|
|
|
Information on this page is provided by Purdue Tourism & Hospitality Research Center (PTHRC) and Anderson/Madison County Convention & Visitors Bureau. Permission to use the information, partially or in whole, can be obtained by contacting PTHRC.Table of Contents
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ANDERSON/MADISON COUNTY VISITORS Demographically, the majority of visitors (53.5%) to Anderson/Madison County in 1997-98 were in the 25-49 age group (Table 1). Some 75.4% of the respondents were 35 or older. A majority of the respondents, at 59.3%, were male (Table 2). In terms of the highest educational levels achieved, the three major categories were earned high school diploma (27.2%), Bachelor’s degree holders (25.4%), and Master’s degree holders (10.5%) (Table 4). The largest of the occupational groupings among the respondents were professional/technical (30.5%), retired (17.8%), skilled worker (13.1%), and manager/executive (9.2%)(Table 5). AGE GROUPS In 1997-98, about 75.4% of respondents were aged 35 or more (Table 1). This proportion of over- 35s varied only slightly by season, ranging from a low of 73.2% in Winter 1998 to a high of 76.9% in Spring 1997. Only 9.2% of all the 1997-98 respondents were under the age of 25. The Spring and Fall 1997 seasons had the highest percentages of the 65 and above group. The Fall 1997 season showed a relatively high percentage of the 35-49 age group (41.3%). When looking at the age compositions of all travel party members, some interesting seasonal variations were noted. For all of 1997-98, the percentage of teenagers and younger children was 15% of all travel party members. This percentage of under 20s was at its highest in Summer 1997 (18.8% of all travel party members) and at its lowest in Winter 1998 (13.6%) (Table 3). In contrast, the proportion of 45 or older persons was at its highest in Spring 1997 (40.5% of all travel party members) and at its lowest in Winter 1998 (32.3%). For the 1997-98 period, 75.4% of respondents (Table 1) and 57.4% of all travel party members (Table 3) were aged between 35 and above. The largest individual age bracket of respondents was those visitors between 35 and 44 at 24.5% (Table 1). For all travel party members, the largest individual age group was again 35-44 at 21.6% (Table 3). The 45 and above group represented more than 50.9% of the respondents and 35.8% of all travel party members. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUNDS Some 67.6% of all respondents had some college experience, while 29.4% had just had a high-school education (Table 4). The two single largest groups were people with earned high school diplomas, at 27.2%, and with Bachelor’s degrees, at 25.4%. Some 46.3% of the respondents had earned college degrees ranging from Associates to Doctorates, and 13.1% had postgraduate degrees. The proportions of visitors with earned high school diplomas were almost exactly the same in Spring, Summer, and Fall 1997 at around 28%, but dropped to 24.4% in Winter 1998. The largest proportion with earned Bachelor’s degrees was in Fall 1997 (27%) and the lowest proportion in Winter 1998 (24.4%). The proportion of respondents with earned degrees was highest in Fall 1997 at 50.2% and lowest in Winter 1998 at 41.8%. OCCUPATIONS The majority of Anderson/Madison County’s visitors (61.4%) were from three occupational groupings; professional/technical (30.5%), retired (17.8%), and skilled workers (13.1%) (Table 5). There were also smaller, but nevertheless significant, proportions of managers/executives (9.2%), students (7.5%), owners/self-employed (7.1%), and clerical/sales workers (6.3%). The distribution of occupations varied somewhat from season to season. Homemakers were more prevalent in Anderson/Madison County in the Winter 1998 (17.3%). Students were at their highest proportions in Spring 1997 (11.4%). HOUSEHOLD INCOMES AND HOUSEHOLD SIZES Approximately 74.3% of the respondents provided information on their household income levels, while the remaining 25.7% were unwilling to provide these details (Table 6). Approximately 70% of the respondents who provided this information had household incomes of $40,000 or more. About 46% of those providing income data reported incomes of $60,000 or more. Some 24.5% of the respondents providing information had household incomes in the $80,000 and over range, while 16.7% of these respondents had incomes of $100,000 or more. Only 8.5% of all the respondents providing income data reported annual, before tax household incomes below $20,000. The three most frequently encountered income brackets among the respondents providing income data were $40,000-$49,999 (10.7%), $30,000-$39,999 (9.4%), and $60,000-$69,999 (8.7%). There were some seasonal variations in the patterns of household incomes. For example, the over $40,000 group was at its highest in Spring 1997, at 73%, and at its lowest in Fall 1997, at 66.6%. The middle income range, from $40,000 to $79,999, was at its highest in Winter 1998, at 55.3%%, and at its lowest in Fall 1997, at 43.6%. A
majority of the respondents (71.8%) lived in households of two to four persons
(Table 7). Another 18.7% lived alone and 8.1% has household sizes of five to
six people. The proportion of respondents who lived alone was at a high of
23.6% in Spring 1997.
