Household Questionnaire Results
Back to RegenerationHousehold Questionnaire Analysis
The household questionnaire was sent to 794 households. A total of 354 questionnaires have been returned and analysed, including 30 from children at Boscastle Primary School. The final analysis of results is set out below.
Respondents| Male: |
Number 152 |
% 42.9 |
Female: |
Number 185 |
% 52.2 |
| (17 responses – not given) | |||||
|
Number |
% |
|
| Under 10 | 17 | 4.8 |
| 10 -16 | 16 | 4.5 |
| 17 -25 | 9 | 2.5 |
| 26-40 | 29 | 8.2 |
| 41-55 | 106 | 29.9 |
| 56-65 | 94 | 26.5 |
| 66-75 | 49 | 13.8 |
| 75+ | 24 | 6.7 |
| (10 responses - not given) | ||
|
Permanent Resident |
Number 277 |
% 78.2 |
Non permanent resident |
Number 50 |
% 14.1 |
| (27 responses – not given) | |||||
| Directly Affected by Flood | |||||
| Yes: |
Number 108 |
% 30.5 |
No: |
Number 229 |
% 64.7 |
| (17 responses – not given) | |||||
Aspiration for Boscastle in Ten Year’s Time
|
Number |
% |
|
| Keep it as it was | 148 | 41.8 |
|
Community development including better services/facilities; provision for local people |
65 | 18.4 |
| Higher quality services – attracting different types of tourists | 21 | 5.9 |
| Less commercialised than at present | 40 | 11.3 |
| No redevelopment in harbour/other areas of the village | 6 | 1.7 |
| Improvements to infrastructure/access/car parking | 12 | 3.4 |
| Provision to avoid future flood | 12 | 3.4 |
| No response | 48 | 13.5 |
| Other | 2 | 0.5 |
Car Parking
A: Reinstatement of the car park as it was prior to the flood
| Yes |
Number 156 |
% 44 |
No |
Number 98 |
% 27.6 |
No response |
Number 100 |
% 28.2 |
| Yes |
Number 193 |
% 54.5 |
No |
Number 69 |
% 19.5 |
No response |
Number 92 |
% 26 |
C: Provide some parking elsewhere in Boscastle to either partly replace or act as an overspill car park
| Yes |
Number 168 |
% 47.4 |
No |
Number 90 |
% 25.4 |
No response |
Number 96 |
% 27.1 |
Comments on Car Parking
|
Number |
% |
|
| Insufficient parking available | 17 | 4.8 |
| Concessionary parking for residents/residents relatives | 35 | 9.9 |
| Cheaper parking/cheaper parking for visitors | 14 | 4 |
| Parking is adequate | 21 | 5.9 |
| More disabled parking | 2 | 0.5 |
| Extend car park at current location | 37 | 10.4 |
| Provide more parking elsewhere incl. top of village | 64 | 18 |
| No roadside parking | 11 | 3.1 |
| Need a park & ride system | 4 | 1.1 |
| Need better landscaping | 17 | 4.8 |
| Other | 21 | 5.9 |
| No response | 111 | 31.4 |
Visitor Centre
A: provide a new building within the general vicinity of the car park
| Yes |
Number 200 |
% 56.5 |
No |
Number 63 |
% 17.1 |
No response |
Number 91 |
% 25.7 |
B: Re-use an existing building in the car park/harbour area
| Yes |
Number 148 |
% 41.8 |
No |
Number 67 |
% 18.9 |
No response |
Number 139 |
% 39.3 |
Comments on redeveloping the Visitor Centre
|
Number |
% |
|
| Keep it as it was/in keeping with local architecture | 49 | 13.8 |
| Locate in car park | 30 | 8.5 |
| Site in harbour café/other existing building in harbour area | 19 | 5.4 |
| This is needed/urgent | 16 | 4.5 |
| Do not locate in car park | 11 | 3.1 |
| Include a museum/info on the flood | 11 | 3.1 |
| Centre is not needed/should be smaller | 13 | 3.7 |
| Combine with National Trust | 5 | 1.4 |
| Situate away from river/flood risk | 5 | 1.4 |
| More local knowledge/staffed by locals | 3 | 0.8 |
| Other | 19 | 5.4 |
| No response | 173 | 48.1 |
Public Toilets
|
Number |
% |
|
| Public conveniences needed at top and bottom of village | 31 | 8.7 |
| Adequate facilities are essential/more are needed | 71 | 20 |
| More pleasant building – more in keeping with surroundings | 2 | 0.5 |
| Good quality facilities are needed, modern | 31 | 8.7 |
| Locate in car park | 31 | 8.7 |
| Locate at harbour | 17 | 4.8 |
| Locate by surgery/top of village | 11 | 3.1 |
| Need disabled toilets | 4 | 1.1 |
| Reinstate toilets as they were before | 73 | 20.6 |
| Toilets are only needed in the car park and harbour area | 41 | 11.6 |
| Close the toilets by the surgery | 2 | 0.6 |
| Locate next to/in the Visitor Centre | 10 | 2.8 |
| Other | 9 | 2.5 |
| No response | 21 | 5.9 |
Improvements to the Harbour
|
Number |
% |
|
| Leave it as it is/retain natural beauty | 62 | 17.5 |
| Restrict vehicular access (as much as possible) | 14 | 3.9 |
| Re-lay Valency lawn | 1 | 0.3 |
| More seats | 48 | 13.5 |
| Take care not to destroy natural surroundings when rebuilding | 22 | 6.2 |
| No buskers | 10 | 2.3 |
| Extra lighting | 15 | 4.2 |
| Improve river edges | 7 | 2 |
| Improve access/slipways/make more disabled friendly | 11 | 3.1 |
| Remove sewage pipe/ensure harbour clean for swimming | 16 | 4.5 |
| Litter bins provided and emptied/area kept clean and tidy | 8 | 2.2 |
| Other | 36 | 10.2 |
| No response | 104 | 29.4 |
The Public Highway
|
Yes |
No |
No response |
||||
|
Number |
% |
Number |
% |
Number |
% |
|
| Widen pavements | 117 | 33 | 131 | 37 | 106 | 29.9 |
| Reduce or eliminate on street parking | 194 | 54.8 | 79 | 22.3 | 81 | 22.8 |
| Improve bus stop facilities | 181 | 51.1 | 74 | 20.9 | 99 | 28 |
| Improve location and type of street lighting | 179 | 50.6 | 68 | 19.2 | 107 | 30.2 |
| Review options for traffic management | 161 | 45.5 | 73 | 20.6 | 120 | 33.9 |
Improvements to the public highway
| Number | % | |
| Leave it as it was | 13 | 3.7 |
| Pavements need improvement/widening at riverside | 42 | 11.9 |
| On-street parking is necessary/laybys for buses and coaches | 11 | 3.1 |
| Better street lighting | 23 | 6.5 |
| Roundabout at surgery corner | 4 | 1.1 |
| Traffic calming/stop speeding | 17 | 4.8 |
| Better public transport | 5 | 1.4 |
| Free short term parking in village | 7 | 2 |
| Restrict on-street parking | 36 | 10.2 |
| Fewer advertising boards/signs | 2 | 0.5 |
| Do not widen pavements | 4 | 1.1 |
| Other | 55 | 15.5 |
| No response | 135 | 38.1 |