Second Homes in Northern Ireland - Growth, Impact & Policy ...

Second Homes in Northern Ireland 

Growth, Impact & Policy Implications 

Final Report to the Housing Executive 

September 2008 

Chris Paris, Professor Emeritus, University of Ulster

CONTENTS 

Acknowledgements 

Summary and recommendations 

iii 

v 

Section 1: Introduction 1 

The background to the study and the issues involved; review of research aims, 

objectives and methods. 

Section 2: Literature review 5 

Concepts, definitions and data; the impact of second homes; international dimensions; 

policy issues and debates; a typology of second homes and related dwelling uses. 

Section 3: Case study 1: second homes on the Causeway Coast 13 

The growth impact of second home ownership on the Causeway Coast based on the first phase 

of work undertaken during 2006. 

Section 4: Case study 2: second homes in Newcastle-Dundrum 29 

The growth impact of second home ownership in the Newcastle-Dundrum 

area and the impact of second homes on the local housing market. 

Section 5: Case study 3: second homes in the Co Fermanagh Lakelands 51 

The growth of second homes in the Co. Fermanagh Lakelands and the 

impact of second homes on the local housing market. 

Section 6: Second home owners in Northern Ireland 69 

Overall second home ownership in Northern Ireland, case studies compared and relationship 

to outright home ownership. 

Section 7: Taxation issues relating to second home ownership 81 

A perspective on taxation issues relating to the purchase, use and disposal of second homes 

in relation to the overall housing system. 

Section 8: Conclusions 87 

Conclusions, review of the case studies, and recommendations in response to overall 

research aims and objectives. 

Section 9: Addendum 91 

July 2008 review of changes in the housing market and how this affects the 

conclusions and recommendations in this report. 

Section 10: References 97 

Appendix 1 Participants in semi-structured interviews & focus groups 101 

Appendix 2 The survey questionnaire 102 

Appendix 3 Semi-structured interview topics 109 

Appendix 4 NISRA omnibus survey questions 110 

ii 

Second Homes in Northern Ireland - Growth, Impact & Policy Implications

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The following individuals and organisations have provided invaluable help and assistance during the 

conduct of this research; as ever, however, the author accepts responsibility for any errors of fact or 

analysis in this report. 

• The Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE) Research Unit, especially Joe Frey, Mary Rainey & 

Patrice Carmichael, and other colleagues who assisted with the surveys of second home owners and 

residents in ‘hot-spot’ areas. 

• Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) for advice and technical assistance, 

conducting the omnibus survey and providing data for the specific questions on second homes in 

Northern Ireland. 

• Elected representatives, officers and citizens of Coleraine Borough Council (CBC), Down District 

Council (DDC) and Fermanagh District Council (FDC). 

• Other participants in qualitative research, including semi-structured interviews, focus groups, 

telephone interviews and emailed correspondence in the case study areas: officers from the Northern 

Ireland Planning Service; local estate agents; residents’ groups in the Causeway Coast, and Newcastle- 

Dundrum areas; Regional Offices of the NIHE; housing developers in the case studies; an official in 

HM Revenue & Customs; officials in the Department of Communities and Local Government, and 

representatives from English National Parks (see Appendix 1). The views and comments of these 

participants were provided in a personal capacity and must not be taken to represent the official 

position of any of the agencies or organisations within which they work or are involved as voluntary 

members. 

• Professor Stephen Boyd, University of Ulster, for providing us with his survey data in 

machine-readable format for secondary analysis. 

• Comments and suggestions from participants in seminars and conference presentations at Flinders 

University, the University of Tasmania, the University of Hong Kong, La Trobe University, the 

Department of Sustainability & Environment (Government of Victoria, Australia), and Workshop 24 at 

the ENHR conference, Ljubljana July 2006. 

• The Institute for Advanced Study at La Trobe University for providing excellent facilities during my 

period as Distinguished Fellow, writing up this research in February and March 2007, and for assisting 

me in the development of further collaborative research on issues related to second home ownership 

in affluent societies. 

Second Homes in Northern Ireland - Growth, Impact & Policy Implications 

iii

SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS 

Background and overview 

The Housing Executive commissioned the University of Ulster to undertake research on second homes 

in Northern Ireland in response to growing claims that the growth of second home ownership was having 

adverse impacts on some local communities and housing markets. 

This report is the second output from this research. It includes a brief literature review, followed by 

case studies of the impact of second homes on communities in three ‘hot spot’ areas: the Causeway 

Coast, the Newcastle-Dundrum area and County Fermanagh. It also considers some more general data 

on second home ownership in NI and issues relating to the tax treatment of the purchase and sale of 

second homes. The report reaches a series of conclusions relating to project objectives and makes some 

recommendations in response to the project brief. 

Literature review 

The literature review comprises a summary of the more extensive literature review provided in the report 

on the first stage of this research (Paris, 2007) together with some commentary on material published in 

the intervening period and a typology of dwelling use, including second homes and ‘multiple residences’. 

Case studies of second homes ‘hot spots’ 

The Causeway Coast case study was undertaken during 2006 and was explored in detail in the first report 

(Paris, 2007). It provides a context for two more case studies in the Newcastle-Dundrum coastal area and 

in County Fermanagh. The case studies in Newcastle-Dundrum and the Fermanagh Lakelands are based 

on similar methods to the Causeway Coast study: local literature search, secondary analysis of census and 

survey data, surveys of second home owners and permanent residents, and semi-structured interviews 

with representatives from local organisations, government agencies and businesses. 