GENDER Overall, the majority of respondents in 1997-98 were males at 59.3% (Table 2). This proportion was relatively consistent throughout the year, with the highest proportion of female respondents being in Fall 1997 at 43.7%. GEOGRAPHIC ORIGINS OF VISITORS Geographically, the majority of the visitors to Anderson/Madison County in 1997-98 came from 32 of the 50 states in the U.S and the District of Columbia. In particular, the data showed that Anderson/Madison County’s market is strongest in Indiana and its neighboring states. The majority (approximately 85.6%) of Anderson/Madison County’s U.S. visitors were from just four states: Indiana (70%), Michigan (7.4%), Ohio (5.8%), and Illinois (2.4%) (Table 10). The other 28 states each represented less than 2% of the respondents. The leading census region was East North Central (IL, IN, MI, OH, and WI), accounting for 86.3% of all U.S. visitors to Anderson/Madison County in 1997-98 (Table 9). The only other significant census regions were Middle Atlantic (3.1%; NJ, NY, PA), and West North Central (2.5%; IA, KS, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD). The top three census regions generated 91.9% of all Anderson/Madison County U.S. visitors. The smallest-generating census region was Mountain (0.6%). Only 1.7% of Anderson/Madison County’s visitors was from outside of the U.S. (Table 8). There were some changes in geographic origins by season. For example, the four-state area of Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Illinois peaked in Summer 1997 at 88.9% and was lowest in Spring 1997 at 80.7%. Only 21 states were represented in Spring and Fall 1997. The most-frequently mentioned 3-digit zip code areas of the respondents were in Indianapolis (460-462 = 20.2%) (Table 11). Other Indiana zip codes with significant numbers of visitors were Muncie (17.7%), Columbus (10.3%), Kokomo (8.3%), Fort Wayne (7.4%), and Gary (2.4%). The Detroit-Flint-Saginaw area zips in Michigan (481-486) accounted for 4.7% of all the respondents included in Table 11. The other out-of-state zips with the most respondents were Grand Rapids, Michigan (1.4%) and Dayton, Ohio (1.3%). All the other 3-digit zip codes each accounted for less than 1% of the respondents. The Indianapolis area zip codes were at a high proportion of 22.3% in Spring 1997. The average travel party size for 1997-98 was 2.87 persons (Table 12). About 73% of all respondents were repeat visitors to Anderson/Madison County, while only 27% were visiting for the very first time (Table 16). It was noticeable that 48.3% of all visitors were very frequent visitors and had visited Anderson/Madison County four or more times previously. Of those overnighting in Anderson/Madison County, some 80.7% were on short duration trips of one to four nights stay in Anderson/Madison County, while another 9.8% were on longer-stay trips to Anderson/Madison County (Table 22). SIZE OF TRAVEL PARTIES Travel party sizes ranged from just one traveler to a group of 31 and more visitors (Table 12). The average party size in 1997-98 was 2.87 persons. The highest average party size was in Summer 1997 (3.23 persons). The mode for travel party size, or the most frequently encountered party size, was two persons with the highest proportion of 38.2%, followed by solo travelers (28.1%) and groups of three persons (12.8%). Most of the visitors (92.4%) to Anderson/Madison County in 1997-98 were in travel parties of five or less persons. The average travel party size was the smallest in Winter 1998 (2.51 persons) and Fall 1997 (2.68 persons). TYPES OF TRAVEL PARTIES The majority (56.8%) of Anderson/Madison County’s 1997-98 visitors were traveling as families, with or without friends. Solo travelers were the