Thesis Last Na Jud Print

i
A PROPOSED 3 STOREY PARKING BUILDING IN BARANGAY SAN ROQUE,

CEBU CITY
A Thesis
Presented to the
Faculty of the Civil Engineering Department
University of the Visayas
Cebu City
In Partial Fulfilment
Of the Requirements for the
Degree of Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
Hisham Y. Amilhasan
Meljon L. Abaño
Al Salvador C. Ching
Artemio B. Dubluis Jr.
Alexis Jude L. Labastida
Donato Henry R. Lacbayo
Jon Sedfrey T. Nadera
Jenny Rose R. Siega
Jenny Y. Tejano
Rhamy P. Urtezuela
Don Sergio G. Villaester
October 2017
ii
ABSTRACT
TITLE : A PROPOSED 3 STOREY PARKING BUILDING
IN BARANGAY SAN ROQUE, CEBU CITY
AUTHORS : HISHAM Y. AMILHASAN
MELJON L. ABAÑO
AL SALVADOR C. CHING
ARTEMIO B. DUBLUIS JR.
ALEXIS JUDE L. LABASTIDA
DONATO HENRY R. LACBAYO
JON SEDFREY T. NADERA
JENNY ROSE R. SIEGA
JENNY Y. TEJANO
RHAMY P. URTEZUELA
DON SERGIO G. VILLAESTER
DEGREE : BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
SCHOOL : UNIVERSITY OF THE VISAYAS MAIN CAMPUS
DATE : OCTOBER 2017
ADVISER : ENGR. NIMFA O. RODRIGUEZ

iii
The study is entitled “A Proposed 3 Storey Parking Building in Barangay San
Roque, Cebu City.” The aim of this study is to brought out the importance of having a
parking building in that location. The place is surrounded by various establishments that
are lacking of parking areas, thus vehicles are left to park alongside the road which can
cause traffic congestions and unsafe to both the vehicle and the owner. Other than that,
vehicle owners spend time and gasoline in finding a parking space resulting to delay in
their transactions.
Methodology
The study made use of the Descriptive Survey Method in collecting data with
supporting document analysis. The input of the study was the data from survey
questionnaires, and interviews. The research respondents had a total number of fifty (50)
vehicle owners.
Conclusion
The Parking Building is in demand due to the increasing number of vehicles and
lack of parking areas where the vehicle owner are force to park alongside the road which
can cause traffic congestions and it is unsafe for their vehicles .
Recommendation
The present study thereby recommends this proposed three storey parking
building to help lessen the vehicles parking on streets and give vehicle owners less
hassle, more safety and less time finding a parking space.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, we owe more than thanks to our family for their financial
support and encourage throughout our life. Without their support, it is impossible for us
to finish this project and also we would never have been able to finish our project study
without the guidance of our group members and help from friends,
We would like to express our deepest gratitude to our advisor, Engr. Ramiel To-
ong, for his excellent guidance, caring, patience, and providing us with an excellent
atmosphere for doing our research.
We would like to thank Dr. Nimfa Rodriguez, who let us experience the research
for the proposal of a three-storey parking building by its practical issues beyond the
textbooks, patiently corrected our manuscript and emotionally supported our research.
We would also like to thank Engr. Johmie Torrenueva for guiding our research for
the past several months and helping us to develop our background in structural theory,
earthquake engineering, and planning and estimates.
We would like to thank Mr. Michael Vincent Querubin, who as a good friend,
was always willing to help and give his best suggestions. It would have been a lonely
journey without him. Our research would not have been possible without their help.
We would also like to thank our parents, brothers and sisters who stood by us
through the good times and bad. They were always supporting us and encouraging us
with their best wishes.
Finally, we would like to thank God for hearing our prayers and giving us the
strength to complete this assessment.

v
APPROVAL SHEET
This thesis entitled, “A PROPOSED 3 STOREY PARKING BUILDING IN
BARANGAY SAN ROQUE, CEBU CITY” submitted by HISHAM Y.
AMILHASAN, MELJON L. ABAÑO, AL SALVADOR C. CHING, ARTEMIO B.
DUBLUIS JR., ALEXIS JUDE L. LABASTIDA, DONATO HENRY R. LACBAYO,
JON SEDFREY T. NADERA, JENNY ROSE R. SIEGA, JENNY Y. TEJANO,
RHAMY P. URTEZUELA and DON SERGIO G. VILLAESTER, in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL
ENGINEERING had been examined and is recommended for acceptance and approval
for ORAL DEFEND.
RAMIEL P. TO-ONG
Instructor, CE Department
Adviser/Structural
MITCHELLE IAN C. DORIA

Adviser/Grammar
THESIS COMMITTEE
NIMFA O. RODRIGUEZ, Ph. D. TM

Chairman of Thesis Committee
BIENVENIDA U. CATALAN, DM RAMIEL P. TO-ONG
Instructor, CE Department Instructor, CE Department

Panel Panel
vi
Accepted and approved by the committee with a rating of during the

Oral Examination on October 7, 2017.
NIMFA O. RODRIGUEZ, Ph. D. TM

Chairman of Thesis Committee
BIENVENIDA U. CATALAN, DM RAMIEL P. TO-ONG
Instructor, CE Department Instructor, CE Department

Panel Panel
Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering.
ARCH’T. ADELINE CORTEZ-LAURON
Dean, College of Engineering and Architecture

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................. iv
APPROVAL SHEET ..................................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... x
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ xi
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE ............................................................................... 1
Rationale of the Study ......................................................................................... 1
Conceptual Background of the Study.................................................................. 4
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................... 7
Scope & Limitation of the Study......................................................................... 7
Significance of the Study .................................................................................... 8
DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................................................ 10
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES ......................................... 11

viii
Related Literature .............................................................................................. 11
Related Studies .................................................................................................. 12
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES ............................................. 17
Research Method ............................................................................................... 17
Research Environment ...................................................................................... 17
Research Respondents ....................................................................................... 22
Research Instruments ........................................................................................ 22
Research Procedures ......................................................................................... 22
Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................ 24
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA .................... 25
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............ 30
Summary ........................................................................................................... 30
Findings ............................................................................................................. 31
Conclusion......................................................................................................... 32
Recommendation ............................................................................................... 32
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Research Respondents ........................................................................................ 22
Table 2: Commonly used parking area ............................................................................. 26
Table 3: Respondents in favor for the parking bldg.. ....................................................... 27
Table 4: Time spent searching for parking area................................................................ 28
Table 5: Safety of vehicles in the currently used parking area ......................................... 29

x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK........................................................................ 6
Figure 2: The Proposed Site .............................................................................................. 18
Figure 3: Aerial view of the site ....................................................................................... 19
Figure 4: Vehicles parked along the road ......................................................................... 20
Figure 5: Trcaffic congestion due to roadside parking ..................................................... 21

xi
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................... 34
APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................... 44
APPENDIX C ................................................................................................................... 48
APPENDIX D ................................................................................................................... 49
APPENDIX E ................................................................................................................... 51
APPENDIX F.................................................................................................................... 54
APPENDIX G ................................................................................................................... 60
APPENDIX H ................................................................................................................... 73
APPENDIX I .................................................................................................................. 102
APPENDIX J .................................................................................................................. 113
APPENDIX K ................................................................................................................. 114
APPENDIX L ................................................................................................................. 115
APPENDIX M ................................................................................................................ 117

1
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
Rationale of the Study
Parking building is a building designed for car parking and where there are a
number of floors or levels on which parking takes place. It is essentially a stacked car
park. It is a parking space inside a building intended for short-term storage for vehicles.
The design of a multilevel parking garage can be very different. The most common
design is a garage with ramps to move from one level to another. Less common are
parking garages that use lifts to go from level to level. Parking building applies multiple
access and exit system to avoid traffic congestion in and out of the building. (Khairunnur,
2016)
In the Philippines, one of the main problems of today’s road system is parking.
There are two main reasons why parking is an important part of the transportation
system: first, every starting and end of a car’s trip is a parking lot. Secondly, 95% of the
car’s lifetime is spend on parking. The Philippines have experienced a substantial growth
that led to the increase in demand for residential, commercial and office spaces.
This improvement in growth invited more vehicles that produced a sudden need
for more parking spaces and for parking policies. The lack of well-organized and
authorized off-street parking facilities causes illegal parking on the carriageway thus
resulting in traffic chaos, congestion delay and accidents due to on street parking. As
more number of vehicles increase the lack of parking spaces also increases. In the
2
Philippines there are 690 million vehicles registered to LTO (Land Transportation Office)
as of 2013. Parking has become a controversial issue with traffic congestion and
environmental degradation due to constant and uncontrolled enlargements to date.
Due to limited parking space, and the increasing number of vehicle every year,
and considering its consequence on the transport system, the environment and the
economy, this study will give significant data and a discerning analyses of the parking
reviews to give a picture of the existing parking situation as well as the future scenario
and other related problems which concern the study. The result of the parking demand
analysis will be the basis for a design of the parking facility. In Cebu City the number of
vehicles have increased over the past years that having a place where vehicles will be
parked is a very need that could be left temporarily in a secure place and accessible to the
drivers.
Barangay San Roque is considered as a highly urbanized area in Cebu City, Due
to its landmarks, institutions and businesses it is a perfect place to attract people to visit
the parking building.
Barangay San Roque is home to 4,444 residents. It connects the northern part of
Cebu to the South Road Properties (SRP) and southern part of Cebu of cebu. Due to its
location it is considered to be one of the busiest barangays in Cebu City. Barangay San
Roque is surrounded with three barangays: Brgy. Tinago, Brgy. Parian and Brgy. Santo
Niño with a combined population of 9,530 residents, adding Brgy. San Roque’s
3
population makes almost 14,000 residents, making it a valuable community for a parking
building.
Hence, the proposed site of the 3-storey Parking Building is in Mariano Jesus
Cuenco Avenue or the so called M.J. Cuenco. The site is near the Plaza Independencia,
old POEA building, Toyota Motors, Cebu Technological University, Sto. Niño de
Basilica Church and Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral. It is accessible to park in this area
because of the convenient roadways that leads to the proposed site.
This establishment will also serve as a new landmark in Brgy. San Roque, Cebu
City and also serves to the car owners more than what has before.
The Researchers chose to have this study for the reason that in doing so; It will
help the researchers to learn in the field of vertical construction. This will also open up
people that there is another convenient and a lot more comfortable way to store or park
their cars. The researchers have decided to choose this challenging topic in order to help
provide a solution to lack of parking spaces in Barangay San Roque.

4
Conceptual Background of the Study
Philippines have more than 690 million vehicles. The traffic on roads and parking
space has been an area for concern in the majority of certain cities especially in Cebu
City. Cebu City is constantly progressing in industrial aspects. If there will be more malls
and institutions in the area, there will be more vehicles that will pass through and out of
the place.
Based on the survey, 40 percent of the road space is use for parking rather than
for traffic on a normal working day. Nowadays vehicle owners have two choices of
parking their vehicles. One is On-street Parking where vehicles are parked on the side of
the street and another is Off-street Parking where vehicles are parked of the streets. Since
On-street parking are rampant nowadays, a parking building is necessary to help us lessen
the vehicles that parks wrongly on the road that causes traffic.
The main concern in this study is to have a parking building that will be available
to all people and provide a safe and secure place to leave their vehicle. By having this
parking building we can minimize traffic and lessen the accident rate. Due to fewer
parking spots available and narrowed lanes. It is important to park on permissive parking
spots when we are dropping off or picking up. Blocking cars, parking lanes, parking spots
or parking along the driveway entrances creates a safety concern for children, and adults
walking. It is also important to maintain clear, accessible driving lanes for emergency
vehicles.
5
More than 82 percent of people reported dissatisfaction with city parking
arrangements and the large number of new high-rise building that did not prioritize
parking spaces often leads to vehicle owners spend more time searching for a safe
parking area. Some drivers have no choice but to park far away from their intended
location. This may cause them more time that result to being late to their appointments.
It takes an average time of 20 min. to find a parking area in the city, some of these
locations are too far from the desired destination of the vehicle owners.
6
LACK OF
PARKING
SPACES
VEHICLES STANDARD AND

SPECIFICATIONS
INCREASE
PROPOSED
3- STOREY
PARKING
BLDG. RISK OF
PARKING FAR
SAFETY FROM YOUR
CONCERNS INTENDED
LOCATION
RECOMMENDATION
Figure 1: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