The surveys of second home owners achieved the quota of 100 completed interviews in the Causeway 

Coast, but only managed lower levels of achieved response in Newcastle-Dundrum (39) and Fermanagh 

(18). Sampling was based on local knowledge of areas of high incidence of second home ownership and 

investigation of homes in those areas to identify and interview second home owners. The main problems 

encountered in Newcastle and Fermanagh were the low level of availability of respondents in dwellings 

likely to be second homes and, in the Fermanagh case, by the widely dispersed pattern of housing 

development. The questionnaire gathered data on household characteristics of second home owners, how 

and why they acquired the property, when they purchased and what they paid, their use of local services, 

local social networks, the possibility of acquiring more leisure residences, and details of their other or 

primary home. 

The surveys showed that second home owners in all three case studies are mainly affluent home 

owners with high household incomes who purchased second homes mainly using savings or traditional 

mortgages/loans. They believed that their second homes had increased considerably in value. They did not 

appear to be very sensitive to the level of rates or additional rate imposts. Around one in six had more than 

one second home, and a third were contemplating further acquisition of second homes in NI or elsewhere. 

All three case studies considered the views and perceptions of permanent residents regarding second 

home ownership. The Causeway Coast case study used data from a survey by Professor Stephen Boyd 

exploring attitudes to second homes in the area. The research team conducted surveys in the two other 

case studies to explore permanent residents’ perceptions of the impact of second homes in their areas. 

The target of 100 completed interviews was achieved in Newcastle-Dundrum and 53 interviews were 


completed in Fermanagh. These surveys indicated similar attitudes to those found on the Causeway Coast, 

though concern was less strongly articulated, especially in Fermanagh. 

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals from a range of organisations with expertise 

relating to second homes and the housing market in the three case study areas: residents groups, 

representatives from the local councils, Housing Executive and NI Planning Service officials responsible for 

the three area offices, and local estate agents. The interviews explored trends in the local housing market and 

sought views and attitudes about second homes and other local housing issues. 

The interviews revealed significant areas of agreement and disagreement across a range of issues relating 

to the local housing market in the Causeway Coast case study, with less disagreement among participants in 

Newcastle-Dundrum. There was a high degree of agreement, however, in Fermanagh, where it was impossible 

to identify any community groups actively campaigning on the issue of second homes. There was agreement 

in all three case studies that there had been significant changes in recent years, with intensification of previous 

trends, rapidly rising land and house prices. On the Causeway Coast, redevelopment was replacing houses and 

bungalows with higher density new dwellings, especially apartments. Developer-led replacement of single 

dwellings with multiple dwellings aimed at the second homes market had begun more recently in Newcastle- 

Dundrum but appeared to be absent in Fermanagh. 

There was less agreement about evaluating the impacts of these developments and what policies should or 

could be implemented to overcome perceived problems. Community groups on the Causeway Coast felt their 

areas were being overwhelmed by second home purchasers of existing dwellings and higher density dwellings 

following redevelopment. Other respondents in that case study saw the changing local housing market as 

the outcome of market forces; they agreed that planning had few if any powers to affect the development of 

second homes. Community groups expressed growing concerns about second homes and redevelopment 

in Newcastle-Dundrum but accepted that planning had limited capacity to affect market-driven processes of 

change. There was no identifiable community group in Fermanagh and respondents generally saw changes as 

acceptable market- and choice-driven phenomena. 

All three case study areas have experienced changes over the last twenty years, including growth in the level 

of second home ownership, changes in leisure and tourism industries, population and household growth, 

changing patterns of settlement and new housing development, and growth in retirement migration. Many of 

these changes were unrelated to second homes. 

The first report (Paris, 2007) proposed a conceptual model of the development of second homes as a form of 

gentrification on the Causeway Coast, with a second homes ‘life cycle’. That began with artisanal construction 

of shacks for leisure use, then there was a wave of ‘pioneer’ purchasing of existing dwellings and that wave 

overlapped with a third wave of purchasing new dwellings, originally constructed as speculative homes. 

More recently, developers have been buying existing dwellings to redevelop for the second homes market, 

especially in areas where permission is likely for apartments. The situation is similar in Newcastle-Dundrum, 

although it has been less developed by summer 2007. In Fermanagh, by way of contrast, there had been little 

developer-led redevelopment and most second homes have either been purchased from the existing dwelling 

stock or are newly built dwellings, frequently detached houses on greenfield sites. Planning constraints on the 

Causeway Coast and in Newcastle-Dundrum, and the impact of PPS14 on single dwellings in the countryside, 

will affect the future style and pattern of development of second homes in all three case study areas. 

The results of the surveys of second home owners raised questions about some assertions made by residents’ 

groups, especially where second home owners usually live, about their use of local shops and facilities and 

their attachment to the area. Many second home owners may be considered as ‘occasional locals’ rather than 

‘outsiders’. The semi-structured interviews in Newcastle-Dundrum and the Causeway Coast confirmed the 

image of areas experiencing rapid change. All the estate agents and public officials on the Causeway Coast had 

copies of the Northern Area Plan and many of the developments described in this case study area, and in 

Newcastle-Dundrum, are consistent with recent changes in the NI planning regime. 

vi 


Taxation issues relating to second home ownership 

This section of the report provides a perspective on taxation issues relating to second homes, based on 

the literature review, an interview with a taxation official and exploration of taxation advice guidance notes. 

Although capital gains tax in theory should be paid on the disposal of second homes at a profit, in practice 

such payments usually are only made by owners who contact the tax authorities voluntarily and/or who 

previously sought tax relief against some of the costs of purchasing or using second homes. Second homes 

may thus in practice constitute an attractive mechanism for achieving untaxed capital gains. 

