BREAKING DRIVING HABITS : COSTWAYS COULD BE GRIDLOCK REMEDY.

Byline: Keith Stone Daily News Staff Writer

Rather than freeways, they could be called costways.

This week, 3,400 randomly selected motorists will be polled by telephone on how they feel about paying to use freeways during rush hour.

They also will be asked whether they would pay an air pollution fee at the gas pump - a fee that would be tied to the amount a particular car pollutes.

These questions come as the region's traffic gurus desperately hunt for ways to save Los Angeles-area freeways from what they say will be perpetual gridlock and daylong rush hour by the year 2010.

Enter congestion pricing - a new twist on the old-fashioned highway toll.

The theory is that motorists would change their driving habits if they knew they could no longer get a free ride during rush hour. They would drive only when necessary, take less crowded routes, travel more by bus and car pool and work at home more often.

Each car would carry an electronic device that would keep track of travel on congested freeways and then bill the driver automatically. Emissions fees could be levied at the pump.

And whatever money is collected would be spent on improving the bus and train systems and running door-to-door shuttle vans. Or it could be returned to residents through car-repair coupons, income tax discounts and the elimination of other taxes.

Still, the odds of widespread congestion pricing hitting the City of Freeways are not great, by some accounts, because there just aren't enough other ways yet for people to travel.

And they still have to travel.

``You have to offer them a viable alternative. They've shown they would rather be disemboweled than take the bus,'' said Kenneth Green, environmental studies director for the Reason Foundation, a public policy think tank in Los Angeles.

Other problems remain unanswered, including how out-of-town visitors would be billed and whether the fees would push too many cars onto already burdened city streets.

Outside of Los Angeles, congestion pricing is a craze that is sweeping the nation's transportation planners. It even has its own page on the World Wide Web on which academics extol the virtues of fee-for-use roadways.

``In other countries, it has proved to be very effective, notably in France, Singapore and Norway,'' saidMartine Micozzi, transportation specialist for the Federal Highway Administration's Office of Policy.

Congestion pricing is not without precedent locally:

In December, Route 91 in Orange County opened as the nation's first fully automated, privately owned toll road, charging between 25 cents to $2.50, depending on the time of day.

San Diego County is targeting HOT lanes, or high-occupancy toll lanes that solo drivers can use for a fee. Critics call them ``Lexus'' lanes.

Sen. Tom Hayden, D-Los Angeles, calls the whole concept of freeway fees an unfair burden on the poor.

``Congestion pricing is discriminatory, impacts the poor more than the affluent and charges the motorist for a highway they have already paid for,'' Hayden said.

Not according to the federal government.

The federal Highway Administration set aside $25 million for pilot programs around the country, including in Southern California.

Seventy-four traffic experts, business leaders, politicians and environmental watchdogs received $1.3 million in federal money as the Reduce Emissions and Congestion on Highways Task Force.

They have come up with several possibilities, including charging motorists 5 cents a mile for less clogged sections of freeway and 10 cents for the most jammed sections.

By the task force's calculations, such a fee would get automobiles moving 22 percent faster on freeways, cut the number of people who drive alone by 5 percent, increase car pooling by 16 percent and hike public transportation use by 6 percent.

``Those are good numbers,'' said Deborah Redman, who is shepherding the task force for the Southern California Association of Governments.

Such fees could take effect in two to five years in limited areas, Redman said.

``We are still stuck on some of the major stumbling blocks or challenges of this strategy,'' Redman conceded.

One major challenge will be getting the 74 task force members to reach a consensus, develop proposed legislation and then win approval in the Legislature.

In the past, the nonprofit SCAG has produced voluminous reports, recommending all manner of freeway improvement, including double decker freeways and ambitious rail lines.

None of them has ever made it beyond a thick report.

Still, there are greater hopes for the REACH task force, if for no other reason than its membership includes such heavy hitters as Caltrans and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Redman is optimistic.

``We are not doing this just to waste the taxpayers' dollars,'' she said.

The telephone survey scheduled to begin Saturday will have a lot to do with how far REACH gets with congestion pricing, she said.

``We are not expecting people to up and cheer. No one does when asked to pay for something, however legitimate the price,'' Redman said.

Caltrans representative Raja Mitwasi also is optimistic that the task force will push for legislation.

``Tolls are coming back,'' Mitwasi said.

Although the South Coast Air Quality Management District has the heft to push through congestion pricing, its support for REACH proposals remains untested.

Since joining the task force to find new ways to cut pollution, the air quality district has determined that the region will meet federal air pollution standards without taking new, drastic measures.

Beyond that, it is unclear whether faster-moving freeways necessarily generate less pollution.

``And if there are no air quality benefits and they have no impact on air quality, the district as such really doesn't have a place in that game,'' said task force co-chairman Jon Mikels, head of the air quality district's governing board.

Mikels said he has reached no conclusion about congestion pricing, though he believes it could help solve the problems of dwindling gas tax revenues and increasing gridlock.

``I think there are a lot of drawbacks to it. Obviously, one of the drawbacks is public acceptance,'' Mikels said.

REACH held focus groups in Encino and Irvine to measure support. ``The spontaneous reactions tended to be negative,'' the task force reported. ``Some thought the fees collected would just be frittered away and others were skeptical about the time savings.''

Ultimately, eight of 10 Encino group members voted in favor of a single lane for congestion fees. The Irvine group supported fees for new lanes only.

A survey of 1,700 people conducted between Jan. 3 and Jan. 9 found that 40 percent supported congestion fees, while 55 percent did not, and 5 percent didn't know or didn't answer.

Air pollution fees earned more support: 58 percent of those surveyed said they were either an excellent or good idea, while 38 percent voiced opposition.

``Nobody is expecting 100 percent of people to stand up and cheer,'' Redman said, adding, however, that she believes people will pay for better freeways.

``Premium service,'' she said, ``for the premium price.''

CAPTION(S):

Chart

Chart: FREEWAYS OR COSTWAYS?