7
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
The main objective of this study is to propose a three – storey parking building in
Barangay San roque, Cebu City?
For the reason, it sought to answer the following questions:
1. Is there a need to construct a parking building in Brgy. San Roque, Cebu City?
2. What is the present status of parking space availability in Brgy. San Roque ?
3. What are the benefits if a parking building is realized?
4. What will be the technical aspects needed to realize a parking building?
3.1. Building Design;
3.2. Structural Design;
3.3. Labor and Material cost;
3.4. Standard and Specifications;
5. Based on the researchers findings to the study, what recommendation can be
attained?
Scope & Limitation of the Study

The study will only deal with the realization of a three storey parking building in
Brgy. San Roque, Cebu City. Including the Technical Aspects such as; the Building
Designs, Structural Designs, Cost of Materials and the Standard and Specifications
following the National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP). The scope of the study
covers the safety, economical and the simplest approved design but convenient. Soil
8
investigations, drainage system, survey, electrical and mechanical aspects if implemented
are beyond the scoped of the study.
Furthermore, it will also cover considerable factors that could improve Barangay
San Roque given that the place has identified as heritage site and which hopes to
showcase a proposed parking building that tends to attract more foreign visitors and local
tourists as well.
Significance of the Study

The significance of the study will present or show who benefited of the study.
Vehicle Owners
The vehicle owners could assure comfortability and safety for their
automobiles.
Commuters
The proposed three – storey parking building would help the commuters
lessen their travel time going to their destination due less traffic caused by off-
street parking.
Residents
The residents will be beneficiary of the proposed project giving them new
option for parking their vehicles. This will also be beneficial to the residents in
Brgy. San Roque for it opens parking opportunities to the neighboring place of the
said project.
9
Researchers
This study will serve as enrichment for the researcher’s knowledge for
having a parking building as bases of their future constructions when they become
successful in their profession as a Civil Engineer.
Future Researchers
The future researchers may use this as a reference for their research to
continue or study further and overcome limitations of this study.
10
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Accessibility – the project site is accessible to automobiles that come from the South
Road Properties route, F. Urdaneta route and J. Palma routes.
Capacity – the maximum number of vehicle that the parking building can accommodate.
Design – the idea to manufacture a certain structure
Labor and Material Cost-this tackles the number of labor manpower needed and its
cost. The types/kinds and cost of the materials needed in the project. Computations are
available in the succeeding pages.
Parking Building – is a three storey parking garage where people can leave their cars.
Propose – a suggestion made by the group which fits to the desired plan
Researchers - In this paper, the term researchers is used to mean “gatherer of data and
information about a subject.”
Standard and Specification – refers to the standards to be used in the project and the
detailed description of the project
Storey – refers to the number of floors that the building has.
Structural - relating to or forming part of the structure of a building or other item.
Vehicle – is a type of machine used to transport people and goods.

11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This Chapter contains studies that had been done in the past by both foreign and
local authors which are related to this study.
Related Literature
Dr. S.K. Sharma (2008), Terminal facilities form an integral part of any
transportation system. Traffic usually travels towards a destination and the vehicle must
be parked while some business, pubic, recreational or servicing, is transacted. Failure to
provide suitable parking facility can result in congestion and frustration, ultimately
leading to the decline in the importance and value of areas considered at present to be
most desirable for the day-to-day business of a city by its inhabitants. As a general rule,
increase in vehicle ownership results in increased parking demand.
Garber and Hoel (2015), Parking studies are used to determine the demand for
and supply of parking facilities in an area. A comprehensive parking study usually
involves (1) inventory of existing parking facilities; (2) collection of data on parking
accumulation, parking turnover, and parking duration; (3) identification of parking
generators; and (4) collection of information on parking demand.
Dahane (2015), Parking structures are generally classified as either “static” or
“automated.” The automated parking are more common in Europe while static is the most
prevalent type of parking structure in the United States. The two types of ramps that can
be used are straight ramp and curve ramp. Five types of layout that can be used in
12
traditional parking structure includes parallel packing, perpendicular/ angle 90° , angle
60° , angle 45° and angle 30°. The floor level system can be flat on the same floor, can be
split level or staggered floor systems or sloping floor systems.
For the design aspect, there are numerous configurations of multi-storey car parks
featuring different arrangements of deck and ramp. The final selection of the
configuration will be determined by the overall size of the car park, the shape of the site
and the use for which the car park is intended. Starting from the planning dimensions,
you consider the bay width, aisle width, ramp dimensions, planning grid, alignment paths
to exit barriers, means of escape distances, travel distances from the car to the
destination, security, visibility, space allowances, lift provision and payment system
among other things.
Related Studies
According to Weterings (2013), Parking regulates mobility; provides services to
users; shapes the urban environment; and is a source of revenue for government and
market parties. Parking activities are located in the public domain (on‐street) and private
domain (off‐street) in garages, areas or near walkways.
Parking facilities, as elements of the built environment, provide users with spaces
for their cars nearby their destinations. As a result, it affects urban planning, spatial use,
the convenience of transportation and sustainability of the city is growing.
Recently, attention is growing on sustainability in relation with parking. As a
result, the parking industry and government are embracing a large number of
13
developments ranging from sustainable innovations to environmental policy in the
context of parking. The focus in this research lies with recent developments in the context
of sustainable parking.
According to the study in 2011 by Desman Associates, Industry standards suggest
that a parking facility is considered to be at full operational capacity when occupancy
levels reach 90‐95%. Once this level is achieved, potential parkers find it difficult to
locate an available space. As a result, those individuals must continue to search, creating
traffic flow problems and increases in the potential for vehicle/vehicle and
vehicle/pedestrian conflicts. Additional considerations include the inefficient use of the
facilities (vehicles potentially occupying more than one space), snow storage during
winter months, and areas needed for maintenance procedures (cleaning, painting,
landscaping, striping, drainage, etc.). The effective and efficient turnover of parking
spaces is most successful when the supply of spaces exceeds the peak demand for those
spaces by 5%‐10%. As is common for nonurban university settings, a practical capacity
factor of 90% is used.
Gupte (2014), Surface parks consume too much of the precious land in the heart
of the city and are not, therefore, always feasible. One of the alternatives when land is
costly is to provide multi-storey car parks. Multi-storey car parks are designed for a
capacity of about 400 to 500 cars. Larger capacity tends to increase the time for
unparking a car. About five floors is also the upper limit for the same reason. The car
parking floors, the ramps, the entrance and the exits should be well lighted. If the garage
is without external walls, as is often the case, there is no need for artificial means for
14
ventilation. Otherwise, mechanical ventilators should be provided. The operation of the
multi-storey car parks can be with customer parking or attendant parking or a
combination of the two.
Lim, Hallare and Briones (2012). The use of most major streets in Metro Manila are
not properly monitored and managed especially with regards to on-street parking thereby
reducing the capacity of the road and even could cause accidents. On-street parking slows
down and impedes vehicles and disrupts the flow of traffic especially parking along the
street.
By understanding the effects as well as the relationship of on-street parking on
moving vehicles, this could provide a better means of measuring the capacity of the road.
On-street parking should not be allowed on roads with high vehicular demand while on-
street parking should be allowed on roads with less vehicular demand. This would also
benefit a lot of people especially those who bring their vehicles to work and to other
places since it would provide a better vehicular flow as well as reduce the number of
accidents with regards to on-street parking.
The researchers Aliwalas and Samson (2012) came up with a solution to build a
two-storey building with a basement to eliminate the need for on-street parking near
Victoria and Murallasteets and this would minimize the traffic crisis in the area. The car
park has a total of 285 slots for cars and 75 slots for motorcycles with security personnel,
closed-circuit television (CCTV), comfort rooms and a vertical garden on the rooftop.
15
Due to limited space and the height requirement of the Intramuros Administration, it was
decided to put a basement on the structure to maximize the space.
Transportation and economic problems are effects of the undersupply of parking.
The undersupply of parking may encourage on-street parking, worsen traffic congestion
and limit socio-economic activities in the area. Minimum parking requirements address
problems associated with an undersupply of parking. Minimum parking requirements
require developers to construct a minimum number of parking spots, depending on the
zone and type of development. Minimum parking requirements are implemented to
ensure that there is parking within a reasonable distance of a driver’s final destination.
Bulactial, Dizon, Garcia and Valdez (2013), Ermita-Malate and Makati Central
Business District (CBD) are the center of business and commerce in the Philippines. On-
street parking is rampant in Ermita-Malate even in areas that do not allow it including
some national roads, public utility vehicle routes and loading & unloading areas. In
Makati CBD, on-street parking facilities are also widely used particularly for short-term
businesses. Parking management is crucial for an efficient use of available parking
resources. The main objective of this study is to compare the on-street parking
management between the two study areas. The two study areas were surveyed in order to
identify the establishments and institutions within the district as well as its current on-
street parking conditions.
From the data gathered, it was found out that Ermita-Malate actually has existing
parking ordinances but these are not properly implemented. From the existing ordinance
16
in Makati, several recommendations were made for Ermita-Malate specifically the three-
hour parking limit. This recommendation was done to maximize the use of the on-street
parking facilities. An on-street parking map was generated for Ermita-Malate area to
serve as a guide for motorists to determine the proper on-street parking areas.
17
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
This chapter contains the methods and procedures undertaken from gathering of
data to its assessment in order to come up with a factual and reliable result.
Research Method
This study would use the descriptive survey method. The data were gathered
through a series of interviews to the recipients. A questionnaire was given in order to
clarify the present status of the Barangay and whether the proposed Parking Building was
feasible in the area. The inputs were collected and served as the basis in formulating
recommendations.
Research Environment
The study was conducted in Brgy. San Roque, Cebu City, Cebu. is one of the 46
barangays of the northern district of Cebu City in the island province of Cebu, within
Region VII. The total population of the said barangay is about 4,444 local residents.
Mariano Jesus Cuenco Avenue or the so called M.J. Cuenco Avenue is part of
Brgy. San Roque. M.J. Cuenco Avenue is a main road that connects northern part of
Cebu to the South Road Properties (SRP) and southern part of Cebu. The site is in the
middle of Plaza Independencia, Cebu Pier 1, Cebu Technological University, Sto. Niño
de Basilica Church and Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral.

18
Figure 2: The Proposed Site

19
Figure 3: Aerial view of the site

20
Figure 4: Vehicles parked along the road

21
Figure 5: Trcaffic congestion due to roadside parking

22
Research Respondents
The respondents are the vehicle owners and the local residents of Brgy. San
Roque. The Non-probability sampling would be used wherein fifty (50) respondents
would be given the chance to answer the survey questionnaires.
TABLE 1
RESEARCH RESPONDENT
N = 50
RESPONDENTS NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE
COMMUTERS 16 32
VEHICLE OWNERS 7 14
DRIVERS 23 46
RESIDENTS 4 8
TOTAL 50 100
Research Instruments
This study would make use of researcher-made questionnaires. The research
questionnaire would contain inquiries for the need of a parking building, wherein every
question are answerable by putting a check mark on the space provided in the listed
choices after every questions made.
Research Procedures
The title of this study was formulated during the researcher’s frequent visits to
Barangay San Roque Cebu City. The increasing volume of vehicles and lack of parking
23
area are the important factors that the researchers considered. The vehicle owners needed
a secure place where they can temporally leave there vehicles.
A request letter approved by the Department Head was submitted to Hon. Cyrus
Lindog of Barangay San Roque followed by a letter asking permission to distribute
questionnaires.
The researcher would prepare and distribute the questionnaires. The respondents
are provided instructions upon receiving the instrument and are assured of confidentiality.
The researchers would distribute the research questionnaire to the local residents and
vehicle owners. There would be 50 questionnaires given out to the respondents. The
respondents would be asked to answer the questionnaire as honestly as possible. The data
would be tallied to show percentages on the problems encountered as well as the
respondents in favor for the proposed parking building.
Frequent visit to the proposed site were done to assess the current situation of the
area. Paper works and technical works then followed after all necessary data were
gathered.
24
Statistical Analysis
The data were tabulated, tallied and statistically analyzed using the simple
percentage method with the formula showed:
The formula: P = (F / N) x 100
Where: P - percentage
F - frequency
N - number of respondents
25
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This part of the study shall present the findings of the researchers, the data and
documents gathered throughout the course of this study. This chapter shall provide
answers to the inquiries raised in the first few chapters of this study. Also this chapter
covers the interpretation of data based on factual analysis.
Presentation of the need of constructing a Parking Building in Barangay San
Roque, Cebu City
Based on our research, Barangay San Roque cannot be denied is one of the most
urbanized barangays in Cebu City. It is home of many landmarks, institutions and
businesses which serves as a good indicator that the area is well dense. Adding to that is a
parking building we are proposing, a place that can provide a safe and secured place
where vehicle drivers can temporally leave there vehicles.
The parking building shall accommodate vehicles that are park along the
roadways. Putting up a parking building will lessen the time of the vehicle owners in
finding an appropriate area for parking.

