Remember how people (read: Drivers) were so concerned about the viability of Seattle's business districts when the city council proposed modest increases in parking rates in some center-city neighborhoods? The argument, at the time, was that people would simply take their business to Bellevue if they had to pay $4, or $3, or $2, an hour for parking. Moreover, the opponents railed, the new rates would be so confusing ! Who can take the time to read a sign and find out what parking costs in a particular neighborhood? Surely economic calamity would ensue.

Well, the jury's still out on Seattle's new parking rates (although the evidence so far suggests they should have been set higher in many neighborhoods where they actually decreased), a new survey of parking spaces in San Francisco---where parking rates, which range from 75 cents an hour all the way up to $4.25---reveals that people continue to park even at the most expensive spots on downtown San Francisco streets.

Moreover, they aren't parking on streets where parking rates have been reduced---generally, streets where few people parked in the first place because they're further away from major destinations. Convenience, it seems, trumps cost---and driving around and around looking for cheaper parking (or driving to another city where parking is free) just isn't convenient.

My prediction: As Seattle continues to adjust parking rates to apparent demand, we'll see similar results---fewer cars parked on streets that are far away from major destinations (think: Seventh Ave. vis-a-vis Pike Place Market), and very little change in the number of cars parked on streets where destinations are more convenient (think: First Ave. and Pine). People, as I've noted previously, are adaptable---and sometimes, that adaptability means they're willing to pay a quarter an hour more for parking in exchange for not having to drive around for half an hour looking for a better deal.