next largest group at 29.6% (Table 13). Groups of friends was the next highest at 13.3%. There were some differences in travel party compositions by season. While 62.6% of the respondents in Summer 1997 were with their families, with or without friends, this proportion fell to 50.5% in Spring 1997. Groups of friends ranged from a high of 15.9% in Fall 1998 to a low of 10.2% in Spring 1997. The proportion of solo travelers varied from a high of 39.3% in Spring 1997 to a low of 23.4% in Summer 1997. Combining this party composition data with the age information discussed earlier, the largest proportion of younger visitors (19 and under) was in Summer 1997 (18.8%) (Table 3). This suggests that, as could be expected, the families with children market was strongest in Summer 1997, while older travelers were more prevalent in Spring 1997. TRIP PURPOSES Some 63% of all Anderson/Madison County’s 1997-98 visitors indicated that their main trip purpose was for pleasure reasons (Table 14). Business travelers accounted for 20.7%, and 15% traveled to Anderson/Madison County for personal reasons. There were some interesting differences in trip purposes by season. Summer 1997 had the highest proportion of pleasure travelers at 68.8%, while Spring 1997 had the highest percentage of business travelers at 24.8%. The proportion of personal reason travelers was highest in Fall 1997 at 22.4%. The most frequently cited specific trip purposes were shopping in Anderson/Madison County (26.1%), passing by or through on vacation (10.2%), and visiting an attraction (5.4%) (Table 15). These data clearly confirmed the key importance of shopping in attracting visitors to Anderson/Madison County. The data also confirm the role of Anderson/Madison County as a tourism destination, rather than as a place to pass through en route to another destination. Only 19.2% of the respondents indicated that they were passing by or through Anderson/Madison County. There
were significant differences in specific trip purposes according to season.
For example, the percentage of respondents vacationing in Anderson/Madison
County was at a high of 7.7% in Summer 1997, while the shopping percentage
also peaked in Summer 1997 at 30.5%. The visiting friends and relatives
percentage reached a high of 8.1% in Spring
1997.
NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
VISITS TO ANDERSON/MADISON COUNTY As was mentioned earlier, the majority (73%) of respondents in 1997-98 had visited Anderson/Madison County on at least one previous occasion (Table 16). In fact, 48.3% of the respondents had visited Anderson/Madison County on four or more previous occasions. Generally, this pattern held true in each of the four seasons. In Summer 1997, return visitors reached a peak of 76.3% of all respondents. The very frequent visitors (those with five or more visits) represented between 52% and 54% or more of the respondents in Spring and Summer 1997, but were at somewhat lower proportions in the other two seasons. FINAL DESTINATIONS AND PRIOR TRAVEL STOPS Some 79% of all the 1997-98 respondents stated that Anderson/Madison County was their final destination on their current trips (Table 17). The remaining 21% had other final destinations. This relationship held fairly stable for each of the four seasons, reaching a high of 85.7% in Summer 1997 and a low of 73.5% in Winter 1997. The most popular final destinations within Indiana other than Anderson/Madison County were Indianapolis (23.6%) and Muncie (10.9%) (Table 18). The final destinations within Michigan (Michigan, Detroit, Flint, Ann Arbor, Jackson, and Lansing) represented 16.8% of the other final destinations. The
most popular places visited within Indiana on the respondents’ trips prior