26
TABLE 2
COMMONLY USED PARKING AREA
VEHICLE TYPE STREET PRIVATE MALL

PARKING LOT PARKING
GARAGE
CARS 4 3 2
VANS 0 1 0
SUV/AUV 1 1 1
MOTORCYCLE 6 2 2
TOTAL 11 7 5
PERCENTAGE 47.83% 30.43% 21.74%
Table 2 presents the parking facilities commonly used by the vehicle owners,
(47.83%) of the vehicle owners use the street for parking. According to them parking on
street allows them to be closer to their desired location but they are concern about the
safety of their vehicles. While thirty point forty three percent (30.43%) used the private
parking lot and twenty one point seventy four percent (21.74%) used mall parking
garages.
27
TABLE 3
RESPONDENTS IN FAVOR FOR THE PARKING BLDG.
RESPONDENTS YES NO
COMMUTERS 15 1
VEHICLE OWNERS 5 2
DRIVERS 23 0
RESIDENTS 2 2
TOTAL 45 5
PERCENTAGE 90% 10%
Table 3 shows that fifteen (15) of the commuters confirmed and answer yes,
citing the importance of the project and how it will lessen the traffic congestion within
the area. Only one (1) said no for the commuters for unknown reasons. Five (5) of the
students also answered yes, according to them this will help them not to be late in their
classes and only two (2) students said no. The most positive answer we got was from the
drivers. Twenty three (23) confirmed and said yes. According to them this will lessen the
time they will spend on finding a parking area and prevent them from using the street as
means of parking. Equal number of (2) residents oppose and favour the proposed project.
To them this will add to the beautiful landmarks in barangay. Overall majority or (90%)
of the respondent are in favour of realizing a parking building in Barangay San Roque, on
28
the other hand only 10% of the respondents are not in favour of a parking building within
the Barangay.
The figures below answer the inquiry; Benefits the vehicle owners gain if a parking
building is realized?
TABLE 4
TIME SPENT SEARCHING FOR PARKING AREA
CLASSIFICATION 5-10 mins 10-20mins 20-30mins 30mins up

OF VEHICLES
CARS 1 3 2 3
VANS 0 0 1 0
SUV/AUV 0 2 0 1
MOTORCYCLE 6 3 1 0
TOTAL 7 8 4 4
PERCENTAGE 30.44% 34.78% 17.39% 17.39%
Table 3 shows the classification of vehicles and the time spent by each vehicle in
finding a parking area. Thirty point forty four percent (30.44%) of the vehicles takes 5 –
10 min. to find a parking area; most of them are motorcycles. Thirty point seventy eight
(34.78%) of the vehicles takes 10 – 20 min. to find a parking area and seventeen point
thirty nine percent (17.39%) of the vehicle owners take 20 – 30 min. to find a parking
area and seventeen point thirty nine percent (17.39%) of the vehicles take 30 min. and up
to find a parking area. This shows that most of the motorcycles take less time in finding a
parking area than cars, SUV and AUV.

29
TABLE 5
SAFETY OF VEHICLES IN THE CURRENTLY USED PARKING AREA
VEHICLE Very Poor Poor Ok Good Very Good

OWNERS
CARS OWNER 4 1 2 2 0
VANS OWNER 0 0 1 0 0
SUV/AUV 0 2 1 0 0
OWNER
MOTORCYCLE 5 2 2 0 1
OWNER
TOTAL 9 5 6 2 1
PERCENTAGE 39.13% 21.74% 26.07% 8.7% 4.35%
Table 4 shows the vehicle owners rating to the security or safety of the parking
area they are using. Thirty nine point thirteen percent (39.13%) of the vehicle owners rate
the safety of the parking area they are using as very poor. Twenty one point seventy four
percent (21.74%) says poor, Twenty six point zero seven percent (26.07%) says ok or
contented, eight point seven percent (8.7%) says good and only four point thirty five
percent (4.35%) feels very good or feels very safe with the parking area they are using.
This means that most of the vehicle owners feel uneasiness when leaving their vehicles
while attending appointments or transactions.

30
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the summary of the study, the findings in terms of data
gathered by the researchers, the conclusion and recommendation for this research.
Summary
Cebu City has been identified as a first class highly urbanized city in the island
province of Cebu in the Central Visayas. The substantial growth of Cebu City led to the
increase in the demand for the residential, commercial and office spaces. This translates
to more people means more vehicles. Many of whom have appointments and transactions
in Barangay San Roque due to its landmarks, institutions and businesses.
In Barangay San Roque, the numbers of vehicles have increased over the past
years that it needs to have a secure place where vehicles could be left temporarily and
accessible to the drivers. Barangay San Roque is considered as a highly urbanized area in
Cebu City, due to its landmarks, institutions and businesses. Thus, it is a perfect place to
attract people to visit the parking building.
What is missing in Barangay San Roque is a parking building that can
accommodate the increase in vehicles and to avoid the cause of heavy traffic during
festivals and events in the area. It will also attract more people and investment to the
barangay.
31
Findings
 For our research in Barangay San Roque Cebu City, the chosen area of
study, the researchers were able to find out that in this area many vehicles
are parked alongside the road, especially around the churches like Cebu
Metropolitan cathedral and Basilica del Santo Nino.
 At present situation Brgy. San Roque faces the scarcity of parking space.
Many car owners are struggling to find a space to park for their own
vehicles because of the lack of parking space in the area. This is a
dilemma to the vehicle owners especially during Fridays or Sundays
wherein there are more people who goes to the church than ordinary days.
This causes them to be late on their appointments, not only the car owners
are affected but also the civilians who pass by the area or the commuters
who uses the area as a route to their destination.
 The researchers were able to find out that the owner of the vehicles or the
drivers would roam with an average of 5 to 20 minutes just to find a
parking space in this area. This means that they spend more time, almost
half an hour, in finding a parking space. And that is why parking building
is really a big need in this area.
 The researchers were also able to find out that many of the respondents
feel uneasy whenever their vehicles are parked alongside the road. Their
most common reason is that they might be victimized of theft or may
cause traffic in the area. The safety of the motorist is not only at stake but
32
also the civilians which could be affected due to obstruction of roadways.
Vehicles that parks alongside of the roads can affect the roadways since it
can add up the problem in terms of traffic flow near the area.
 The propose study is feasible in terms of safety accessibility and
convenience which was based upon the survey questionnaires that are
accepted generally by the citizens which the researchers surveyed.
Conclusion
In the light of the findings of the study , the researchers came up to the conclusion
that a three storey parking building should be constructed in the place in order to help
lessen the vehicles that parks wrongly alongside of the road that may cause traffic and
provide a safe and secured place to leave their vehicle. As a result, we can minimize
traffic and lessen the accident rate.
Recommendation
 It is recommended by the researchers that having a parking building in the
area would give vehicle owners less hassle, more safety and less time
finding a parking space.
 All vehicles that are parked in the road especially during peak seasons will
be accommodated by the parking building. This would give more space in
the roadway thus reducing the traffic flow in the area. Vehicle owners
approximately take 5 – 10 min. or 10 – 20 min. in order to find a parking

33
area and also this parking building will give a safety shelter for their
vehicles.
 This proposed parking building is intended to all light vehicles such as
motorcycles, cars, vans, suv and small vans.

APPENDIX A
ARCHITECTURAL
34
THE PROPOSED 3- STOREY BUILDING
PERSPECTIVE
35
36
FRONT ELEVATION
A B C D E F G H I
1.000
3.000
0.300
1.800
6.500
3.500
0.500
7.500
37
REAR ELEVATION
I' I H G F E D C B A A'
1.000
3.000
0.300
3.500
0.500
7.500
5.966 7.528 7.528 7.603
38
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
1 2 3 4 5 6
3.000
1.200
3.500
3.500
39
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
6 5 4 3 2 1
3.000
1.200
3.500
3.500
EXIT ENTRY
6.600
40
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
A B 7.500 C 7.500 D 7.500 E 7.500 F 7.500 G 7.500 H 6.000 I

1.500 7.500
1
4.500
6.000
DRIVEWAY 4.500 6.000
2.500
2
3.000
6.000 6.000
3
1.800
6.000
MOTORCYCLE 6.000
PARKING
4
3.000
MOTORCYCLE
5.400
DRIVEWAY PARKING
5.400
1.800
1.200
5
2.600
6.600 6.600
0.800 LOBBY
TOILET
1.000 1.700
OFFICE OFFICE 2.600
0.800 1
0.800 2
6 1.000
2.300 3.750 3.750
1.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 6.000
A FIRST FLOOR PLAN

5
41
SCALE 1 : 100 METERS
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
A B C D E F G H I
7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 7.500 6.000
1
2.600
6.000
DRIVEWAY
2
FIRE EXIT 1.000
FIRE EXIT
6.000 6.000
6.000 6.000
4
MOTORCYCLE 2.500 2.500 2.500
PARKING
5.400
DRIVEWAY
5
2.800 3.000
6.600
2.800 3.000
TOILET 1.000
6
22.500
A SECOND FLOOR PLAN

6 SCALE 1 : 100 METERS
42
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
A B C D E F G H I
1
DRIVEWAY
2
FIRE EXIT
FIRE EXIT
6.000
4
MOTORCYCLE 2.500 2.500 2.500
PARKING1.200
1.800
DRIVEWAY
5
TOILET
A THIRD FLOOR PLAN

2 SCALE 1 : 100 METERS
43
APPENDIX B
STRUCTURAL
44
FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR FRAMING
A B C D E F G H I
B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
1
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1
6.00 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
2
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1
6.00 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
3
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 B1 C1
6.00 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
4
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1
5.40 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
5
C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1
6.40 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1 B1
C1 B1 C1 B1 C1 B1 C1 B1 C1 B1 C1 B1 C1 B1 C1 B1 C1
6
7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 6.00
45
ROOF BEAM FRAMING
A B C D E F G H I
1
6.00
6.00
6.00
5.40
6.40
6
7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 6.00
46
FOUNDATION PLAN
A B C D E F G H I
1
6.00
6.00
6.00
5.40
6.40
6
7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 6.00
47
APPENDIX C
WALL FOOTING
48
APPENDIX D
SEPTIC TANK DETAIL
49
SEPTIC TANK GENERAL NOTES:
 ALL PLUMBING INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE
PHILIPPINE PLUMBING ORDINANCE.
 ALL HORIZONTAL PIPING INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE RUN IN PRACTICAL ALIGNMENT AND SHALL BE
PROVIDED WITH A SLOPE NOT LESS THAN 2%.
 ALL PLUMBING PIPES PASSING THRU OR UNDER CONCRETE SHALL BE FULL PROTECTED AGAINST
BREAKAGE.
 VERIFY ACTUAL LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF STREET DRAINAGE AND WATER SOURCE FOR
CONNECTION BEFORE CONSTRUCTION.
 ALL PLUMBING INSTALLATION SHALL BE DONE UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF A DULY
LICENSED PLUMBING ENGINEER OR MASTER PLUMBER.
 (UPVC) PIPES FOR WASTE, DRAIN AND VENT SHALL BE ATLANTA BRAND, NO REPLACEMENT OF
MATERIALS SHALL BE MADE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE DESIGNER.
50
APPENDIX E
SCHEDULE OF DOORS AND WINDOWS
51
52
53
APPENDIX F
BILL OF QUANTITIES
54
BILL OF QUANTITIES
Project Name: 3 Storey Parking Building