Second home owners in Northern Ireland 

This section of the report provides a perspective on the ownership of second homes by NI residents, 

based on evidence from a NISRA omnibus survey and analysis of other evidence from the census and the 

Northern Ireland House Condition Survey (NIHCS). 

The January and April 2007 NISRA omnibus surveys together achieved a sample of 2,360 interviews within 

which a total of 90 households currently owned a second home or homes and another 90 were likely to 

buy a second home during the coming two years. The results suggest that there may be around 18-20,000 

second homes in NI; this is higher than previous estimates, especially the 2006 NIHCS estimate of 8,000. 

There are significant numbers of second homes overseas and in the RoI. There appears to be a strong 

likelihood of further purchase of second homes by existing and ‘first time’ second home buyers, with the 

possibility that many purchases will be outside the UK and RoI. 

Census data show that outright home ownership in NI has grown at a much higher rate than overall home 

ownership, indicating the possibility that growing numbers of households can purchase a second or more 

homes. An examination of the changing rates of outright ownership by householders in different age groups, 

using census data for 1991 and 2001, showed that the fastest growth in levels of outright home ownership 

was among younger householders rather than retirees, thus suggesting growing scope for future purchase 

second homes. Census data for Scotland as well as England and Wales reveal similar patterns. 

Conclusions & recommendations 

This study shows that growing second home ownership in NI has much in common with experiences in 

other countries, though it has taken off more recently in NI, GB and the RoI than in other EU countries. The 

Causeway Coast case study was set in a context of significant sub-regional change before and during the 

growth of second home ownership. Second home owners appear to make substantial use of local shops 

and services; they also have significant levels of place attachment and local networks of family and friends. 

The survey also revealed multiple ‘second’ home ownership and a likelihood of future purchase of second 

homes. The semi-structured interviews highlighted the step change in local land and house prices and a 

new pattern of development, including extensive replacement of houses and bungalows with apartments 

and other higher density buildings. Views on the impact of second homes varied considerably, with 

community groups generally commenting adversely but others taking a less critical stance. 

The Newcastle-Dundrum case study had many similarities with the Causeway Coast, except that the 

process of developer-led replacement of single dwellings had begun more recently and was less focussed 

specifically on the second homes market. The Fermanagh Lakelands case study differed from the others in 

three key ways: there was no community group actively campaigning on this issue; there was no significant 

evidence of redevelopment for the second homes market; and there was generally support for the future 

growth of second homes in the area, subject to environmentally sensitive regulation. 

The NISRA omnibus survey results led to the conclusion that the level of second home ownership in NI is 

substantially higher than previous estimates and to a likelihood of continued growth in the second home 


vii

ownership both locally and outside the jurisdiction. Analysis of census data suggests that growing outright home 

ownership, especially among younger households, is expanding the pool of potential second home owners. 

The review of taxation issues concluded that second homes are unlikely in practice to be subject to any 

effective capital gains tax and are thus an untaxed form of household wealth acquisition and disposal. 

The main conclusions and recommendations from this report are listed 1-6 below, as well as other issues 

considered separately in the first report, listed 7-9. 

1. To examine the motivations of owners and residents in the second homes housing market: NI second 

home owners are motivated mainly by a wish to own dwellings for leisure use by family and friends, 

with the possibility of retiring there, and seeing this purchase as an investment. 

2. To provide a socio-economic profile of the owners of second homes and an insight into the attitudes 

of other residents to the second home owners: second home owners are predominantly owneroccupiers, 

especially outright owners, of high value primary residences, significantly younger than 

retiree households and with higher incomes: Attitudes of other residents varied significantly from 

strong opposition on the Causeway Coast, to milder concern on the Fermanagh Lakelands. 

3. To examine taxation and subsidy issues in relation to second homes with a view to providing a clear 

understanding of the dynamics of the second homes market: any capital gains arising from the sale of 

second homes are liable for capital gains tax but in practice this is unlikely to be paid, thus investment in 

second homes may constitute an effective tax shelter. 

4. To further refine the second home (multiple residences) typology developed in phase 1 of the research: 

the typology is based on how dwellings are used at any time, not on enduring physical aspects as 

measured by the NIHCS: primary residences; second homes and multiple residences (including piedsa-terre 

and other non-commercial family uses; investment properties (privately rented and holiday 

homes). 

5. To make more robust estimates of the number of second homes in Northern Ireland, based on the 

2006 House Condition Survey and the NISRA Omnibus Survey and, if possible, provide an estimate 

of the size of the second homes market in areas of high concentration, specifically the Fermanagh 

Lakelands and Newcastle areas: the 2006 NIHCS estimated that there were around 8,000 second 

homes in NI. The NISRA Omnibus survey results indicate around 18-20,000 in 2007, with another 

10-13,000 second homes owned elsewhere in the UK, RoI or overseas. Second homes are likely to 

constitute a major component of demand for dwellings in NI over the next few years. It is not possible to 

provide more robust estimates at the local level on the three case study areas. 

6. To make recommendations in relation to the concerns expressed by local residents and the problems 

emerging from the research in relation to the (physical and social) character of the area, affordability, 

implications for planning and housing policy: planning cannot stop dwellings being used as second 

homes and tighter restrictions increase the likelihood of existing dwellings becoming used as second 

homes. The only possible planning recommendation relating to residents’ concerns are how best 

to manage development related to second homes and other demand factors. The implications for 

housing policy are that, combined with factors, growing second home ownership increases problems of 

affordability and access, especially for low income households and first time buyers. The NI Assembly 

could consider exempting designated areas from right to buy/right to acquire. Given sufficient local 

support, Community Land Trusts or other non-charitable bodies could provide ongoing subsidised 

affordable rental or home purchase opportunities. 

