Home » Posts tagged 'parking'
Tag Archives: parking
I have written a lot about NAIA’s Terminals 1, 2 and 3 but have featured Terminal 4 only perhaps once or twice. That’s probably because I have not used Terminal 4 as much as the others. All of my domestic flights have been via either Terminal 2 or 3 while my travels overseas are via Terminals 1, 2 and 3. And so I have had a lot of opportunities to also take photos about those terminals. The opportunity to take a few photos about Terminal 4, particularly the open parking area, presented itself last November when I fetched my wife and daughter who were arriving from a local trip one Sunday. My wife thought she had booked a Cebu Pacific flight but that turned out to be what CebGo, which used to be the Tiger Airways Philippines affiliate that Ceb Pac had acquired years ago. These operated from T4. Here are photos of the open parking area across from T4.
Achievers Airport Hotel, which is the nearest hotel to T4
Parking ticket at T4 parking area – the rates are the same for all NAIA Terminal parking areas
Exit from the parking area – T4 is just across from it
Unfinished or just unoccupied area for drivers or shops?
View of aircraft flying overhead
The parking lot doesn’t have a lot of spaces but it was relatively easy to get a slot. I actually waited a few minutes to get a slot and immediately after I parked, a few more vehicles left. So the turnover for the parking area is high enough at least for the Sunday noontime I was there. Perhaps its proportional to the number of people using T4?
I’ve received a lot of views and inquiries about the parking rates at the NAIA Terminal 3. There seems to be a lot of people wanting to know about the rates and ideas about how much they might be paying if they chose to leave their vehicles while on trip abroad or within the Philippines. There are a few articles I’ve written about them and even posted some example parking receipts. We also have had someone from NAIA parking explaining how fees are computed (scroll through the comments sections of my posts, its there somewhere). In the interest of many travelers still inquiring about this topic and to have a recent example, I am posting a receipt from a very recent trip when I parked my vehicle at the multilevel parking facility of T3:
If you break down the total amount paid, 600 pesos went to the 2 overnights that I assumed to cover 48 hours of the total 56 hours and 3 minutes logged for the parked vehicle. The regular fee of 135 pesos covered the remaining 8 hours and 3 minutes. If the basic rate was 35 pesos for the first 3 hours and 20 pesos per succeeding hour, then that practically translates to the 135 pesos. I hope this helps my readers!
I had a nice view of the parking lot of the hospital where my mother-in-law was staying for a couple of days to recover from a bad case of dehydration. The doctors wouldn’t say it was severe but because Mama was 75 years old, they had to treat her condition. But that isn’t what I’d like to write about in this post. It’s really about parking.
I noticed from my times on hospital watch (relieving my wife who spent the couple of nights with her) that the parking lot didn’t get full during the day. The hospital was a good sized one and generated a lot of trips but mostly those taking public transport (mainly tricycles). But this was more a community hospital than one in the league of the St. Luke’s and Medical City, which generate much more private traffic and requires much more parking spaces.
A view of the parking lot of Clinica Antipolo
Friends have always made the observation that parking is difficult in the major private (e.g., St. Luke’s, Medical City, Makati Med,etc.) and public hospitals (e.g., PGH, NKTI, Philippine Heart Center, etc.). I agree with these observations as we have our own experiences where it was difficult to get parking spaces for when we go to these hospitals for check-ups or to visit relatives or friends admitted there. For one, these hospitals are the “go to” places for specialists and modern medical equipment, never mind that these are also the most expensive in terms of medical and laboratory/test expenses. I guess that to be a doctor with their practices in these hospitals means a lot and ups the prices of their services? I say that based also on observations that standard tests (blood, urine, stool, etc.) are much cheaper in other hospitals or clinics. Doctor’s professional fees, too, tend to be less expensive for when you consult with them in the ‘minor’ hospitals.
Major hospitals can also be teaching hospitals and I’m not just referring to internships or residents but medical schools hosted by the hospitals. And many did not consider these schools when the hospital buildings were initially built so schools don’t have their own parking spaces and patients, doctors, hospital staff and students end up competing for parking spaces. Medical City, for example, even instituted some parking fee measures to deter long term parking or those who appeared to have attempted to park for free and therefore occupying slots that would have otherwise have been revenue-generating for the hospital.