to Anderson/Madison County were Indianapolis (30 respondents) and Bloomington
(4 respondents) (Table 19). MODES OF TRANSPORTATION Given Anderson/Madison County’s location and transportation facilities, it could be expected that the visitors’ predominant mode of transportation would be the automobile. In fact, 92.5% of all respondents indicated that private or rented vehicles were used (Table 20). Among the other transportation modes used, the most popular were commercial airline (1.7%) and scheduled bus service (1.6%). These patterns were fairly consistent throughout the year. There was not much seasonal variation in other transportation mode usage. Private vehicle usage reached a high of 91.4% in Fall 1997. HIGHWAYS AND ROADS USED The highways and roads used most frequently to get to Anderson/Madison County were I-69 (70.7% of all respondents), Highway 67 (9.1%), I-65 (5.7%), Highway 231 (8.4%), I-465 (6%), Highway 9 (5.1%), I-70 (4.1%), and Highway 32 (4%) (Table 21). The other highway used by a significant number of respondents was 109 (3.4%). LENGTHS OF STAY
Just over 60% of the respondents in 1997-98 were staying overnight in
Anderson/Madison County (Table 22). Some 80.7% of these people were staying
one to four nights in Anderson/Madison County. Day trips to Anderson/Madison
County accounted for approximately 40% of the respondents. There was some
variation in lengths of stay by season. For example, the day trip percentage
was at a high of 46.7% in Summer 1997, but fell to 28.6% in Winter 1998. ACCOMMODATION USAGE The majority of the 1997-98 visitors to Anderson/Madison County who remained overnight stayed in local hotels and motels (82.6%) (Table 23). The other major types of accommodation were the homes of relatives (3.6%) and friends (3.3%). The most frequently used hotels were as follows (Table 24): Accommodation Rates
Other specific lodging establishments were mentioned by 1% or less of visitors who remained overnight in Anderson/Madison County. VISITOR EXPENDITURE PATTERNS Respondents were given the alternative of estimating their travel expenditures in Anderson/Madison County for themselves only or for their travel parties as a whole. For respondents only, some 83% expected to spend less than $250, while the remaining 17% expected to spend $250 or more in Anderson/Madison County (Table 25). The largest single expected spending categories for individuals were under $50 (32%), $50 to $99.99 (21.8%), and $100 to $149.99 (14.9%). The pattern of expenditures for groups was different from the individual spending pattern. For those estimating for their travel parties as a whole, 74.7% expected to spend less than $250 and the remaining 25.3% to spend $250 or more (Table 26). The largest expected spending category (in $100 increments) for entire travel parties was under $100 (30.5%). The next largest spending category was $100 to $199.99 at 30%. The under $200 to $299.99 category ranked third at 19.3%, followed by the $300 to $399.99 category (8.1%). It is also noteworthy that 8.8% of the groups expected to spend $500 or more in Anderson/Madison County. There were some seasonal variations in the spending estimates of this study’s respondents. For the entire year of 1997-98, the median expenditure range for travel parties was in the $150 to $199.99 category. However, in Winter 1998, the median travel party expenditure was lower at $100 to $149.99. MEDIA AND TRAVEL INFORMATION USAGE For advertising and marketing purposes, it was felt to be important to ask respondents about their media habits. Therefore, the questionnaire included questions on usage of magazines, newspapers, radio formats, and cable TV stations. Respondents were also asked about their use of the World Wide