Other objectives considered in the first report (Paris, 2007): 

7. To evaluate data sources and advise on suitable sources of information: there is no systematic reliable 

viii Second Homes in Northern Ireland - Growth, Impact & Policy Implications

source of data on second homes. This could be addressed by including questions in the NISRA 

Continuous Household Survey, and/or a module in the socio-economic section of the NIHCS, and/or 

by a periodic housing survey modelled on the SEH. 

8. To assess the combined impacts of second homes, holiday homes and student houses in multiple 

occupation: the impact is localised in Portstewart, with little or no impact on other local housing 

markets. 

9. To review relevant UK policies on second homes in relation to NI: policy initiatives have mainly been 

developed in National Parks and other high amenity areas and relate primarily to limiting new housing 

development or restricting initial access to people with specified ‘local’ connections. Little has been 

done to address concerns about the loss of existing or potential future social housing through the right 

to buy except in Scotland and Wales. 


ix

1: INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background 

The Board of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (subsequently ‘the Housing Executive’) recently 

noted that the growth of second homes has become a major issue in Northern Ireland (subsequently ‘NI’). 

Rising incomes and buoyant housing markets have led to increased demand for second homes used as 

holiday homes, weekend cottages or as investments. Evidence from the 2001 NI House Condition Survey 

(NIHCS) had indicated growth over the previous five years in the order of 400 dwellings a year, with 

concentrations on Coleraine/Moyle, Fermanagh and parts of Co. Down. The Board noted that concerns 

over second homes in Great Britain (subsequently ‘GB’) had led to planning restrictions being placed on 

new houses, restricting them to people from the area or incoming key workers. 

The Housing Executive contracted the University of Ulster to work in collaboration with them on a study 

of second homes in NI. The work was undertaken in two phases. The first phase concentrated on the 

literature review and a case study of second homes along the Causeway Coast (Paris, 2007). This report is 

the second output from the overall research project. The remainder of this section provides an overview 

of issues and methods. Section 2 considers the literature on second homes. Sections 3-5 comprises 

case studies of the impact of second homes in ‘hot spot’ areas on the Causeway Coast, the Newcastle- 

Dundrum area and Co. Fermanagh. Section 6 provides an overview of second home ownership in NI 

based on omnibus survey results and analysis of census data. Section 7 contains a review of taxation issues 

relating to second homes. Section 8 comprises conclusions and recommendations. Section 9 assesses 

the implications of the recent housing market developments in NI & UK. Section 10 contains a list of 

references to work cited in this report. 

1.2 The issues 

Second home ownership has become the subject of heated debate in NI with numerous residents’ groups, 

environmental organisations and politicians campaigning against further development. Concerns about the 

visual impacts of second homes have intensified with the increased volume of new building. Other concerns 

relate to claims that second home owners buy most new housing in some areas and most second hand 

houses coming on the market in other areas. In some places developers purchase existing dwellings and 

replace them with higher density expensive new houses or apartments aimed at the second home market. 

Some local residents complain that second home ownership causes rapid land and dwelling price inflation 

thus forcing young locals to leave the area. They argue that seasonal use of second homes imposes 

excessive demand on services, especially water and sewerage, and causes traffic congestion; meanwhile 

the falling number of permanent residents results in closure of shops, schools and services so coastal 

settlements are ‘ghost towns’ for much of the year. 

Other concerns relate to strategic planning for housing provision. It is widely accepted that some newlyconstructed 

houses are built for or purchased for use as second homes, also that some dwellings that 

were used previously as primary residences are purchased for use as second homes. It is more difficult 

to estimate how many new homes are purchased as second home, and/or existing homes are purchased 

for use as second homes. This uncertainty has strategic and local significance in terms of estimating future 

housing demand and land allocation in local plans. At the strategic level it is clear that some net additional 

housing is used as second homes: but how much? At the local level, surveys show that second home 

ownership is spatially concentrated, so the local implications for land release are highly sensitive. 

The literature review in section 2 shows that these issues have been debated for many years elsewhere. 

There is a huge literature on second homes, including scholarly, professional and other research and 

commentary. The topic is often explored in the media and on thousands of internet sites. The recent 

growth of second home ownership across international borders is particularly striking. 


1.3 The research aims and objectives 

The overall study aim was to provide a comprehensive perspective on the impact of second homes on 

housing markets in NI. In order to achieve this, the project initially had nine specific objectives which were 

explored in the first report (Paris, 2007). These objectives were developed further for the second phase of 

work reported here. 

1. To examine the motivations of owners and residents in the second homes housing market 

2. To provide a socio-economic profile of the owners of second homes and an insight into the attitudes of 

other residents to the second home owners. 

3. To examine the taxation and subsidy issues in relation to second homes with a view to providing a clear 

understanding of the dynamics of the second homes market. 

4. To further refine the second home (multiple residences) typology developed in Phase One of the 

research. 




Lakelands and Newcastle areas. 

6. To make recommendations in relation to the concerns expressed by local residents and the problems 

emerging from the research in relation to the (physical and social) character of the area, affordability, 

and the implications for planning and housing policy. 

1.4 Research methods 

The overall research project involved the combination of a number of research methods, involving 

systematic work covering the whole of NI and three case studies in the ‘hot spot’ areas that had been 

identified in the 2001 NIHCS: the Causeway Coast, the Newcastle-Dundrum area in south Co. Down and 

Co. Fermanagh. The Causeway Coast case study was examined in detail in the first report of this research 

study (Paris, 2007) and is reviewed here in section 3 to provide a template for comparisons with the other 

two case studies in sections 4 and 5. 