Of course, there would be those who would be reacting to this situation and say that people going to the hospital should be taking public transportation. Perhaps this is easier said than done for many cases in Metro Manila? I’m not familiar with similar conditions in other cities like Cebu, Iloilo and Davao but perhaps it is not as severe as those in major hospitals in the capital region. Major hospitals in Metro Manila also attract a lot of people from surrounding provinces like Rizal, Bulacan, Laguna and Cavite. Again, this is because of the reputations of these hospitals. Even the current President went to Cardinal Santos Medical Center for his recent check-up.
And so the parking problem will persist unless there are better options for public transportation. Incidentally, ridesharing may have helped ease the parking dilemma since TNVS provides a very good alternative to the private car for such hospital trips. I do know Grab, for example, has booking booths at Medical City, Cardinal Santos and St. Luke’s. I personally don’t think additional parking spaces (or buildings) are required. It would be more like a parking management challenge for these hospitals. And in any case, these parking spaces would be mostly empty and therefore idle at night time and Sundays.
Here’s another nice read that I’m sure is worth the while particularly if you are interested in parking
Litman, T. (2018) Parking Planning Paradigm Shift, planetizen.com, https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/99462-parking-planning-paradigm-shift [Accessed: 7/7/2018].
An acquaintance recently forwarded to me a position paper of sorts calling for the removal of parking minimums in the Philippines. The document constantly dropped the name of UC Irvine Professor Donald Shoup and others in order to justify his proposal. This was supposed to be addressed to those who are doing the revisions of the National Building Code (NBC) of the Philippines. First off – I didn’t know that the minimum parking requirements are being reviewed now and that there is another revision project that is ongoing. The last revisions I was aware of was the project that sought to include resilience items in the NBC. That was done through the University of the Philippines Diliman with UP’s Building Research Service (BRS) as lead and involving, among others, its Colleges of Architecture and Engineering.
These days when there are heavy rains and the threat of flooding, the Marikina river and its riverbanks come to mind. In the Santolan area, where a former Mayor of Marikina has invested a lot in developing a bus terminal, he seems to be stretching it in terms of trying to make the area a major intermodal terminal and maximising utility of the land. The latest venture is described by the sign below:
“Park and ride” sign along the Marcos Highway Bridge crossing the Marikina River
A closer look at the sign shows what’s written at the lower part. That is, that the parking spaces are “walking distance” from the Line 2 Santolan Station. I’m not sure if they measured the actual walking distance and what it would take to walk that distance between this parking area for the “park and ride” and the Line 2 Santolan Station. A quick measurement using Google Maps indicate that the distance between these two are more than 400m, and this is not an ‘easy’ walk considering that you would have to ascend from or descend to the riverbanks level and there is no shelter from the elements for what would be regular walks if one is to commit to this “park and ride” arrangement. If I were to walk such a distance, then I would likely choose to park at the mall and use the long footbridge connecting it to the station.
I still maintain that the best location for a “park and ride” would be one near the station similar to the Trinoma mall parking lot being practically adjacent to the Line 3 North EDSA station. And that is what LGUs, the railway authorities or the private sector should look into for projects like the Line 2 Extension and Line 7. The area around the future Line 2 Masinag Station presents a lot of possibilities in terms of parking facilities including perhaps a redevelopment of the existing SM City Masinag to be integrated with the station. As for Line 7, the areas around another SM City (Fairview) also presents opportunities for “park and ride” facilities.
I found a couple of old parking tickets from the Ninoy Aquino International Airport. Both are for overnight parking, which shows how cheaper overnight rates were before. The amounts to be paid then were also simpler to calculate since an overnight is automatically computed as either 40 or 300 pesos. Note that the 40-peso overnight fee was for the open parking lots of NAIA T2 and T3. The 300-peso fee was for the multi-level building of T3. I’ll just put these photos here for reference and those throwback moments.
I recently posted about the new parking rates at NAIA Terminal 3. I took this photo last night as we exited the Terminal 3 parking lot after our delayed arrival from a domestic trip.
There’s no mention in the signs about overnight rates. When asked about the latter, the staff at the booth simply replied that the information posted are their new parking rates. I assume this is just for Terminal 3 as that is what the signs stated and perhaps because only T3 has a multi-level parking facility. The other three terminals only have open parking lots. It’s easy to calculate your parking fees should you opt to leave your vehicles at the T3 multi-level building. If you find it expensive then perhaps you can just take public transport or have someone drop you off (and pick-up later).