Location: Barangay San Roque (ciudad)
Item Unit Cost Total

DIV No. Description QTY Unit
No. Material Labor Total Amount (Php)
I GENERAL PRELIMINARIES 1,325,000.00
1.0 Power & Water Consumption 1.00 lot 100,000.00 100,000.00
2.0 Mobilization and Demibilization 1.00 lot 350,000.00 350,000.00
3.0 Communication Expenses 1.00 lot 25,000.00 25,000.00
4.0 Daily Housekeeping & Disposal of Debris 1.00 lot 200,000.00 200,000.00
5.0 Testing of Materials 1.00 lot 20,000.00 20,000.00
6.0 Timekeeper, Warehouseman & Purchaser 1.00 lot 35,000.00 35,000.00
7.0 Structural Plan,As-Built Plan,Revision 1.00 lot 45,000.00 45,000.00
8.0 Processing and Permit fee 1.00 lot 150,000.00 150,000.00
9.0 Safety Requirements 1.00 lot 150,000.00 150,000.00
10.0 Safety Personel 1.00 lot 250,000.00 250,000.00
II EARTHWORKS 177,411.90
1.0 Excavation 212.59 cu.m. 430.00 430.00 91,413.70
2.0 Disposal of Excess Materials 117.73 cu.m. 380.00 380.00 44,737.40
3.0 Backfilling and Compaction 109.86 cu.m. 280.00 280.00 30,760.80
4.0 Soil Poisoning/ Treatment of Termites 1.00 lot 55,000.00 10,500.00 10,500.00
III CONCRETE WORKS 1,792,519.20
1.0 Foundation, Wall Footing , Columns 155.32 cu.m. 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 866,685.60
2.0 Beam 33.94 cu.m. 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 189,385.20
3.0 Roofbeam 4.37 cu.m. 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 24,384.60
4.0 Slab 50.56 cu.m. 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 282,124.80
5.0 Stairs 20.80 cu.m. 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 116,064.00
55
6.0 Ramp 56.25 cu.m. 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 313,875.00
IV FORM WORKS 4,067,320.38
1.0 Foundation, Wall Footing , Columns 866.61 sq. m. 580.00 250.00 830.00 719,286.30
2.0 Beam 181.80 sq. m. 580.00 250.00 830.00 150,894.00
3.0 Roofbeam 114.29 sq. m. 580.00 250.00 830.00 94,860.70
4.0 Slab 3,353.14 sq. m. 580.00 250.00 830.00 2,783,106.20
5.0 Stairs 9.55 sq. m. 580.00 250.00 830.00 7,923.18
6.0 Ramp 375.00 sq. m. 580.00 250.00 830.00 311,250.00
V REBAR WORKS 6,617,112.32
1.0 10mm diameter x 6 m grade 40 29,053.20 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 1,510,766.40
2.0 10mm diameter x 7.5 m grade 41 12,610.80 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 655,761.60
3.0 12mm diameter x 6 m grade 60 827.70 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 43,040.40
4.0 12mm diameter x 7.5 m grade 60 19,097.18 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 993,053.36
5.0 16 mm diameter x 6 m grade 60 12,987.60 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 675,355.20
6.0 16 mm diameter x 9 m grade 60 29,577.00 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 1,538,004.00
7.0 16 mm diameter x 7.5 m grade 60 18,912.60 kgs 45.00 7.00 52.00 983,455.20
8.0 20 mm diameter x 6 m grade 60 3,201.12 kgs 60.00 8.00 68.00 217,676.16
VI MASONRY WORKS 1,681,035.60

1.0 Masonry Wall inc. Labor for hauling.( CHB # 4) 449.76 sq. m. 620.00 160.00 780.00 350,812.80
2.0 Masonry Wall inc. Labor for hauling.( CHB # 6) 1,350.48 sq. m. 810.00 175.00 985.00 1,330,222.80
VII PLASTERING WORKS 1,404,187.20
1.0 Plastering 3,600.48 sq. m. 210.00 180.00 390.00 1,404,187.20
VIII PAINTINGS 4,402,267.45
1.0 CHB Wall 3,600.48 sq.m 415.00 180.00 595.00 2,142,285.60
2.0 Slab soffit and beams 3,534.94 sq.m 415.00 180.00 595.00 2,103,289.30
3.0 Fascia Board 156.29 sq.m 415.00 180.00 595.00 92,992.55
4.0 Hand & Stair Railings 1.00 lot 3,500.00 3,500.00
5.0 Doors & Door Jamb - -
a. Solid Door with Jamb 2.00 sets 900.00 650.00 1,550.00 3,100.00
b. Flush Door with Jamb 2.00 sets 650.00 400.00 1,050.00 2,100.00
6.0 Stairs 1.00 lot 55,000.00 55,000.00
56
IX WINDOWS 201,379.75
1.0 Awning Glass Window (500x800) 6.00 set 6,343.50 2,114.50 8,458.00 50,748.00
2.0 Casement Glass Window (1250x1550) 3.00 set 15,000.00 1,784.50 16,784.50 50,353.50
3.0 Casement Glass Window (1250x2300) 5.00 set 14800.00 1,119.75 15,919.75 79,598.75
4.0 Fixed Glass Window (1850x800) 2.00 set 9,220.00 1,119.75 10,339.75 20,679.50
X DOORS AND DOOR JAMB 108,559.75
2.0 Rool-up door (4000x2450) 1.00 set 11,797.50 3,932.50 15,730.00 15,730.00
5.0 Panel Door (900x2100) 2.00 set 5,592.00 1,864.00 7,456.00 14,912.00
6.0 Swing Glass Door (1100x2100) 1.00 set 10,350.00 2,149.75 12,499.75 12,499.75
7.0 Swing Glass Door (1700x2100) 2.00 set 14,713.50 4,904.50 19,618.00 19,618.00
10.0 PVC Door w/Louver(900x2100) 6.00 set 1,600.00 300.00 1,900.00 11,400.00
10.0 PVC Door w/Louver(1100x2100) 1.00 set 2,300.00 300.00 2,600.00 2,600.00
10.0 Flush Door (600x1675) 2.00 set 2,600.00 300.00 2,900.00 5,800.00
11.0 Door Jamb (1200X2100) 1.00 set 1,200.00 500.00 1,700.00 1,700.00
12.0 Door Jamb (900X2100) 2.00 set 1,100.00 500.00 1,600.00 3,200.00
13.0 Door Jamb (600X2100) 2.00 set 1,100.00 300.00 1,400.00 2,800.00
14.0 Door Lock 15.00 pcs 750.00 150.00 900.00 13,500.00
15.0 Door Hinges 12.00 sets 350.00 50.00 400.00 4,800.00
XI STEELWORKS 163,236.00
1.0 Trusses
a 2" x " x 3/16" Angle Bar 40.00 lngths 712.00 150.00 862.00 34,480.00
b 2" x 2" x 1/4" Angle Bar 38.00 lngths 652.00 165.00 817.00 31,046.00
c C - Purlins 2 x 4 x 2.0mm 58.00 lngths 820.00 175.00 995.00 57,710.00
d Consumables 1.00 lot 15,000.00 15,000.00
2.0 Hand & Stair Railings 1.00 lot 25,000.00 25,000.00
XII FINISHES 237,061.35
1.0 Ground Floor-Granite Tiles 103.49 sq.m. 650.00 240.00 890.00 92,106.10
2.0 Toilet (Floor Tiles) 21.75 sq.m. 650.00 240.00 890.00 19,357.50
3.0 CR Wall Tiles 61.22 sq.m. 650.00 240.00 890.00 54,485.80
4.0 Fascia Board 156.29 ln.m. 215.00 240.00 455.00 71,111.95
57
XIII PLUMBING ROUGHING-INS 401,461.50
1.0 Water Line
a Water Flow Meter 1.00 set 3,600.00 300.00 3,900.00 3,900.00
b 1/2" Desotherm pipes 165.00 lngths 750.00 180.00 930.00 153,450.00
c 1/2" x 90 deg Elbow 114.00 pcs 350.00 36.00 386.00 44,004.00
d 1/2" Tee 90.00 pcs 75.00 30.00 105.00 9,450.00
e 1/2" Threaded Tee 112.00 pcs 75.00 30.00 105.00 11,760.00
f 1/2" x 90 deg Threaded Elbow 105.00 pcs 75.00 30.00 105.00 11,025.00
g Consumables 1.00 lot 25,000.00 25,000.00
2.0 Sewer Line
a 2” PVC Pipe 85.00 lngths 350.00 50.00 400.00 34,000.00
b 3” PVC Pipe 62.00 lngths 520.00 50.00 570.00 35,340.00
c 4” PVC Pipe 35.00 lngths 950.00 50.00 1,000.00 35,000.00
e 4” WYE 40.00 pcs 97.00 10.00 107.00 4,280.00
f 4" x 2" TEE Reducer 20.00 pcs 45.00 10.00 55.00 1,100.00
g 4" x 3" TEE Reducer 20.00 pcs 55.00 10.00 65.00 1,300.00
h 3” WYE 8.00 pcs 75.00 10.00 85.00 680.00
i 90 deg x 4" PVC Elbow 36.00 pcs 75.00 10.00 85.00 3,060.00
j 45 deg x 4" PVC Elbow 20.00 pcs 70.00 10.00 80.00 1,600.00
k 90 deg x 3" PVC Elbow 15.00 pcs 65.00 10.00 75.00 1,125.00
l 45 deg x 3" PVC Elbow 13.00 pcs 65.00 10.00 75.00 975.00
m floor drain 20.00 set 210.00 40.00 250.00 5,000.00
n 4" Dia. P-Trap 20.00 set 118.00 11.50 129.50 2,590.00
o 4” Clean-out Plug 50.00 set 120.00 25.70 145.70 7,285.00
p Vulca Seal 5.00 liters 635.00 20.00 655.00 3,275.00
q PVC Solvent 25.00 pints 215.00 35.50 250.50 6,262.50
XIVPLUMBING FIXTURES 78,650.00
1.0 Water Closet-HCG Legato 7.00 set 10,100.00 750.00 10,850.00 75,950.00
2.0 Lavatory 6.00 set 450.00 450.00 2,700.00
58
XV SEPTIC TANK 28,825.48
1.0 Masonry 11.60 sq.m 620.00 180.00 800.00 9,280.00
2.0 10mm diameter 103.49 kg 45.00 7.00 52.00 5,381.48
3.0 Plastering 23.20 sq.m 210.00 160.00 370.00 8,584.00
4.0 Concrete 1.00 cu.m 5,000.00 580.00 5,580.00 5,580.00
XVI ELETRICAL ROUGIHNG-INS 102,000.00
1.0 Electrical Roughing-ins (w/out lighting fixtures) 1.00 lot - - 102,000.00 102,000.00
XVIIELETRICAL WORKS 130,157.00
1.0 Switches -
a. 1-Gang Switch 16.00 pcs 105.00 410.00 515.00 8,240.00
b. 2-Gang Switch 21.00 pcs 233.00 410.00 643.00 13,503.00
c. 3-Gang Switch 24.00 pcs 280.50 410.00 690.50 16,572.00
d. 4-Gang Switch 12.00 pcs 200.00 410.00 610.00 7,320.00
2.0 Convenience Outlets -
a. 2-Gang Outlet 16.00 pcs 107.00 410.00 517.00 8,272.00
b. 3-Gang Outlet 18.00 pcs 280.00 410.00 690.00 12,420.00
8.0 Lighting Outlet 18.00 pcs 233.00 410.00 643.00 11,574.00
9.0 Pinlights 71.00 set 326.00 410.00 736.00 52,256.00
XVIIFire Protection 796,650.00
1.0 -
2x2 Square tube 24.00 pcs 85.50 512.00 597.50 14,340.00
1x1 square tube 30.00 pcs 133.00 512.00 645.00 19,350.00
B.I Pipe 2" 204.00 pcs 2,800.00 512.00 3,312.00 675,648.00
2x2 Angle Bar 51.00 pcs 1,200.00 512.00 1,712.00 87,312.00
XVIIIROOFING WORKS 428,365.00
1.0 Rooftiles and accessories including battens 1.00 lot 428,365.00 428,365.00
using Pre-painted Longspan Undersheeting -
TOTAL PROJECT COST Php 24,143,199.88
59
APPENDIX G
PROGRAM OF WORKS
60
PROGRAM OF WORKS
Activities Task Name Duration Early Start Early Finish Late Start Late Finish
1-2 Site Setting 1 day Mon 1/1/18 Mon 1/1/18 Mon 1/1/18 Mon 1/1/18
2-3 Lay out 2 days Tue 1/2/18 Wed 1/3/18 Wed 1/3/18 Thu 1/4/18
2-4 Delivery of Materials (dummy) 0 days Mon 1/1/18 Mon 1/1/18 Tue 1/2/18 Tue 1/2/18
4-5 Perimeter Fencing 2 days Tue 1/2/18 Wed 1/3/18 Fri 1/12/18 Mon 1/15/18
4-6 Construction of Temp. Facilities 2 days Tue 1/2/18 Wed 1/3/18 Tue 1/2/18 Wed 1/3/18
3-5 Excavation of footings 7 days Thu 1/4/18 Fri 1/12/18 Fri 1/5/18 Mon 1/15/18
5-7 Gravel Bedding 2 days Mon 1/15/18 Tue 1/16/18 Tue 1/16/18 Wed 1/17/18
Fabrication of Rebars (for
6-7 10 days Thu 1/4/18 Wed 1/17/18 Thu 1/4/18 Wed 1/17/18
column, footing and septic)
Installation of Forms (for column
7-8 5 days Thu 1/18/18 Wed 1/24/18 Thu 1/18/18 Wed 1/24/18
and footing)
Installation of Rebars (for column
8-9 8 days Thu 1/25/18 Mon 2/5/18 Thu 1/25/18 Mon 2/5/18
and footing)
9-10 Concrete Pouring for footing 1 day Tue 2/6/18 Tue 2/6/18 Tue 2/6/18 Tue 2/6/18
Installation of forms (for column
10-11 4 days Wed 2/7/18 Mon 2/12/18 Tue 2/20/18 Fri 2/23/18
1st lift)
Excavation for tie beams and
10-12 10 days Wed 2/7/18 Tue 2/20/18 Wed 2/7/18 Tue 2/20/18
septic
Installation of Rebars (for tie
12-13 8 days Wed 2/21/18 Fri 3/2/18 Wed 2/21/18 Fri 3/2/18
beams and septic)
61
Concrete Pouring (for tie beams,
11-14 1 day Tue 2/13/18 Tue 2/13/18 Mon 2/26/18 Mon 2/26/18
septic and column 1st lift)
Stripping of forms (for column 1st
14-15 4 days Wed 2/14/18 Mon 2/19/18 Tue 2/27/18 Fri 3/2/18
lift and septic)
13-15 Delivery of Materials (dummy) 0 days Tue 2/6/18 Tue 2/6/18 Mon 3/5/18 Mon 3/5/18
10-15 Backfilling 5 days Mon 3/5/18 Fri 3/9/18 Mon 3/5/18 Fri 3/9/18
Installation of Rebars (1st column
15-16 8 days Mon 3/12/18 Wed 3/21/18 Tue 3/20/18 Thu 3/29/18
to 2nd flr)
Installation of Forms (1st column
16-19 6 days Thu 3/22/18 Thu 3/29/18 Fri 3/30/18 Fri 4/6/18
to 2nd flr)
Concrete Pouring (1st column to
19-20 1 day Fri 3/30/18 Fri 3/30/18 Mon 4/9/18 Mon 4/9/18
2nd flr and septic cocering)
Fabrication of Rebars (for 2nd flr
15-17 15 days Mon 3/12/18 Fri 3/30/18 Tue 3/20/18 Mon 4/9/18
slab,beams and stairs)
Installation of Forms (for 2nd flr
15-18 8 days Mon 3/12/18 Wed 3/21/18 Mon 3/12/18 Wed 3/21/18
slab,beams and stairs)
Installation of Rebars (for 2nd flr
18-21 13 days Thu 3/22/18 Mon 4/9/18 Thu 3/22/18 Mon 4/9/18
slab, beams and stairs)
Installation of black out for
17-22 2 days Mon 4/2/18 Tue 4/3/18 Tue 4/10/18 Wed 4/11/18
plumbing at 2nd floor
Installation of black out for
21-22 2 days Tue 4/10/18 Wed 4/11/18 Tue 4/10/18 Wed 4/11/18
electrical at 2nd floor
Instalaltion of black out for
20-22 2 days Mon 4/2/18 Tue 4/3/18 Tue 4/10/18 Wed 4/11/18
Mechanical at 2nd floor
Concrete pouring for 2nd floor
22-23 1 day Thu 4/12/18 Thu 4/12/18 Thu 4/12/18 Thu 4/12/18
slab, beams and stairs
62
Stripping of forms (at 2nd floor
23-24 4 days Fri 4/13/18 Wed 4/18/18 Mon 4/23/18 Thu 4/26/18
slab)
Fabrication of Rebars 2nd floor-
23-25 12 days Fri 4/13/18 Mon 4/30/18 Fri 4/13/18 Mon 4/30/18
3rd floor columns
Installation of Rebars (2nd-3rd
25-26 10 days Tue 5/1/18 Mon 5/14/18 Tue 5/1/18 Mon 5/14/18
floor columns)
Installation of Forms (2nd-3rd
24-26 5 days Thu 4/19/18 Wed 4/25/18 Fri 4/27/18 Thu 5/3/18
floor columns)
Concrete pouring ( 2nd floor
26-27 1 day Tue 5/15/18 Tue 5/15/18 Tue 5/15/18 Tue 5/15/18
columns)
Installation CHB #6 and 4
26-28 exterior and interior walls 1st 14 days Thu 4/26/18 Tue 5/15/18 Fri 5/4/18 Wed 5/23/18
floor
Plastering of CHB Partitions and
28-30 12 days Wed 5/16/18 Thu 5/31/18 Wed 5/16/18 Thu 5/31/18
exterior walls
Stripping of Forms ( 2nd floor
27-29 3 days Wed 5/16/18 Fri 5/18/18 Tue 5/29/18 Thu 5/31/18
columns)
Preparation and Clearing for slab
28-29 2 days Wed 5/16/18 Thu 5/17/18 Thu 5/24/18 Fri 5/25/18
on grade (SOG)
Installation or Rebars for slab on
29-31 4 days Fri 6/1/18 Wed 6/6/18 Fri 6/1/18 Wed 6/6/18
grade (SOG)
29-32 Delivery of Materials (dummy) 0 days Thu 5/17/18 Thu 5/17/18 Mon 5/28/18 Mon 5/28/18
31-32 Concrete Pouring (SOG) 1 day Thu 6/7/18 Thu 6/7/18 Thu 6/7/18 Thu 6/7/18
Fabrication of Rebars (for beams,
31-33 15 days Fri 6/8/18 Thu 6/28/18 Fri 6/8/18 Thu 6/28/18
slab and stairs at 3rd floor)
Installation of Forms ( for beams,