The research methods used in this study are as follows: 

1. The literature review in the first report considered material from a range of published and electronic 

sources, including data sources, taxation and subsidy issues and UK policies relating to second homes 

and related matters (Paris, 2007). The literature review is summarised and updated in this report, 

together with the refined typology of second homes and other related dwelling uses. 

2. Secondary analysis was undertaken of census and survey data, including the NIHCS, partly to inform 

estimates of the number of second homes and as background information relating to the case study 

of the impact of second homes on coastal communities in the Coleraine Borough Council area 

(subsequently CBC). Background census data was also analysed for the Newcastle-Dundrum and Co. 

Fermanagh case studies in this report. Secondary analysis of census data was also conducted in order 

to assess the extent to which growing levels of outright home ownership may affect the likelihood of 

purchase of a second home or homes. 

3. Surveys of second home owners in case studies: 100 second home owners plus some other local 

residents were interviewed in August 2006 in CBC coastal settlements. The field work was managed and 

 


conducted by Housing Executive research staff under the direction of the University of Ulster research 

team. Further surveys were conducted during summer 2007 in the Newcastle-Dundrum area and Co. 

Fermanagh, resulting respectively in 39 and 18 achieved interviews. The surveys in 2007 involved faceto-face 

interviews and, in some cases, leaving questionnaires for respondents to complete and return 

to the researchers. 

4. The attitudes of permanent residents regarding second homes were explored in two ways: firstly, 

through secondary analysis of a usable sample of over 400 completed questionnaires from a survey 

conducted on the Causeway Coast during 2005 by Professor Stephen Boyd; secondly, the research 

team conducted surveys of permanent residents in the Newcastle-Dundrum area and in Co. 

Fermanagh, resulting in 100 and 53 achieved interviews respectively. The surveys in 2007 involved faceto-face 

interviews and, in some cases, leaving questionnaires for respondents to complete and return 

to the researchers. 

5. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with local actors in the case studies (including some 

councillors, estate agents, resident group members and advisers, and planning and housing officials). 

A semi-structured interview was also carried out with a specialist from HM Customs and Revenue. 

Developers operating in hot spot areas were contacted by post and asked to respond to a short 

questionnaire about second homes in their areas of operation. Other central government officials and 

advisers were interviewed by telephone regarding policies on second homes in GB. 

6. Data relating to second home ownership by households resident in NI, including properties within and 

outside the jurisdiction, were obtained by placing specific questions within a NISRA omnibus survey. 

The relationships between objectives and methods are set out in Figure 1.1. 

Fig. 1.1 Research objectives in relation to methods 

Objectives 

To examine the motivations of owners and 

residents in the second homes market 

To provide a socio-economic profile of the owners 

of second homes and an insight into the attitudes 

of other residents to the second home owners 

To examine taxation and subsidy issues relating to 

second homes to provide a clear understanding of 

the dynamics of the second homes market 

To further refine the second home (multiple 

residences) typology developed in phase 1 of the 

research 

To make more robust estimates of the number of 

second homes in NI, based on the 2006 HCS, the 

NISRA Omnibus Survey and, if possible, to estimate 

the size of the second homes market in areas of 

high concentration, specifically the Newcastle- 

Dundrum and Fermanagh Lakelands areas 

To make recommendations in relation to 

concerns of local residents and problems relating 

to the physical and social character of the area, 

affordability, implications for planning and housing 

policy 

Methods 

Addressed through secondary data analysis, the 

case studies and the omnibus survey 

Addressed in the case studies and the omnibus 

survey 

Addressed in the literature review, case studies and 

interview with tax official 

Addressed in the literature review and on the basis 

of case studies and the omnibus survey 

Addressed through secondary data analysis, the 


Addressed on the basis of the literature review, the 



2: LITERATURE REVIEW 

2.1 Introduction to the literature 

The first report on second homes in NI contained an extensive literature review (Paris, 2007). This is 

summarised here, together with consideration of some material that has been published during the 

intervening period. Sections 2.2 to 2.6 correspond with equivalent sections in the fuller literature review in 

the first report. Section 2.7 comprises the typology of second homes (multiple residences) required in the 

project brief. Section 2.8 provides conclusions to this section overall. 

The introduction noted that, following Coppock’s seminal (1977) Second Homes: curse or blessing?, most 

scholarly writing on second homes had derived from leisure and tourism studies, rural studies, planning 

and cultural studies (Gallent et al 2005; Hall, 2005; Hall & Muller, 2004; Hettinger, 2005; McIntyre et al, 

2006). The housing literature, by way of contrast, contains little about second homes apart from references 

to national parks. 

2.2 What is a ‘second home’ and how many are there in NI? 

The literature review explored conceptual and definitional issues relating to second homes, including 

their importance in household investment and consumption strategies and the distinctive position of 

second homes within ‘housing’ and ‘leisure’ markets. Second homes ‘are at the point of overlap between 

housing and tourism - neither squarely one nor the other, but having the nature and implications of both’ 

(Dower, 1977: 160, emphasis in original). The review noted many definitional issues and diverse quality 

of data, especially regarding international comparisons. It also considered issues relating to counting the 

number of second homes and provided a preliminary estimate of the extent of the second homes market 

in NI. Unlike England, where the biannual Survey of English Housing (SEH) provides a basis for estimating 

numbers of second homes, in NI it was necessary to use the 2001 census and the 2001 NIHCS data to 

provide a preliminary estimate of the number of second homes: around 5,000 in 2001. The 2006 NIHCS 

estimates the NI total to be around 8,000 second homes. 

