🚀 Feature: Refine subset of links for highway assignment network

[i-am-sijia]

User Story

Issues:

What link subset should be used for the highway network? Discussed in the June 14, 2023 meeting with MTC.

Currently using "assignable" links (assignable = 1). assignable was the old approach used and inherited from TM2.0. But it includes e.g. service roads, which has FT = 99. The Facility Type definition can be found in the network PRD.
The issue occurs when the FT 99 links do not have meaningful capacity in the assignment, which is defined in the model_config.toml. They will have infinite travel time in the assignment. And the infinite travel time will be inherited by transit assignment and skimming.

Solutions:

1. Temporarily added capacities for FT 99 so that they will have meaningful travel time in the assignment
2. Another option to consider: Link 21 used FT <= 8 for highway assignment network, instead of assignable. It includes everything except service roads. If we use Link 21 option, there will be more links in the highway network, which increases run time. We should probably do another round of roadway trimming. And we will also need to rebuild centroid connectors

Progress:

• Sufficiently defined
• Approach determined
• Tests developed
• User story satisfied
• Doc strings
• General documentation
• Passing tests

Priority

Level of Effort

Resolution Ideas

Project

Who should be involved?

Users:
Reviewers:

Risk

Tests

• Test for...

[DavidOry]

Replaced by #147