32-34 13 days Fri 5/18/18 Tue 6/5/18 Mon 5/28/18 Wed 6/13/18
63
Installation of Rebars ( for beams,
33-35 13 days Fri 6/8/18 Tue 6/26/18 Thu 6/14/18 Mon 7/2/18
Installation of blackout for
34-36 2 days Fri 6/29/18 Mon 7/2/18 Fri 6/29/18 Mon 7/2/18
plumbing at 3rd floor
35-37 2 days Tue 7/3/18 Wed 7/4/18 Tue 7/3/18 Wed 7/4/18
electrical at 3rd floor
36-37 2 days Wed 6/27/18 Thu 6/28/18 Tue 7/3/18 Wed 7/4/18
mechanical at 3rd floor
Concrete Pouring ( for beams,
37-38 1 day Thu 7/5/18 Thu 7/5/18 Thu 7/5/18 Thu 7/5/18
slabs and stairs at 3rd floor)
Stripping of Forms (beams, slabs
38-39 4 days Fri 7/6/18 Wed 7/11/18 Tue 7/10/18 Fri 7/13/18
and stairs at 3rd floor)
Fabrication of Rebars (for
38-40 8 days Fri 7/6/18 Tue 7/17/18 Fri 7/6/18 Tue 7/17/18
colums, roofbeam at 3rd)
Installation of Rebars ( for
40-41 6 days Wed 7/18/18 Wed 7/25/18 Wed 7/18/18 Wed 7/25/18
columns at 3rd)
Piling of CHB #6 and 4 for
39-42 exterior and interior walls @ 2nd 14 days Thu 7/12/18 Tue 7/31/18 Mon 7/16/18 Thu 8/2/18
floor
41-42 Plastering of walls at 2nd floor 6 days Thu 7/26/18 Thu 8/2/18 Thu 7/26/18 Thu 8/2/18
Concrete Pouring ( for columns at
42-43 1 day Fri 8/3/18 Fri 8/3/18 Fri 8/3/18 Fri 8/3/18
3rd)
Installation of Forms ( for roof
43-44 5 days Mon 8/6/18 Fri 8/10/18 Mon 8/6/18 Fri 8/10/18
beam)
Piling of CHB #6 and 4 for
43-45 exterior and interior walls @ 3rd 6 days Mon 8/6/18 Mon 8/13/18 Tue 8/28/18 Tue 9/4/18
floor
45-46 Plastering of walls at 3rd floor 5 days Tue 8/14/18 Mon 8/20/18 Wed 9/5/18 Tue 9/11/18
64
Installation of Rebars ( at
44-46 6 days Mon 8/13/18 Mon 8/20/18 Mon 8/13/18 Mon 8/20/18
roofbeam)
Fabrication of steel truss and
46-47 6 days Tue 8/21/18 Tue 8/28/18 Tue 8/21/18 Tue 8/28/18
fire exit
Concrete Pouring ( at
46-48 1 day Tue 8/21/18 Tue 8/21/18 Wed 9/12/18 Wed 9/12/18
roofbeam)
Installation of steel truss and
46-49 4 days Wed 8/29/18 Mon 9/3/18 Wed 8/29/18 Mon 9/3/18
fire exit
Installation of Fire Protection
47-50 5 days Tue 9/4/18 Mon 9/10/18 Tue 9/4/18 Mon 9/10/18
and Fixtures
Installation of Canopy
2 days Wed 8/22/18 Thu 8/23/18 Thu 9/13/18 Fri 9/14/18
48-51 Cladding
49-51 Installation of Roof 2 days Tue 9/4/18 Wed 9/5/18 Thu 9/13/18 Fri 9/14/18
Installation of Electrical
50-52 3 days Tue 9/11/18 Thu 9/13/18 Tue 9/11/18 Thu 9/13/18
Fixtures
Installation of Plumbing
51-53 3 days Thu 9/6/18 Mon 9/10/18 Mon 9/17/18 Wed 9/19/18
Fitures
52-53 Tile Works 4 days Fri 9/14/18 Wed 9/19/18 Fri 9/14/18 Wed 9/19/18
16
53-54 Paint Works Thu 9/20/18 Thu 10/11/18 Thu 9/20/18 Thu 10/11/18
days
Installation of Sliding doors Mon Mon
54-55 2 days Fri 10/12/18 Fri 10/12/18
and windows 10/15/18 10/15/18
Wed Wed
Clearing and Furnishing 2 days Tue 10/16/18 Tue 10/16/18
55-56 10/17/18 10/17/18
65
PROGRAM OF WORKS CHART
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
APPENDIX H
STRUCTURAL
ANALYSIS AND
DESIGN
74
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
(Three – Storey Parking Building)
Project Information:
Building type: Parking building
Level : three – storey
Height : 1.70 meters from the natural grade line
Effective height = 3.50 meters
Effective depth = 1.63 meters
Location :
Zone factor : 0.40
Importance factor: 1.20
Resistance factor: 8.50
For Rebar set: ASTM A615 (fy = 415 MPa )
Design and Analysis specifications and provisions used :
 National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010
 National Structural Code of the Philippines 1996
 American Concrete Institute

75
 Unified Building Code 1997
 National Building Code of the Philippine
BEAM/GIRDER
From NSCP 2010 Specifications
fc’ = 21 MPa
Weight of concrete = 2400 kg/m3
Fy = 415 MPa
Figure 6: Beams along axis A – I
Using NSCP Moment Coefficient for Continuous Beams:
WU = [1.20(Weight of beam + weight of slab) + 1.60( weight of car + weight of
passenger + other live loads )]
Total Weight of beam ={ [( 035x0.40x7.5x7) + ( 0.35x0.40x7x6)](2400)(9.81)](6)}/58.5
Total Weight of beam = 31947.39 = 31950 N/m

76
Total Weight of beam = 31947.39 ( 58.5)= 1868922.315 N
Total weight of beams for three floors = 1868922.315( 3 ) = 5606766.945
Weight of each beam according to span L = (31950/6)xL
Weight of car + passenger =[ 20,000 kg ( maximum largest wt. of car with loading ) +
50kg(10)]
Weight of car + passenger = 20,500 kg
Weight of car + passenger per span L = 20,500/L
Weight of slab: Using an average thickness t = 200 mm ( based on slab analysis )
Weight of slab @ Tributary Area = 6x7.5 = (0.2x6x7.5x2400x9.81) = 211896 N
Weight of slab @ Tributary Area = 6x6= (0.2x6x6x2400x9.81) = 169516.8 N
Weight of slab @ Tributary Area = 6X5.9 = (0.2x6x5.9x2400x9.81) = 166691.52 N
Weight of slab @ Tributary Area = 5.9x7.5 = (0.2x5.9x7.5x2400x9.81) = 208364.4 N
Weight of slab @ Tributary Area = 6x6.4 = (0.2x6x6.4x2400x9.81) = 180817.92 N
Total weight of slab = 211896 + 169516.8 + 166691.52 + 208364.4 + 180817.92
Total weight of slab = 937286.64 N ( level 1 )
Total weight of slab for three level = 937286.64(3) = 28111859.92
Other live loads = 20% of the design live loads = (0.20x20,500) = 4100 N
77
WULTIMATE = [(1.20x(937286.64/58.5)+(3197.39) + (1.60x(20500+4100)]
WULTIMATE = 50123.26 N/m
𝐿2
MA = - Wu16 ( At interior face of support for members built integrally with supports
where support is a column).
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MA = - Wu16 = ( 50123.26 ) 16 = -176214.586 N.m
𝐿2
MB = - Wu10 L = 7.50 meters ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally
at exterior face of first interior support).
L = 7.5 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MB = - Wu10 = ( 50123.26 ) 10 = -281943.338 N.m
𝐿2
MC = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MC = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) 11 = -256312.125 N.m
𝐿2
MD = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
78
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MD = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) 11 = -256312.125 N.m
𝐿2
ME = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
ME = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) 11 = -256312.125 N.m
𝐿2
MF = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MF = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) 11 = -256312.125 N.m
𝐿2
MG = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MG = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) 11 = -256312.125 N.m
𝐿2
MH = - Wu10 L = 7.50 meters ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally
at exterior face of first interior support).