2.3 The impacts of second homes and conflicts with ‘locals’ 

The literature review showed that the impacts of second homes on places and ‘locals’ are contested, 

diverse, and changing over time. It was suggested that such relationships should be conceptualised as 

webs or networks of interaction, rather than in terms of simple and unchanging binary opposites, and that 

no universal model was applicable. 

This section reviewed literature on second homes in seaside and high amenity rural areas, as well as 

a growing trend of second homes in cities. It was argued that leisure-oriented second home ‘markets’ 

overlap seamlessly with housing markets. It proposed an ideal-type ‘life course’ model of second home 

development, starting with ‘pioneer’ renovators, continuing through revitalisation of areas and purchase 

of existing homes from former lower-income residents, going on to fully commercial involvement. This 

sequence is similar to ‘gentrification’ processes which have been examined mainly in inner metropolitan 

areas (Atkinson & Bridge, 2004). As well, some geographers have examined ‘rural gentrification’ as a 

process of ‘class colonisation’ (Phillips, 1993, 2005; Smith, 2002; Smith & Phillips, 2001); they focused more 

on permanent movement into the countryside, suburbanisation and ‘counter-urbanisation’, rather than 

second homes. Smith (2002), however, suggested that ‘retirement hotspots’ such as coastal resorts were 

worthy of consideration as cases of gentrification. 

The ‘gentrification’ perspective reminds us that the growth of second home ownership may involve 

displacement activities similar to those which had originally been studied with regard to ‘primary’ homes. It 

also reminds us that other processes of change, including counter-urbanisation and retirement migration, 


are rarely separate from growing second home ownership but are often over-lapping and inter-related. 

This perspective also adds to debates in the gentrification literature. A recent special issue of Environment 

and Planning A examined developments in gentrification theory and research, with contributors focusing 

primarily on urban/metropolitan areas. In their introduction, however the editors noted many ‘overlaps 

between gentrification and themes such as globalisation, gated communities, suburbanisation, higher 

education, edge cities and the changing role of the countryside’ (Smith and Butler, 2007: 2). 

2.4 International variations and transnational dimensions of second homes 

There is a huge literature on second homes around the world, with well-documented traditions of regional 

or local second homes in many European countries (see especially Hall and Muller, 2004; Gallent et al, 

2005; McIntyre et al, 2006). Studies from many countries show that there has been considerable diversity 

over time and between places. Differences between countries in terms of planning and other regulatory 

systems, however, constitute a central recurring theme affecting the development of second homes. 

Some of the sharpest conflicts occur where a restrictive planning or regulatory system imposes strong 

constraints on development and thus any growth of second home ownership can only occur through 

the purchase of existing dwellings whether for use or replacement through redevelopment (Gallent et 

al, 2005). It was noted that recent growth of second home ownership in NI has occurred in a planning 

context which itself has undergone considerable change, having moved from a permissive model to 

a more restrictive approach to development in rural areas. There is now an emphasis on brownfield 

development, tighter development limits for settlements and restrictions on development of single houses 

in the countryside. In addition, much of NI has actual or proposed protected status as Areas of Outstanding 

Natural Beauty (AONB) as well as UNESCO World Heritage listing of the Giant’s Causeway and Causeway 

Coast and a proposed Mourne National Park. 

The international review remarked on rapid growth of second home ownership across national borders 

and overseas as residents of rich countries purchase dwellings in other countries. Rising disposable 

incomes and growing housing assets in rich countries have enabled the ‘export’ of second home owners to 

lower cost housing markets in ‘importing’ regions. More generally, the international review suggested that 

the self-provision of second homes seems to be increasingly less the norm in most countries, especially 

in cross-border developments, where large developers typically lead second home and resort projects, 

often combined with other leisure and commercial developments: shopping centres, golf courses and 

marinas. Growing transnational second home ownership has been documented in England by the SEH 

which showed that ownership of overseas second homes had increased much faster than within Britain: 

from 91,000 in 1994/5 to 235,000 in 2005/06 1 , especially in Spain and France. The property sections of 

UK newspapers also reveal strong marketing of overseas second homes, despite warnings about risks 

associated with investment in some local housing markets with high levels of second homes (Ball, 2005). 

2.5 Residence, mobility and consumption 

The literature review noted the existence of a growing literature on changing patterns of residence, 

mobility, social organisation, and orientation to places in relation to the ownership of second and ‘multiple’ 

homes. Authors have emphasised growing mobility and enhanced capacities for consumption in affluent 

societies, the changing nature of tourism as a vital element of enhanced mobility, and the many ways in 

which places are created, changed and ‘consumed’ by tourists and other leisure users (Hall, 2005; Urry, 

1995, 2000; Sheller and Urry, 2004). 

Contributors to the sociological and tourism literatures also explore variations in the use of dwellings 

over time and between household members: daily, weekly, seasonally, and over life courses. Sociological 

perspectives on ‘first’, ‘second’ or more ‘homes’ suggest that such categories are increasingly anachronistic, 

especially for more affluent households. Many writers on tourism and second homes emphasise diversity, 

changing preferences and fashion as well as strategic action by individuals and households. 

 

1 

Preliminary results from the 2005/06 SEH to 235,000 by 2006. 