Web. Finally, respondents provided information on their sources of travel information, and about the people or organizations that influenced them to travel to Anderson/Madison County. THE PRINT MEDIA: MAGAZINES AND NEWSPAPERS The ten most popular magazines read by what could be considered a significant proportion of respondents were: Reader’s Digest (152), Sports Illustrated (138), Better Homes & Gardens (133), Newsweek (124), National Geographic (98), People (92), Time (77), Good Housekeeping (57), Business Week (46), and Country Living (46) (Table 36). Other magazines read by significant numbers of respondents were Midwest Living (44), U.S. News & World Report (38), Family Circle (34), Modern Maturity (33), Redbook (27), and Woman’s Day (26). Among newspapers, the most frequently mentioned were the Indianapolis Star (231), USA Today (214), the Wall Street Journal (82), and the New York Times (32). THE ELECTRONIC MEDIA: RADIO, CABLE TV, AND WORLD WIDE WEB The most popular radio format mentioned by the respondents was country (370). There was a fairly even distribution of respondents among the next three most popular radio formats. These were classic rock (249), rock/popular (Top 40) (241), and easy listening (208) (Table37). The other popular radio station formats were classical (193), talk radio (154), jazz/blues (104), alternative rock (89), Christian/religious/gospel (87), new age (51), and oldies (38). The ten most popular cable television subscriptions among the respondents were ESPN (529), CNN (415), Discovery Channel (397), A & E (380), HBO (321), TBS (310), USA Network (303), TNN (297), Family Channel (255), and CNBC (253) (Table 38). Other cable TV stations with significant numbers of respondents were The Learning Channel (237), The Disney Channel (199), Nickelodeon (191), Cinemax (184), The Travel Channel (156), and BTV (134). Approximately 29% of the respondents were not connected to cable television. Some
46.4% of the respondents said that they had used the Internet/World Wide Web
in their homes or places of business, while the remaining 53.6% had never used
this computer-based medium (Table 39). The majority of the Internet users had
been online at work (58%), at a library, school or college (28%), or at home
via America Online (19.5%). This implies that almost half of visitors have
potential access to AMCVCB’s World Wide Web site (http://www.madtourism.com). TRAVEL INFORMATION SOURCES Given
the high proportion of repeat visits noted earlier, it is not surprising that
a large proportion of the 1997-98 visitors did not actively seek
travel related information for their current trips. In fact, 87.3% of
all the respondents indicated that they “didn’t look for or receive any
information” or they “already knew about Anderson/Madison County” (Table
33). Significant information sources used were friends or relatives at 5.4% of
respondents and an AAA travel guide (2.3%). MOST INFLUENTIAL PERSONS IN TRAVEL DECISION-MAKING The most influential groups of persons in influencing the travel decisions to Anderson/Madison County were yourself (the respondent, at 38.3%), the organization for which you work (19%), spouses/partners/companions (17.4%), children (8.2%), friends (8.2%), and other relatives (5%) (Table 34).
VISITS, AWARENESS, AND RATINGS OF ANDERSON/MADISON COUNTY'S ATTRACTIONS AND FACILITIES ACTIVITY PARTICIPATION The
respondents were supplied with a list of 23 activities and were asked if they
participated in them during their trips to Anderson/Madison County. The ten
activities with the highest participation rates among 1997-98 visitors were: ACTIVITIES 1. Shop (general shopping) 50.0% 2. Swim 10.3% 3. Shop for local arts and handicrafts 12.8% 4. Horse racing/gambling 6.3% 5.