79
L = 7.5 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MH = - Wu10 = ( 50123.26 ) 10 = -281943.338 N.m
𝐿2
MI = - Wu16 ( At interior face of support for members built integrally with supports
L = 7.50 meters
𝐿2 7.52
MI = - Wu16 = ( 50123.26 ) 16 = -176214.586 N.m
Figure 7: Beams along axis 1 – 6
𝐿2
M1 = - Wu16 ( At interior face of support for members built integrally with supports
L = 6.0 meters
𝐿2 6.02
M1 = - Wu16 = ( 50123.26 ) 16 = -112777.28 N.m
𝐿2
M2 = - Wu10 L = 7.50 meters ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at
exterior face of first interior support).

80
L = 6.0 meters
𝐿2 6.02
M2 = - Wu10 = ( 50123.26 ) 10 = -180443.63 N.m
𝐿2
M3 = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
L = 6.0 meters
𝐿2 6.02
M3 = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) 11 = -164039.66 N.m
𝐿2
M4 = - Wu11 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at other face of
interior support.
L = 5.40 meters
𝐿2 5.402
M4 = - Wu11 = ( 50123.26 ) = -132872.21 N.m
11
𝐿2
M5 = - Wu10 ( At interior face of supports for members built integrally at exterior face of
first interior support).
L = 5.4 meters
𝐿2 5.40
M5 = - Wu10 = ( 50123.26 ) 10 = -146159.43 N.m
𝐿2
M6 = - Wu16 ( At interior face of support for members built integrally with supports

81
L = 6.40 meters
𝐿2 6.402
M6 = - Wu16 = ( 50123.26 ) = -128315.55 N.m
16
Figure 8: Beam Design
Using 8 – 16 mm 𝜃 deformed bars for main reinforcements
For Actual Ultimate Moment (MU actual )
(MU actual ) = 𝜃RUbd2
0.59 (𝜌 )𝑓𝑦
(MU actual ) = 𝜃bd2𝜌fy [ 1 – ]
𝑓𝑐′
Using b = 350 mm; d = 400 mm; 𝜃 = 0.90 ( for tension and axial loading )
𝛽 = 0.85
82
𝜌maximum = 0.75 𝜌balance
0.85𝛽 ( 𝑓𝑐 ′ )( 600 )
𝜌balance = 𝑓𝑦 ( 600+𝑓𝑦 )
β = 0.85 since fc’ is less than 28 MPa.
0.75 ( 0.85 )(0 .85 𝑥 21 )( 600 )

𝜌maximum = 415 ( 600+415 )
𝜌maximum = 0.0162
Checking for 𝜌minimum:
1.4 1.4
𝜌minimum = 𝑓𝑦 = 415 = 0.00337
𝜌maximum> 𝜌minimum ( steel yields )
Check if compression bars is needed:
𝐴
𝑠 4𝑥3.1416𝑥(162 )/4
𝜌 = 𝑏𝑥𝑑 = = 0.006 > 0.00337
350(330)
(0.85)0.85(21)(600)
𝜌 − 𝜌’ > 415( 600−415)(330)(70) = 𝜌 − 𝜌’> 0.025
Compression bars is needed
0.59 ( 0.006 )( 415 )

(MU actual ) = { 0.90(0.006 )( 415 )( 350 )( 330 )2 [ 1 – ]}
21
(MU actual )= 79440.27 N.m
𝐿2 7.52
MUallowable MA = - Wu16 = ( 50123.26 ) 16 = -176214.586 N.m
83
79440.27 N.m<176214.586 N.m
Therefore :
(MU actual )< MUallowable( safe )
Sectio Floo Widt Dept Span Bar No.o Mu actual Mu REMAR

n r h h lengt diamet f allowab KS
Name leve h er mai N.mm le
l ( mm (mm n
) ) (m) ( mm ) bars N.mm
A-B 1 350 400 7.50 16 8 176214.58 79440.2 Safe

6 7
B-C 1 350 400 7.50 16 8 281943.33 79440.2 Safe

8 7
C-D 1 350 400 7.50 16 8 256312.12 79440.2 Safe

5 7
D-E 1 350 400 7.50 16 8 256312.12 79440.2 Safe

5 7
E-F 1 350 400 7.50 16 8 256312.12 79440.2 safe

5 7
F-G 1 350 400 7.50 16 8 281943.33 79440.2 Safe

8 7
H-I 1 350 400 6.0 16 8 176214.58 79440.2 Safe

6 7
1-2 1 350 400 6.0 16 8 112777.28 79440.2 Safe

7
2-3 1 350 400 6.0 16 8 180443.63 79440.2 Safe

7
3-4 1 350 400 6.0 16 8 164039.66 79440.2 Safe

84
4-5 1 350 400 5.40 16 8 146159.43 79440.2 safe

7
5-6 1 350 400 6.40 16 8 128315.55 79440.2 safe

7
A-B 2 350 400 7.50 16 8 102255.33 79440.2 Safe

2 7
B-C 2 350 400 7.50 16 8 233692.92 79440.2 Safe

5 7
C-D 2 350 400 7.50 16 8 224451.06 79440.2 Safe

0 7
D-E 2 350 400 7.50 16 8 224451.06 79440.2 Safe

0 7
E-F 2 350 400 7.50 16 8 224451.06 79440.2 safe

0 7
F-G 2 350 400 7.50 16 8 233692.92 79440.2 Safe

5 7
H-I 2 350 400 6.0 16 8 102255.33 79440.2 Safe

2 7
1-2 2 350 400 6.0 16 8 102255.33 79440.2 Safe

2 7
2-3 2 350 400 6.0 16 8 2336922.9 79440.2 Safe

25 7
3-4 2 350 400 6.0 16 8 252201.44 79440.2 Safe

7 7
4-5 2 350 400 5.40 16 8 122123.02 79440.2 safe

5 7
5-6 2 350 400 6.40 16 8 122145.32 79440.2 safe

0 7
A-B 3 350 400 7.50 16 8 256222.11 79440.2 Safe

4 7
85
B-C 3 350 400 7.50 16 8 325523.66 79440.2 Safe

2 7
C-D 3 350 400 7.50 16 8 313120.22 79440.2 Safe

1 7
D-E 3 350 400 7.50 16 8 313120.22 79440.2 Safe

1 7
E-F 3 350 400 7.50 16 8 313120.22 79440.2 safe

1 7
F-G 3 350 400 7.50 16 8 256222.11 79440.2 Safe

4 7
H-I 3 350 400 6.0 16 8 256222.11 79440.2 Safe

4 7
1-2 3 350 400 6.0 16 8 102255.33 79440.2 Safe

2 7
2-3 3 350 400 6.0 16 8 2336922.9 79440.2 Safe

25 7
3-4 3 350 400 6.0 16 8 252201.44 79440.2 Safe

7 7
4-5 3 350 400 5.40 16 8 122123.02 79440.2 safe

5 7
5-6 3 350 400 6.40 16 8 122145.32 79440.2 safe

0 7
86
COLUMNS:
∅ = 0.65 for tied column
Fc’ = 21 MPa, minimum requirement for mixture class of 1:2:4
Fy = 415 MPa
Figure 9: Column
Using 350 mm x 350 mm square tied column at 12 – 16 mmθ main vertical deformed
bars:
Maximum actual load (PU)

87
PU = ∅[ 0.85( fc’ )( Area gross – Area of steel actual ) + ( Area of steel actual x fy )]
∅ = 0.65 for tied column
𝜋 (16)2
Area of steel used = ( 12 ) = 2,412.74 mm2
4
Area gross = ( 350 mm )2 = 122,500 mm2
Maximum actual load PU =0.75 [ 1.2DL + 1.6LL + 1.7WL ]
Loading factors:
Uniform Load Concentrated Load
DL = [(Wt. of beam)/(effective length) + LL = 4100/(effective length )
wt. of slab)/(effective length) ]
Ultimate load Wu = ( 1.20DL + 1.60LL + WL = 2 KPa ( Effective height )
1.70WL )
DL = (1868922.315+937286.64)/(7.50)= 374.16 KN/m
LL = 4100/7.5= 0.5467 KN/m
WL = 2( 3.5) = 7.0 KN/m
Maximum actual load PU = 0.75 [ 1.2(374.16 x3.50 ) + 1.6( 0.5467 x 3.50 ) + 1.7( 7 x
3.50 ) ](spacing)
88
Maximum actual load PU= 1212.137 KN/m ( 6 ) = 7272.825 KN
7272.825 = 0.65[ 0.85( 21 )( 122,500 - Area of steel actual ) + (Area of steel actual x 415 )]
Area of steel actual = 5477.618 mm2
2,412.74 mm2< 5477.618 mm2
Area of steel used < Area of steel actual( safe )
Use 350 mm x 350 mm square tied column with 12 – 16 mm ∅ deformed main
vertical bars
Spacing of 10 mm ∅tie wires:
S = 48 ( tie diameter ) = 48(10) = 480 mm
S = 16( bar diameter ) = 16( 16 ) = 256 mm
S = least dimension = 350 mm
Use Spacing of 10 mm ∅ tie wires = 256 mm ~ 250 mm

89
FOUNDATION/FOOTING
Weight of soil specification required = 15 KPa/m
Soil Pressure allowable = 200 KPa
fc’ = 21 MPa
Weight of concrete = 2400 kg/m3
Fy = 415 MPa
Concrete depth = 500 mm
Effective depth of footing = 430 mm with clear covering of minimum of 70 mmm on
both ways.
Total depth = 1.70 meters

90
Figure 10: Footing

91
Loading factors:
Uniform Load Concentrated Load
DL = [(Wt. of beam + wt. of LL = 4100/(effective length )(spacing)
slab)/(effective length) + (wt. of column
)/(effective height )](spacing)
Ultimate load Wu = ( 1.20DL + 1.60LL + WL = 2 KPa
1.70WL )
DL = {[(5606766.945 + 2811859.92)+ (0.35x0.35x3.5x2400x9.81x54)/(1000)]/(7.5x6)}
DL = 18.82 KPa
LL = 4100/7.5(6)= 0.0911 KPa
WL = 2( 3.5) = 7.0 KN/m
For Qe:
Qe = 200 – 15( 0.430 ) – 1.5(1.2 ) = 191.75 KPa
Length of square footing ( L ) =
( 𝐷𝐿 𝑥 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑥 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ )+ ( 𝐿𝐿 𝑥 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑥 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ )

√ 𝑄𝑒
( 18.82𝑥3.5𝑥3)+ ( 0.0911𝑥3.5𝑥3 )
L=√ 189.17
92
L allowable = 1.0496 meters ( least dimension to be used )= 1.10 m
Using L actual = 1.50 meters
L allowable ≤ L actual ( safe )
1.2𝐷𝐿+1.6𝐿𝐿
QU = 1.52
QU =(( 1.2 𝑥 6.25 𝑥 4 𝑥 12 ) + ( 1.6 𝑥 1.75 𝑥 4 𝑥1 2))/(1.5)^2
QU = 219.7333 KPa
Ultimate moment actual = QU( 0.60 ) ( 0.60 ) /2
Ultimate moment actual = 219.7333 ( 0.60 )2/2
Ultimate moment actual = 45.024 KN.m
6𝑀 6( 45.024 𝑥 106 )
Actual bending stress ( fbactual ) = 𝑏𝑑2 = 1000 ( 425)2
Actual bending stress ( fbactual ) = 5.3362 MPa
For bending stress allowable:
Allowable bending stress ( fballowable ) = 𝜃 0.40 √𝑓𝑐′
Use 𝜃 = 0.65 for flexure, shear and buckling for plain concrete:
Allowable bending stress ( fballowable ) = 0.65( 0.40 ) √21
Allowable bending stress ( fballowable ) = 1.1825 MPa

93
Allowable bending stress ( fballowable ) < Actual bending stress ( fb actual )
Use 1.50 meters x 1.50 meters for dimensions of square footing:
Two way shear
Using uniform overall thickness of footing, D =500 mm
Assuming 16 mm diameter bars for main steel, effective depth of footing d
d = 500 70 = 430 mm
The critical section for the two way shear or punching shear occurs at a distance of
d/2 from the face of the column where a and b are the dimensions of the column.
Critical section for Two Way Shear (Punching Shear)
Hence, punching area of footing = (a + d)2 = (0.215 + 0.175)2 =0.1521 m2
where a = b = side of column
Punching shear force = Factored load – (Factored average pressure x punching area
of footing)
94
= 1500 – (219.733 x 0.1521)
= 1466.57 kN
Perimeter along the critical section = 4 (a+d) = 4 (430 + 350) = 3120 mm
Therefore, nominal shear stress in punching or punching shear stress is
calculated as below:
= 1466.57 x 1000/(3120×430) = 1.093MPa
Allowable shear stress =
where = 1.145 MPa
= =1
therefore, allowable shear stress = 1x1.145 = 1.145 MPa
Since the punching shear stress (1.093 MPa) is less than the allowable shear stress (1.145
MPa ),
the assumed thickness is sufficient to resist the punching shear force. Hence, the assumed
thickness of footing D = 500 mm is sufficient.