Only last weekend I was surprised to have been charged 840 pesos for what was usually a 600-peso fee for the equivalent of 2 nights parking at NAIA Terminal 3’s multi-level parking. When I asked, I was informed by the staff that they don’t have overnight parking charges anymore effective a certain date. There was supposed to be a sign at the parking entrance but I didn’t notice this when I entered the facility very early (around 4:00 AM) last Thursday. Here’s a photo of the receipt issued to me.
Note that regular rates were applied and zero was charged for overnight parking. Also note the classification as a “regular” parker. Before, the staff just makes the assessment that the person is an ‘overnighter’ based on the info of time-in and time-out (quite easy to see) and issues overnight tickets of 300 pesos each (per night) for the assessed number for the Parker. [I posted about this previously.]
I have another colleague who was similarly charged despite just an overnight. I still have to confirm it but it seems that there really is no longer an overnight parking rate and they just charge you with the regular rates. That means they are now maximising the revenues from parking and no longer provide incentives for those leaving their cars while away on trips. Whether this is something like a progressive initiative for parking or not, its actually going to be a turn-off for many including individuals and families who usually leave their cars when they travel domestically or abroad for business or pleasure.
Another municipality that has become somewhat aggressive in its campaign against illegally parked vehicles is Taytay also in Rizal province. In the case of Taytay, instead of wheel clamps, authorities have opted to employ what appears as more cost efficient (read: less expensive) tools in their campaign – chains and locks. Instead of the more sophisticated (and likely more expensive) wheel clamps in neighboring Antipolo, chains are wrapped around one of the front wheels of a vehicle and then secured by a lock. Examples are shown in the following photo:
Anti-illegal parking enforcers also post a sheet of paper on the window of the vehicle to notify the driver about the violation. The enforcers are posted nearby; waiting for drivers to approach them. There’s supposed to be a fine similar to when a vehicle is towed and reclaimed by the driver or owner. This, campaign, however, seems to have been relaxed in the same area where I took the photo as there are again a lot of vehicles parked on either side of the street on the Saturdays that I pass by the area. I’m not yet sure if this is a case of ningas cogon on the part of the municipality or perhaps they are just exercising some flexibility considering the parking demand for the market and the numerous clothes shops there where wholesalers flock to for merchandise. I haven’t seen similar “chaining” activities in other parts of Taytay unlike Antipolo, which has been continuously and consistently conducting campaigns throughout the city.
Earlier this year, Antipolo City implemented an aggressive campaign against illegal on-street parking. This policy was borne out of a new ordinance penalizing on-street parking that has been perceived as the cause of traffic congestion along many of the city’s roads. A more detailed description of the conditions or situations warranting wheel clamping may be found in the Antipolo City website.
The following photos were taken from the Antipolo City Government Facebook page:
The ordinance and its implementation by the city is very timely (some may say overdue) considering that many streets particularly in the city center is already clogged with vehicles parked on-street. In certain cases, there’s double parking; severely constricting traffic flow even along one-way streets. There are (as always) evidence of resistance but hopefully, the city’s resolve will overcome and improve the situation.
I think another thing that should be in Antipolo’s agenda that’s very much related to the problem of on-street parking is the requirement for off-street parking spaces as stipulated in the National Building Code. The Code actually prescribes for the minimum number of slots per building or development but it is the local government that is tasked to implement or enforce the provisions in the NBC. Going around Antipolo, one can observe that there are many establishments clearly in violation of the Building Code provisions. One major university, for example, along Sumulong Highway does not have enough spaces considering the vehicle trips it generates. This situation is compounded by the expansion of the school to include a hospital and the adjacent commercial development that conspicuously also appears to not have enough parking spaces. An LGU can actually have a policy for stricter minimum parking slots. Quezon City and Makati City have ordinances stating so but have had mixed results compared to the outcomes they probably thought about as desirable.
Of course the topic of minimum parking spaces is currently the subject of discussions in other, more progressive cities and countries, and particularly those with better developed public transport and more disciplined land development. While relevant to us here in the Philippines, it is a topic that is not yet ripe for serious discussions given the many concerns (i.e., violations, non-compliance issues) that still need to be addressed by LGUs like Antipolo City at present.