Attend or participate in an amateur sporting event 6. Attend a conference (under 500 people) 5.9% 7. Visit a theme or amusement park 5.9% 8. Attend a corporate business meeting 5.7% 9. Shop for antiques 5.0% 10. Play golf 4.0% Overall, the most popular activity was definitely shopping, followed by attending meetings of various types, swimming, horse racing, and amateur sport attendance or participation. As
might be expected, there were some seasonal variations in activity
participation that might be attributed partly to changes in the weather
conditions and local events being staged. However, shopping remained the most
popular activity in all of the four seasons. The following exhibit shows the
top ten activities by participation rates for each season. ACTIVITIES Shop (general shopping) 1 1 1 1 1 Swim 3 2 8 2 2 Shop for local arts and handicrafts 5 9 3 3 3 Horse racing/gambling 2 6 12 * 4 Attend or participate in an 5 3 8 * 5 amateur sporting event Attend a conference (under 500) 4 9 4 4 6 Visit a theme/amusement park 14 5 2 11 7 Attend a corporate business 9 4 10 6 8 Meeting Play golf 8 9 11 8 10 Attend an educational program 7 14 4 9 11 Attend a trade show or exhibition 14 13 10 7 12 Visit a museum 13 9 15 11 13 Ride a bicycle 19 8 20 15 16 * No participation in this activity ATTRACTION AND EVENT USAGE To get an idea of the respondents’ usage and ratings of local attractions, events, and facilities, they were asked if they visited specific locations and, if so, to rate them on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the highest possible rating. The results give an indication of the most popular attractions and events and, in addition, may indicate where some specific improvements are needed in certain attractions or facilities. The two major attractions within the area with the highest rate of usage on current trips were the Indiana Factory Shops (21.2%) and Hoosier Park (12.9%) (Table 27). This was also the case for previous trips (Table 28) and for places still to be visited on current trips (Table 29). Other individual attractions within Anderson/Madison County with significant levels of use were Mounds State Park, Anderson University, and Anderson Speedway. Another individual attraction, which a significant number of respondents had visited on previous trips, was the Paramount Theatre (Table 27). Apart from these six attractions, all the other attractions had relatively low attendance rates and recognition among the 1997-98 visitors to Anderson/Madison County, and especially the Military Armor Museum, Merchant Marine Museum, and Giant Earth Home. The festival and event with the highest rates of previous attendance was actually one held in Grant County, Fairmount Museum Days (Table 27). Again, the awareness and attendance at major local festivals and events were also relatively low. These results suggest that more could be done to promote Madison County’s local events and festivals.
Generally, respondents gave fairly high ratings to Anderson/Madison County’s
attractions, events, and festivals (Table 31-5). The highest ratings were
given to the following: Attractions
Rating
Responses
1. Merchant Marine Museum
8.79
24
2. Military Armor Museum
8.70
27
3. Paramount Theatre
8.44
87
4. Hoosier Park
8.40
325
5. Anderson University
8.32
222
6. Mounds State Park
8.30
231
7. Indian Trails Riverwalk
8.29
59
8. Giant Earth Home
8.25
12
9. Camp Chesterfield
8.16
69 10. Elwood Glass factories
8.08
48 EVENTS
AND FESTIVALS
1. Tour of Homes, Pendleton
9.00
10
2. Elwood Glass Festival
8.48
27
3. Victorian Gaslight Festival
8.47
19
4. Indian Trails Festival
8.06
18
5. Frankton Heritage Days
7.95
19 The attraction with the lowest overall rating among the 1997-98 visitors to Anderson/Madison County was the Anderson Speedway (7.82). Among out-of-town attractions, the most-highly rated were Deer Creek Music Center (8.67) and Conner Prairie (8.55) (Table 31-5). The most-visited out-of-town attractions on prior trips were Conner Prairie (20.4%) and Deer Creek Music Center (17.7%) (Table 27). PERCEPTIONS OF ANDERSON/MADISON COUNTY AS A DESTINATION
One of the major objectives of this Visitor Profile Study was to gather
information on the image of Anderson/Madison County as a visitor destination.