95
For Reinforcements:
Using 12 – 20 mm 𝜃 bars on both ways:
(MU actual ) = 𝜃RUbd2
0.59 (𝜌 )𝑓𝑦
(MU actual ) = 𝜃bd2𝜌fy [ 1 – ]
𝑓𝑐′
(MU actual ) = 𝜃bd2𝑓𝑐 ′ w [ 1 – 0.59w ]
Using b = L = 1.5 m = 1500 mm
Using 𝜃 = 0.90 for tension and axial loading
Effective depth = 430 mm
45.024 x 106 = 0.90( 20.684 )( 1500 )( 430 )2( w ) ( 1 – 0.59 w )
w = 0.03247
𝑤 𝑓𝑐′ 0.03247 ( 20.684 )

𝜌actual = = = 0.00162
𝑓𝑦 415
Checking for 𝜌minimum:
1.4 1.4
𝜌minimum = 𝑓𝑦 = 415 = . 00337
𝜌actual< 𝜌minimum
Use 𝜌minimum = .00337
Area of steel allowable = 𝜌minimum (L )( 430 ) = 0.003( 1500 )( 430 )

96
Area of steel allowable = 1935 mm2
𝜋 (20)2
Area of steel actual = ( 12 ) = 3769.91 mm2
4
Area of steel allowable < Area of steel actual ( safe ), Use 12 – 20 mm 𝜽 bars on both
ways
97
SLABS:
Figure 11: Slab
Using direct design method for NSCP 2010 for two way slab
Check along panel A - 1
by Longer direction/shorter direction = 7.5/6 = 1.25< 2 (ok )
Check along panel B - 2
by Longer direction/shorter direction = 7.5/6 = 1.25< 2 (ok )
Check along panel C – 4
by Longer direction/shorter direction = 7.5/6.4 = 1.17 < 2 (ok )
Check along panel D – 5
by Longer direction/shorter direction = 7.5/5.4 = 1.39 < 2 (ok )

98
Using minimum thickness of slab h = 200 mm
For afm larger than 0.2 but not larger than 2, the slab thickness must not be less than the
values of
𝑓𝑦
𝑙𝑛 [0.8+( )]
1400
h = 36+[(5𝛽( 𝛼𝑓𝑚−0.20 ))]
=≥ 125 mm
For pane A -1
Using ln = 7.5 ( clear span measured in long direction face to face of column or face to
face of beam for slabs with beams )
Fy = 415 MPa
𝛽 = 1.25 (ratio of clear span in longer direction to clear span in shorter direction )
afm =0.35 ( average value of for all beams on the sides of a panel )
415
7500 [0.8 ( )]
1400
h = 36+[(5(1.25)(0.35−0.20)] = 222.625 mm > 125 mm
therefore using h = 200 mm ( ok )
For panel B – 2
Fy = 415 MPa
99
415
7500 [0.8 ( )]
1400
h = 36+[(5(1.25)(0.35−0.20)] = 222.625 mm > 125 mm
For panel C – 4
Fy = 415 MPa
415
7500 [0.8 ( )]
1400
h = 36+[(5(1.17)(0.35−0.20)] = 222.987 mm > 125 mm
For panel D – 5
Fy = 415 MPa
100
415
7500 [0.8 ( )]
1400
h = 36+[(5(1.39)(0.35−0.20)] = 221.9 mm > 125 mm
Load on slab:
The load on slab comprises of Dead load, floor finish and live load. The loads are
calculated per unit area (load/m2).
Dead load = D x 25 kN/m2 ( Where D is thickness of slab in m)
Dead load = 0.20( 25 ) =
Floor finish (Assumed as)= 1 to 2 kN/m2
Live load (Assumed as) = 3 to 5 kN/m2 (depending on the occupancy of the building)
Detailing Requirements of RCC Slab as per NSCP 2010
Nominal Cover:
Using 20 mm for mild exposure
However, if the diameter of bar do not exceed 12 mm, or cover may be reduced by 5 mm.
Thus for main reinforcement up to 12 mm diameter bar and for mild exposure, the
nominal cover is 15 mm.

101
Minimum reinforcement: The reinforcement in either direction in slab shall not be less
than
0.12% of the total cross-sectional area for Fe-415 ( fy = 415 MPa )
Spacing of bars: The maximum spacing of bars shall not exceed
 Main Steel – 3d or 300 mm whichever is smaller
Using clear covering of 70 mm
S = 3(130 ) = 390 mm, therefore use S = 300 mm on centers
 Distribution steel –5d or 450 mm whichever is smaller Where, ‘d’ is the effective
depth of slab. Note: The minimum clear spacing of bars is not kept less than 75
mm (Preferably 100 mm) though code do not recommend any value.
Maximum diameter of bar: The maximum diameter of bar in slab, shall not exceed D/8,
where D is the total thickness of slab.
Using the maximum required diameter of 10 mm < 200/8 = 25 mm ( ok )

102
APPENDIX I
DOCUMENTAION
103
SIGNING OF TRANSMITTAL LETTER

104
DISTRIBUTION OF QUESTIONNAIRE
105
SURVEY FOR VEHICLE OWNERS

106
SITE VISIT AND SURVEY

107
MANUAL MEASUREMENT OF THE LOT AREA

108
MEASURING THE LOT AREA

109
SITE SURVEY
110
PLANNING AND MAKING CHAPTER 1-3

111
ESTIMATING AND MAKING OF BOQ

112
AFTER ORAL DEFENSE TOGETHER WITH THE PANELS

113
APPENDIX J
VISION AND MISSION
MISSION
The College aims to develop graduates that will be acclaimed as competent and
creative professionals contributing to innovation in technological training and research.
VISION
The College is the preferred and recognize school for its excellence in engineering
and architecture education, research and service.
114
APPENDIX K
REFERENCE
Aliwalas, Dionisio F.,Jr (2012). A PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS FOR A PROPOSED

TWO-STOREY CAR PARK WITH BASEMENT AND VERTICAL GARDEN IN
INTRAMUROS, MANILA, page 7, Mapua Institute of Technology, Intramuros, Manila.
Bulactial, Arian (2013). Comparison of on-street parking management in Ermita-Malate

and Makati CBD, page 5, De La Salle University, Manila.
Dahane, Radhika A. (2015). Design of multi-level car parkin, International Journal of

Research in Engineering, Science and Technology, page 155, retrieved from
http://stage.ijrests.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/22.pdf
Desman Associates (2011). Parking Demand Analysis, Parking garage feasibility study,
page 5, William Patterson University, 300 Pompton road, New Jersey.
Gupte, Siddhart N. (2014). Multi-Storey Car Parks, Parking Study for Multiplexes and
Commercial Buildings in Vadodara City, page 115, Parul Institute of Engineering &
Technology, Vadodara City, India.
Garber, Nicholas J. (2015). Identification of Parking Generators, Traffic and Highway

Engineering, Fifth Edition, SI Edition, page 144, CENGAGE LEARNING
Lim, Mark A. (2012), MODELING THE IMPACT OF ON-STREET PARKING ON

VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, page 47, De La Salle University, Manila.
Dr. Sharma, Surjeet K. (2008). Parking Studies, PRINCIPLES, PRACTICE AND

DESIGN OF HIGHWAY ENGINEERING, page 82, S. Chand & Company PVT. LTD.
Weterings, Niels (2013). Towards sustainable parking, page 5, Eindhoven University of

Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
115
APPENDIX L
PROJECT STUDY QUESTIONAIRE
A PROPOSED THREE-STOREY PARKING BUILDING AT BRGY. SAN ROQUE,

CEBU CITY
Dear Respondents,
We the 5th yr. Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering students of the University
of the Visayas (Main Campus) would like to request your cooperation and time to answer
the following questions; this is a partial requirement for our subject CE 155 “PROJECT
STUDY”.
INSTRUCTION: Please check the appropriate answer on the space provided.
1. Do you believe that one of the major problems in the city is lack of parking area?
__Yes __No
2. Do you think On-street parking is one of the major contributors of traffic?

__Yes __No
3. Do you think having an accessible and appropriate parking area will help lessen
the traffic?
__Yes __No
4. Are you in favour of realizing a parking building in Brgy. San Roque? ( M.J.
Cuenco Ave., cor. Urdaneta St. Brgy. San Roque, Cebu City )
__Yes __No
5. Do you own a vehicle?

__Yes __No
 If yes , indicate/check, Vehicle Classification

__ Car __Van __AUV/SUV __Motorcycle
__others, please specify: __________
 Have you ever had a problem finding a parking area?

__Yes __No
 Where do you often park?

__Street __Private Parking Lot __Mall Parking Garage
__others, please specify: ____________
116
 Have you missed or been late in an appointment or class because you

couldn’t find a parking area?
__Yes __No
 How long would it take you to find a parking area? ( Average)

__5 – 10 mins. __10 – 20 mins. __20 – 30 mins.
__30 mins. Up
 How would you rate the security or safety of the parking area you are
using?
__ very poor __ poor __ ok __ good __very good
____________________
Signature
117
APPENDIX M
118
HISHAM Y. AMILHASAN
Dona Josefa st. Gio homes Banawa ,Cebu city
09262507113
nobumesan@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 23
Birth date: February 16, 1994
Birth Place: Hofuf, Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia
Sex: Male
Civil Status: Single
Citizenship: Filipino
Religion: Islam
Height: 5’2
Weight: 55 kgs.
Father’s name: Sahban Amilhasan
Mother’s name: Yomina Amilhasan
Language spoken: English, Cebuano, Tausug, Chavacano & Tagalog
Personal Attributes: Have good analytical, planning and problem-
solving skills, organized and responsible, determined, team player, and
hardworking
Educational Background:
College: University of the Visayas – Main Campus

Colon St. Cebu City
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
June 2014- Present
High School:
Filipino Turkish Tolerance School
Pitogo, Sinunuc Zamboanga City
June 2007 - March 2011
Elementary: Isabela Central Elementary Pilot School

Isabela City, Basilan
119
SKILLS:
Computer Literate (Microsoft, Excel,Powerpoint)
WORK EXPERIENCE:
 On the Job Training (Cayacon Structures)
AFFILIATION:
 Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers-University of the Visayas Student Chapter

(2014-Present)
120
MELJON L. ABAÑO
Bacayan Cebu City
Cell #: 09330228053
Email Add: Meljonabano22@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 21
Birth date: September 22, 1995
Birth Place: Cebu City
Sex: Male
Religion: Roman Catholic
Height: 5’6
Weight: 65kgs.
Father’s name: Benvinido T. Abaño
Mother’s name: Imelda L. Abaño
Language spoken: English, Cebuano & Tagalog
solving skills, organized and
responsible, determined, team player, and
hardworking
College: University of Visayas – Main Campus

Colon St. Cebu City
June 2012 - Present
High School: Talamban National High School

Talamban Cebu City
Elementary: Bacayan Elementary School

Bacayan Cebu City
121
SKILLS:
WORK EXPERIENCE:
On the Job Training (Cayacon Structures)

Hospital Orderly (Vicente Gullas Medical Hospital)
AFFILIATION:

(2012-Present)
122
AL SALVADOR C. CHING
Kahayahay 1 Redstone village subd.
San jose Talamban,Cebu City.
+639493293661
nichylech@yahoo.com.ph
PERSONAL DATA
Age: 31
Birth date: February 26, 1986
Birth Place: Nasipit,Agusan Del Norte
Sex: Male
Height: 5’7
Weight: 48 kgs
Father’s name: Alberto J. Ching
Mother’s name: Esterlina C. Ching
Language: English, Filipino, and Cebuano
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Tertiary: University of the Visayas

Colon St., Cebu City
2013-Present
Bachelor of Science in Nursing

2004
Secondary: Pit-os National High School

Pit-os, Talamban,Cebu City.
2001-2004
Saint Michael College of Caraga

Nasipit, Agusan Del Norte.
1999-2001
Primary: Nasipit Central Elementary School

Nasipit,Agusan Del Norte.
1999
123
SKILLS:
 Knowledgeable in Construction Estimates

 Basic Auto CAD
 Computer skills include basic computer operation, word
processing, powerpoint presentation, internet literacy
 Can work with less supervision
 Flexible towards changes
 Dedicated towards work
124
DUBLUIS JR, ARTEMIO B.