The issue of place attachment among second home owners has been widely explored. Studies have shown 

that people may attach importance to many locations rather than just one ‘home’, and that high attachment 

to tourist destinations can be a key factor in decisions to purchase second homes in such areas (Stedman, 

2006a, 2006b; Tuulentie, 2006). These studies challenge the view that ‘permanent’ residents have greater 

place attachment than seasonal or occasional users of second homes. Stedman criticised studies of rural 

change that start by assuming that ‘real’ communities are affected by ‘outsiders’ because such accounts 

‘privilege’ the claims of permanent residents. 

These perspectives had important implications for the Causeway Coast case study and more generally 

for the future of second home ownership in NI. Firstly, second home owners may not necessarily be 

‘outsiders’ with no attachment to the area where they have their second homes. Secondly, a range of 

other changes are affecting many areas, especially retirement migration. Thirdly, what is happening 

in some places can comprise both ‘gentrification’ and a transition from ‘occupational’ to ‘recreational’ 

communities. 

Demographic changes, combined with economic and labour market restructuring, are resulting in 

emergent cohort effects and the life experiences of current young people will play out in changing contexts 

over time. The past experiences of second home ownership may bear limited resemblance to emerging 

forms including both large scale commercial development and more diverse individualistic developments. 

Socio-economic and demographic changes are also associated with flexible life styles and life style choices, 

greater mobility and emphasis on individualism, especially for wealthy individuals and households despite 

increased actual or perceived risk (Bauman, 1995). 

2.6 Policy issues, debates and developments 

Second homes have received growing policy prominence during recent years in the UK. Much policy 

concern was related to the impact of development on valued amenity areas, such as National Parks and 

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, where the focus of policy was largely on restricting development. 

Increasingly, however, policy debates have been about the impact of second homes, in combination with 

other changes, on affordability in rural and coastal areas. 

The literature review in the first report on second homes in NI (Paris, 2007) noted extensive discussion 

of a need for policy initiatives regarding second home ownership, but that little had happened in terms of 

policy development and implementation. That remains the case at the time of writing early in 2008. 

The growth of second home ownership within the UK has occurred in areas where local incomes are 

relatively low and where modest supplies of social rented housing had been reduced by the impact of 

right to buy sales since the early 1980s. The overall context of tight planning constraints on development 

in high amenity areas, reduced overall house building and falling supply of social housing has resulted in 

widespread gentrification of former agricultural or fishing villages. 

One policy change relating to second homes had been the abolition of reduced property taxes for 

properties that were only occupied part-time. This was indicative of intention but is unlikely to have any 

significant impact on the issue. There was no evidence that the rate of house and land price increases has 

fallen as a result of this measure. 

Concerns about the use of second homes and inter-governmental financial transfers remain unresolved. 

Central funding of locally-provided services usually uses formulae based on per capita numbers of 

permanent residents. Thus when second home owners are recorded at ‘permanent’ residential locations, 

those local governments receive central funding, but local authorities where their second homes are 

located do not receive central funding assistance in relation to their owners’ use of local services. Some 

commentators have suggested that central allocations should reflect such disparities but there were no 

concrete proposals for an equalisation formula. 


The case for levying additional local tax (or rate) charges on second home owners has been advocated by 

some commentators but has not been taken up by government at the time of writing. Some additional 

social housing has been provided under ‘rural exceptions’ policies in areas of high amenity and/or strong 

planning restraint. This only addresses new construction and cannot affect transfers of existing dwellings 

from ‘permanent’ to second home use. In England and NI, moreover, it is difficult to ensure that social 

housing is not purchased under the right to buy and thus later may be sold to second home owners. 

Jones and Murie (2006) noted that restrictions on resale of dwellings bought under the right to buy had 

been introduced in England for seven National Parks, 37 AONBs and another 35 specifically designated 

‘rural’ areas; in practice, however, they do not believe that these restrictions are effectively monitored or 

implemented 2 . Areas of high pressure in Scotland, however, can be exempted from the right to buy. In 

addition, the National Assembly for Wales has restricted the right to buy and/or the right to acquire within 

National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (Welsh Statutory Instrument 2003 No. 1147 

(W.155)). 

A review of debates in printed and electronic media revealed extensive but varied and conflicting 

commentary on what should be done. In practice, the main planning policy affecting second homes 

remains the restriction of new development in high amenity areas. This inevitably has the effect of 

increasing prices and deflecting development proposals to nearby areas. There have been de facto 

policies relating to the creation of new second homes through developments primarily defined as 

leisure and/or resort housing, for example Lower Mill Estate in the Cotswolds had ‘affordable’ second 

homes priced from £500,000 to £750,000 in 2007. That development won planning permission on the 

grounds that former gravel pits were an industrial site and thus brownfield land, but with the condition 

that dwellings may not be occupied all year round (Pearman, 2007). Such conditions are notoriously 

difficult to enforce. 

Concerns about housing affordability in the countryside were focused in the (2006) report of the 

Affordable Rural Housing Commission (ARHC) which considered that the core problem resulted from the 

combined effect of rapidly rising prices in areas where constraints on additional supply were greater than 

in urban areas, and where there was strong demand from commuters, retirees and owners of second or 

holiday homes. Meanwhile, right to buy sales far exceeded new social construction and planning policies 

constrained any new building. 

The AHRC report suggested developing ‘a robust measure for identifying second homes based on the 

system of self certification for tax purposes’, that consideration be give to a ‘second homes impact tax’ in 

stress areas and that local authorities ensure that holiday home owners pay full and proper local property 

taxes. The report also considered restricting right to buy sales, ensuring that subsequent re-sales are 

restricted to people with demonstrable local connections and need, and varying discount levels. It also 

suggested exploring new ways of ensuring that affordable housing could remain so in perpetuity, for 

example through the development of Community Land Trusts. 