Fourteen Likert-scale questions were included in the questionnaire to get an
idea of visitors’ perceptions of various aspects of Anderson/Madison County
as a travel destination. Respondents were also asked to provide their own
suggestions on what could be added or improved in Anderson/Madison County to make
it a more attractive destination for visitors. PERCEPTIONS OF
ANDERSON/MADISON COUNTY Anderson/Madison County was seen as having a high degree of accessibility by road, and as being a safe and affordable travel destination (Table 40). In addition, a majority of respondents agreed that Anderson/Madison County was a good place for couples to visit. Perceptual Statements on Anderson/Madison County (positively-worded) Agree
2. Anderson/Madison County has a high degree of accessibility by road
74.4%
3. Anderson/Madison County is affordable as a travel destination
72.4%
4. Anderson/Madison County is a good place for couples to visit
62.1%
5. Anderson/Madison County offers several unique shopping opportunities
41.9%
6. Anderson/Madison County is a good place to take children
41.6% 7. Anderson/Madison County is a unique vacation travel destination 25.2%
While the overall perceptions of Anderson/Madison County as a destination were
favorable, a central tendency was noticed for several of the perceptual
statements. These statements tended to have significant neutral (neither agree
nor disagree) ratings (at 3.0). Perceptual
Statements on Anderson/Madison County 1. Anderson/Madison County does not offer many activities for vacation travelers 55.0% 2. Anderson/Madison County has several unique attractions for vacationers 52.6% 4. Anderson/Madison County is a good place to take children 49.1% 5. Anderson/Madison County does not have enough high-quality hotels and motels 46.8%
There were small, but significant, proportions of respondents who had negative
perceptions of Anderson/Madison County as a travel destination. The less
favorable perceptual ratings are highlighted in the following table. The table
indicates the percentage of respondents who said that they either
“disagreed” or “strongly disagreed” with the statements when the
statements were positively worded or “agreed” or “strongly agreed”
when the statements were negatively worded. PERCEPTUAL
STATEMENTS 1. Anderson/Madison County does not offer many activities for vacation travelers 30.2% 18.0% 2. The directional signs within Anderson/Madison County need to be improved 24.2% 39.2% 3. Anderson/Madison County does not have enough high-quality hotels and motels 20.5% 32.7% 4. Anderson/Madison County does not have enough quality restaurants 18.9% 47.4% 5. It is difficult to find your way around Anderson/Madison County 16.9% 54.5% 6. Anderson/Madison County is not a good place for family weekends 12.6% 38.2% 7. Anderson/Madison County is a unique vacation travel destination 25.2% 24.7% 8. Anderson/Madison County has several unique attractions for vacationers 32.0% 15.4% 9. Anderson/Madison County has several unique shopping opportunities 41.9% 12.7% 10. Anderson/Madison County is a good place to take children 41.6% 9.3% RESPONDENTS’
SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS The
suggested improvements mentioned most frequently related to the addition of
facilities for families and children within Anderson/Madison County. There was
also an indication that more restaurants and better hotels and motels are
needed. Improvements to the shopping mall and the addition of more street
signs were also mentioned (Table 41). The specific suggestions were as
follows: Suggested
Improvements More restaurants 30 Better mall 16 More street signs 15 Better hotels 14 More facilities for families 13 Roads need to be improved 13 More facilities for children 10
RESPONDENT’S VERBATIM DESCRIPTIONS OF ANDERSON/MADISON
COUNTY Respondents were asked to describe Anderson/Madison County as a place to visit as it is now. In general, Anderson/Madison County was seen as a nice, quiet, convenient small town with good shopping facilities (Table 42). Other descriptors frequently used were related to Anderson/Madison County being a clean, safe, and enjoyable Midwest community. The ten most popular descriptions are listed below. The percentages were based on the total number of respondents in this study. Verbatim
Descriptions Nice 404 31.9% Quiet place 33 2.6% Convenient 32 2.5% Good shopping 27 2.1% Small town 27 2.1% Clean 23 1.8% Good security 20 1.6% Basic Midwest city 17 1.3% Enjoyable 15 1.2% Depressed 15 1.2% Friendly 15 1.2% RESPONDEN It
was mentioned earlier that the majority of the respondents were return
visitors. This trend should continue according to the findings of this study.
When asked if they intended to come back to Anderson/Madison County, 97% of
the respondents provided a positive response (Table 43). Only 3% of the
respondents said they would not be making future trips to Anderson/Madison
County. RECOMMENDED
|
For comments or questions regarding this web contact PTHRC |