At and above 1,750 vehicles per hour, the simulation indicated a reduction in arterial level of service. Therefore, at least in Iowa, the feasibility of a four-lane undivided to three-lane conversion should be questioned and/or considered much more closely when a roadway has (or is expected to have) a peak-hour volume of more than 1,750 vehicles. Assuming that 10 percent of the daily traffic occurs during the peak-hour, these volume recommendations would correspond to 15,000 and 17,500 vehicles per day, respectively. These suggestions, however, are based on the results from one idealized case xi study corridor analysis. Individual operational analysis and/or simulations should be completed in detail once a four-lane undivided to three-lane cross section conversion is considered feasible (based on the general suggestions above) for a particular corridor. All of the simulations completed as part of this project also incorporated the optimization of signal timing to minimize vehicle delay along the corridor. A number of determination feasibility factors were identified from a review of the past research, before-and-after case study results, and the simulation sensitivity analysis. The existing and expected (i.e., design period) statuses of these factors are described and should be considered. The characteristics of these factors should be compared to each other, the impacts of other potentially feasible cross section improvements, and the goals/objectives of the community. The factors discussed in these guidelines include - roadway function and environment - overall traffic volume and level of service - turning volumes and patterns - frequent-stop and slow-moving vehicles - weaving, speed, and queues - crash type and patterns - pedestrian and bike activity - right-of-way availability, cost, and acquisition impacts - general characteristics, including - parallel roadways - offset minor street intersections - parallel parking - corner radii - at-grade railroad crossings xii The characteristics of these factors are documented in these guidelines, and their relationship to four-lane undivided to three-lane cross section conversion feasibility identified. This information is summarized along with some evaluative questions in this executive summary and Appendix C. In summary, the results of past research, numerous case studies, and the simulation analyses done as part of this project support the conclusion that in certain circumstances a four-lane undivided to three-lane conversion can be a feasible alternative for the mitigation of operational and/or safety concerns. This feasibility, however, must be determined by an evaluation of the factors identified in these guidelines (along with any others that may be relevant for a individual corridor). The expected benefits, costs, and overall impacts of a four-lane undivided to three-lane conversion should then be compared to the impacts of other feasible alternatives (e.g., adding a raised median) at a particular location.