Nueva Estrella Cagdianao Dinagat Island
Cell #: 09257137493
Email Add: jdubluis_artemio@yahoo.com.com
Personal data:
Age: 25
Birth date: October 23, 1992
Birth Place: Nueva Estrella
Cagdianao Dinagat
Island
Sex: Male
Height: 5’4
Weight: 70kgs
Father’s name: Artemio B. Dublui Sr.
Mother’s name: Mila B. Dubluis
Language spoken: English, Cebuano, & Tagalog,Bisaya
solving skills, organized and responsible,
determined, team player, and hardworking

Colon St. Cebu City
June 2014 - Present
High School: Surigao Del Norte National High School
June 2007- March 2011
Elementary:
125
SKILLS:
*Computer Literate
*Microsoft Word
*3D MAX CAD
* Excel
* PowerPoint
* Phoshop
WORK EXPERIENCE:
-On the Job Training (JOEsKYN BUILDERS)
-5 years of service crew at Mang Inasal fast food ( SURIGAO BRANCH
AND CEBU SANTO NINO BRANCH)
-Project In-charge (ELIZABETH CONSTRUCTION)
-Present-
-Project Inspector (Architectural Inspector) at CONTEMPO PROPERTY
HOLDINGS INCORPORATION- Bamboo Bay Community Residence
AFFILIATION:

(2014-Present)
126
ALEXIS JUDE L. LABASTIDA

Block 11 Lot 10, Northfield Residences,
Canduman, Mandaue City
Contact #: 09073664240
Email Address: alexisjudel@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 20
Birth date: June 1, 1996
Birth Place: Ozamis City
Sex: Male
Height: 5’8
Weight: 49kgs.
Father’s name: Ricardo C. Labastida Jr.
Mother’s name: Mariessa L. Labastida
Language spoken: English, Cebuano, and Tagalog
Educational Background
College: University of San Carlos – Talamban Campus

June 2012 – 2016
University of Visayas – Main Campus

Colon St. Cebu City
June 2016 – Present
High School: School of Saint John the Baptist

Nacional, Jimenez, Misamis Occidental
Elementary: Jimenez Central School

Nacional, Jimenez, Misamis Occidental
127
SKILLS:
 Oriented in Microsoft Office Applications such as:
o Microsoft Office Word
o Microsoft Office Excel
o Microsoft Office PowerPoint
AFFILIATION:
 Member, PICE-CEBU Students’ Chapter SY 2015-2016
128
DONATO HENRY R. LACBAYO

#25 Molave Street, San Jose Village, Lawaan III Talisay
Cell #: +639556234627
Email Add: lacbayo.donato@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 26
Birth date: November 19, 1990
Birth Place: Poro, Camotes Island
Cebu
Sex: Male
Height: 5’7
Weight: 78 kgs.
Father’s name: Henry O. Lacbayo
Mother’s name: Irene R. Lacbayo
Language spoken: English, Cebuano, & Tagalog
determined, team player, and hardworking.

Colon St. Cebu City
June 2012 - Present
High School: Divino Amore Academy

Lower Mohon, Talisay City, Cebu
Elementary: Tabunok School of Learning

Tabunok, Talisay City, Cebu
129
SKILLS:
Computer Literate (Microsoft Word, Excel,Powerpoint,Photoshop,

3D MAX, AUTOCAD), knows how to drive motorcycle and 4
wheels.
WORK EXPERIENCE:
Gela Construction (June 18, 2014 – September 22, 2014)

On the Job Training (Alviola Surveying and General Services)
AFFILIATION:

(2012-Present)
130
JON SEDFREY T. NADERA

H. Cortes St., Wireless, Mandaue City
Contact #: 09331333996
Email Address: sednadz@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 26
Birth date: September 20, 1990
Sex: Male
Height: 5’4
Weight: 53 kgs
Father’s name: Victor L. Nadera
Mother’s name: Victoria T. Nadera
Language spoken: English, Cebuano, and Tagalog
Educational Background
College: University of San Carlos – Talamban Campus

June 2007-2013

Colon St. Cebu City
June 2016 – Present
High School: Colegio de la Inmaculada Concepcion

Tipolo, Mandaue City
June 2003-2007
Elementary: Colegio de la Inmaculada Concepcion

Tipolo, Mandaue City
June 1997-2003
Skills:
 Knowledgeable in Construction Estimates
 Basic Auto CAD
 Oriented in Microsoft Office Applications such as:
o Microsoft Office Word
o Microsoft Office Excel
o Microsoft Office PowerPoint
131
WORK EXPERIENCE:
AFFILIATION:
 Member, PICE-CEBU Students’ Chapter SY 2015-2016
132
JENNY ROSE R. SIEGA

Dona M. Gaisano Street Lahug Cebu City
Cell #: 09099355862
Email Add: benjohnson2k12@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 20
Birth date: March 14, 1997
Birth Place: Negros Occidental
Sex: Female
Height: 4’11
Weight: 49 kgs.
Father’s name: Alberto Siega
Mother’s name: Rosemarie Siega
Language spoken: English, Cebuano, Ilonggo & Tagalog

Colon St. Cebu City
June 2013 - Present
High School: Lahug Night High School

Gorordo Avenue Lahug Cebu City
Elementary: Malanog Elementary School

Brgy. Malanog Calatrava Negros Occidental
133
SKILLS:
WORK EXPERIENCE:
Service Crew (McDonalds JY Square)
Service Crew (Jollibee Gorordo Avenue)
AFFILIATION:

(2012-Present)
134
RHAMY P. URTEZUELA
Canduman Mandaue City ,Cebu
Cell #:09422907828
Email Add: rhamyurtezuela33@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 31
Birth date: November 16, 1985
Sex: Male
Height: 5’6
Weight: 70 kgs.
Father’s name: Zosimo S. Urtezuela
Mother’s name: Severina D. Urtezuela
solving skills,organized and responsible,

Colon St. Cebu City
High School: Mandaue City Comprehensive National High School

NRA Mandaue City
School Year 2003-2004
Elementary: Guizo Elementary School

Guizo Mandaue City
135
SKILLS:
Computer Literate (Microsoft, Excel Power point)

WORK EXPERIENCE:
Office Clerk at Perpetual Review Center (LET)
Machine Operator at Sunpride Food Inc.
AFFILIATION:

(2012-Present)
136
DON SERGIO G. VILLAESTER

Talisay City ,Cebu
Cell #:09367473406
Email Add: dakz_villaester@gmail.com
Personal data:
Age: 27
Birth date: June 3, 1990
Birth Place: Zamboanga del Norte
Sex: Male
Religion: SDA
Height: 5’5
Weight: 65 kg
Father’s name: Sergio G. Villaester
Mother’s name: Edna G. Villaester
College: Southern Phillipine College
Computer Office Management

Quirino St. Labason Zamboanga del Norte

Colon St. Cebu City
2011-Present
High School: St. Mary’s Academy

Labason, Z.N.
School Year 2002 – 2006
137
Elementary: Labason Central School

SKILLS:
 Computer Literate
 Basic Estimates
 Basic Auto – CAD
 Competent and Team Player
 Ability to do things in the best possible manner with quality
 Dedicated towards work
 Flexible towards changes
 And willing to learn new things
 Ability to do things in the best possible manner with quality
 Can work with minimum supervision
WORK EXPERIENCE:
Working Student @ Goldfin Construction
Obedience St. Capitol Site, Cebu City
255-3753
AFFILIATION:

(2012-Present)
138
JENNY Y. TEJANO
Sambag 1, Cebu City ,Cebu
Cell #:09266168854
Email Add: Jennygedorio@yahoo.com
Personal data:
Age: 48
Birth date: December 27,1968
Sex: Male
Height: 5’7
Weight: 79 kgs.
Father’s name: Deceased
Mother’s name: Deceased

Colon St. Cebu City
High School: Cebu Academy

Poblacion. Carmen Cebu
Elementary: Luyang Elementary School

Carmen Cebu
139
SKILLS:
Computer Literate (Microsoft, Excel Power point)

Electrician and Refrigeration technician
WORK EXPERIENCE:
Electrician and Refrigeration technician
AFFILIATION:

(2012-Present)

Thesis Last Na Jud Print

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Thesis Last Na Jud Print

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

i

A PROPOSED 3 STOREY PARKING BUILDING IN BARANGAY SAN ROQUE,

TITLE : A PROPOSED 3 STOREY PARKING BUILDING

IN BARANGAY SAN ROQUE, CEBU CITY

AUTHORS : HISHAM Y. AMILHASAN

ARTEMIO B. DUBLUIS JR.

ALEXIS JUDE L. LABASTIDA

DONATO HENRY R. LACBAYO

JON SEDFREY T. NADERA

JENNY ROSE R. SIEGA

DON SERGIO G. VILLAESTER

DEGREE : BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

SCHOOL : UNIVERSITY OF THE VISAYAS MAIN CAMPUS

DATE : OCTOBER 2017

ADVISER : ENGR. NIMFA O. RODRIGUEZ

The study is entitled “A Proposed 3 Storey Parking Building in Barangay San

can cause traffic congestions and it is unsafe for their vehicles .

hassle, more safety and less time finding a parking space.

atmosphere for doing our research.

earthquake engineering, and planning and estimates.

with their best wishes.

strength to complete this assessment.

This thesis entitled, “A PROPOSED 3 STOREY PARKING BUILDING IN

BARANGAY SAN ROQUE, CEBU CITY” submitted by HISHAM Y.

AMILHASAN, MELJON L. ABAÑO, AL SALVADOR C. CHING, ARTEMIO B.

DUBLUIS JR., ALEXIS JUDE L. LABASTIDA, DONATO HENRY R. LACBAYO,

JON SEDFREY T. NADERA, JENNY ROSE R. SIEGA, JENNY Y. TEJANO,

RHAMY P. URTEZUELA and DON SERGIO G. VILLAESTER, in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL

for ORAL DEFEND.

MITCHELLE IAN C. DORIA

NIMFA O. RODRIGUEZ, Ph. D. TM

BIENVENIDA U. CATALAN, DM RAMIEL P. TO-ONG

Instructor, CE Department Instructor, CE Department

Accepted and approved by the committee with a rating of during the

NIMFA O. RODRIGUEZ, Ph. D. TM

BIENVENIDA U. CATALAN, DM RAMIEL P. TO-ONG

Instructor, CE Department Instructor, CE Department

ARCH’T. ADELINE CORTEZ-LAURON

Dean, College of Engineering and Architecture

TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................... i

APPROVAL SHEET ..................................................................................................... v

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vii

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... x

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE ............................................................................... 1

Rationale of the Study ......................................................................................... 1

Conceptual Background of the Study.................................................................. 4

Statement of the Problem .................................................................................... 7

Scope & Limitation of the Study......................................................................... 7

Significance of the Study .................................................................................... 8

DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................................................ 10

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES ......................................... 11

Related Literature .............................................................................................. 11

Related Studies .................................................................................................. 12

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES ............................................. 17

Research Method ............................................................................................... 17

Research Environment ...................................................................................... 17

Research Respondents ....................................................................................... 22

Research Instruments ........................................................................................ 22

Research Procedures ......................................................................................... 22

Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................ 24

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA .................... 25