTs. Many DOTs have realized value in managing assets beyond pavements and bridges and are developing dynamic inventories of varying ancillary assets in their TAMPs. However, there are variances and challenges in these approaches, some of which are collected and highlighted within this synthesis report. The scope of this synthesis focused on the following selected set of ancillary transportation assets:

• Hydraulic structures (e.g., culverts, drainage systems).
• Overhead sign and signal structures and signal systems.
• Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks and curb ramps).
• Intelligent transportation systems and communications infrastructure.
• High mast and highway light poles.
• Traffic barriers (e.g., guardrails).
• Earth retaining structures.
• Sign panels and supports.
• Building facilities.
• Pavement markings.
• Pavement markers.

This introductory chapter provides background information, states the synthesis objectives, and provides the methodology. This chapter serves as an overview of the topic and synthesis study, attempting to align a reader’s perceptions and understanding of ancillary asset management programs while highlighting the issues to be covered in the remaining synthesis chapters.

Synthesis Objective

As noted, transportation asset management has evolved significantly over the years, extending in scope beyond traditional focuses on pavements and bridges. As DOTs seek to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of their infrastructure investments, there has been a growing recognition of the value inherent in managing ancillary assets. These ancillary assets, encompassing a diverse array of components such as signage, lighting, and drainage structures, contribute significantly to the overall functionality and safety of transportation networks. In response to this recognition, DOTs across the nation are expanding their asset management frameworks to incorporate these ancillary assets in their broader asset management program either informally or formally in their TAMPs. This shift reflects a strategic realignment towards a more comprehensive

approach to infrastructure management, one that acknowledges the interconnectedness of various assets and their collective impact on transportation system performance.

This synthesis explores the emerging practices and strategies employed by DOTs in managing ancillary assets included in their TAMPs or through informal practice. By examining the evolving landscape of asset management in the transportation sector, this synthesis provides insights into the challenges, opportunities, and experiences associated with the integration of ancillary assets into asset management frameworks. The objective of this synthesis was to document practices used by DOTs for managing selected ancillary transportation assets, including levels of maturity and variability of practice across DOTs. The information gathered for these selected ancillary assets includes:

• Selected ancillary transportation assets included in DOT transportation asset management programs.
• The maturity scale definitions used for the ancillary asset program and the state of practice for maturity (e.g., life-cycle planning methods, risk, and resilience).
• Which, if any, ancillary transportation assets are included in DOT TAMPs or other documents, whether certified or informal.
• The models used for condition forecasting.
• The performance measures, metrics, and targets used.
• Selected asset data used for programming decisions.
• Any available associated DOT resources (e.g., tools, spreadsheets, guidance, manuals).

The synthesis methodology section will detail the approaches used for data collection and analysis in support of the objectives above. The synthesis team gathered information for this synthesis through the following means:

• Reviewing previous research literature, FHWA and AASHTO information, ancillary asset resources, and relevant information from state DOT websites, reports, documents, policies, and tools.
• Surveying DOTs using a web-based survey questionnaire.
• Developing case examples of selected DOT relevant to the management of ancillary assets formally and informally.

Synthesis Methodology

Information for this synthesis was gathered through a literature review, a survey of DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected DOTs for the development of case examples. Through an analysis of case examples, industry trends, and stakeholder perspectives, this synthesis documents the motivations driving DOTs to expand their asset management focus, the methodologies employed in inventorying and assessing ancillary assets, and the implications of such practices on overall transportation system performance and resilience from the DOT perspective.

Ultimately, this synthesis aims to contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding transportation asset management by presenting the state of the practice to DOTs, policymakers, and industry stakeholders seeking to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of transportation infrastructure investments.

The literature review reveals there is support and guidance around the management of ancillary assets, yet the practices vary from state to state. While minimal academic references were highlighted in reference to the management of ancillary assets, national guidance did exist. A variety of reports, documents, manuals, and website information from DOTs, FHWA, and AASHTO were reviewed. The findings of the literature review are in Chapter 2.

Using the literature review and following the scope of work for this synthesis, a survey questionnaire was developed. The facilitation of the survey questionnaire captured the state of practice relative to the management of ancillary assets from state to state. The survey was developed using the Qualtrics online survey platform and was electronically distributed to members of the AASHTO Transportation Asset Management Community. This distribution included DOT representatives from all 50 states as well as the Washington, District of Columbia DOT and the Puerto Rico DOT. The findings of the survey are presented in Chapter 3 based on 43 state DOT respondents, as seen in Figure 1.1. The complete survey is presented in Appendix A, with itemized state DOT survey question responses provided in Appendix B.

Following the analysis of survey responses, case examples were conducted to gather detailed information on ancillary asset management for selected DOTs. In total, five DOTs participated in interviews for case examples: California (Caltrans), Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, and Tennessee DOTs. Details of the DOT case example interviews are outlined in Chapter 4, and the interview questions used for the case example are found in Appendix C.

Synthesis Organization

This synthesis report includes five chapters. The chapters contain the following information:

1. Chapter 1: Introduction to the subject area and description of the study scope, objectives, and study methodology.

2. Chapter 2: Literature review regarding ancillary asset management, common ancillary assets managed, maturity levels of asset management, and national guidance.
3. Chapter 3: State of the practice for ancillary asset management as collected through the state DOT survey questionnaire.
4. Chapter 4: Case examples of ancillary asset management with five DOTs.
5. Chapter 5: Summary of findings, current practices, and potential future research to address knowledge gaps identified by the synthesis.

In addition to the five chapters are three appendices, which contain the survey questionnaires, survey results, and the questions used in the case examples.