A House of Commons Committee 3 considered second homes in a review of housing supply and 

affordability. The Committee expressed concern that increased housing supply in some areas would be 

taken up by second homes and recommended that Government should consider proposals from the 

ARHC report ‘to discourage the purchase of second homes and to ensure that new homes are occupied 

by households as their primary residence’ (p.12). At the time of writing, however, there were no specific 

proposals from government in response to the reports by the ARHC and the House of Commons 

committee. Both reports showed concern about the impact of second homes, alongside other processes 

of change in country and coastal areas, and recommended that action should be taken to discourage the 

purchase of additional housing supply for use as second homes. 

The most positive potential measures include imposing some form of additional tax on second homes 

and/or finding ways of providing additional affordable market or social housing that can remain available 

 

2 

Source: private discussion with Professor Alan Murie. 

3 

See ODPM Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Committee, 2006. 


for low income or other target groups without being lost through right to buy 4 sales. In December 2007 the 

Liberal Democrat MP, Matthew Taylor, was asked by the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to review the rural 

economy and affordable housing, including consideration of possible initiatives relating to second homes. 

Submissions were required by early March 2008 with a view to reporting to Parliament in July 2008. It is 

unlikely that any formal policy initiatives would emerge before the autumn session of Parliament. 

The provision of long-term sustainable social and/or affordable private housing in areas of stress where 

demand for second homes, among other factors driving up house prices, would require restricting the 

right to buy or requiring sale back to non-profit providers. The use of non-charitable forms of provision, 

possibly through Community Land Trusts, is worth exploring further. Such developments, however, would 

have to overcome the high cost of land in popular areas and possible planning restraints. The application 

of a rural exceptions policy may resolve the latter though there remains the likelihood of opposition from 

existing home owners, and other organisations, especially the CPRE, to any development proposals in high 

amenity high value areas. 

2.7 A typology of second homes and ‘multiple residences’ 

This typology responds to the need to conceptualise the diverse ways in which dwellings are used, as 

discussed in the literature dealing with definitions of ‘second homes’. It attempts to cover all possible ways 

in which dwellings are used, from ‘primary’ homes, through ‘second homes’ and ‘multiple residences’, and 

various forms of investment. It is not about types of dwelling in the sense used in the NIHCS. 

The typology does not include caravans, partly because they were outside the project brief but mainly 

because they do not constitute ‘permanent dwellings’. In many ways, however, caravans, mobile homes 

permanently on site, and various forms of holiday lodges can and do fit one or more of the types of 

dwelling use listed below and a case can be made for exploring further the changing role of caravans and 

caravan parks as well as other forms of non-permanent dwellings within overlapping ‘leisure’ and ‘housing’ 

markets. 

The typology does not provide a classification of dwellings, as the use of dwellings can and does change 

over short and longer periods of time. Some of the examples of different types of use, below, are chosen 

to illustrate that identical dwelling types next door to each other can fit into different types of use. It is 

impossible to give numbers of dwellings in each type because the use of dwellings can change over the 

course of a year, for example where a dwelling usually used as a pied-a-terre (see below) is let on a shortterm 

basis during a period of peak demand e.g. the Olympic Games. In practice, categories may be blurred, 

perhaps deliberately for tax avoidance, for example where parents buy a dwelling for their student child/ 

ren, charge rent to other occupants but do not declare the rental income to the tax authorities. 

This typology is a first attempt to capture the variety of dwellings uses, as follows 

1. Primary residences: dwellings occupied by households for all or most of the year. 

a. One example is a house in North Belfast, owned outright and occupied all year by a household that 

has no other property investments. 

b. Another example is a Portstewart apartment occupied permanently by a retired couple who own 

another house occupied full-time by tenants. 

2. Second homes and multiple residences 

a. Second home: a dwelling used by a household, other family members and/or friends purely for 

leisure use, typically weekends and holidays. 

4 

In this and other references the term ‘right to buy’ also includes any right to acquire that attaches to housing association tenancies. 


i. One example is an apartment in Portstewart, next door to the permanent residence of the retired 

couple in 1 above. 

ii. 

Another example is a small house in North Belfast, next door to the permanent residence of the 

family in 1 above, owned by a GP who lives permanently in Fermanagh but enjoys weekends and 

holidays in the relative anonymity of a big city. 

b. In an increasing number of cases, households may own more than one such dwelling: hence use 

of the term ‘multiple residences’ to describe the ownership of more than one ‘second’ home. The 

term ‘multiple residences’ applies to such cases where affluent households own many dwellings in 

different places, including different countries, none of which are used to generate rental income. 

In many cases it may be impossible to specify a ‘primary’ residence as all may be used for varying 

periods of time that differ from year to year. 

i. One example would be a household that owns an apartment in Newcastle and a condominium in 

Florida in addition to their ‘primary’ residence. 

ii. Another example concerns a household that owns a Los Angeles apartment, a townhouse in 

Mayfair, London, a country estate in Kent and a ski lodge in South Island, New Zealand. 

c. ‘Pieds-a terre’: dwellings owned in addition to primary residences, used mainly as a base for work 

distant from primary residences. 

i. One example is the Brussels apartment of an MEP from NI. 

ii. Although typically in cities, another example is the Ballycastle apartment of a charter boat skipper 

whose primary residence is in Belfast. 

d. Other non-commercial family uses: dwellings used by family/household members during 

temporary absences. 

i. One example is an apartment in Aberdeen purchased by parents for the use of their student 

child during undergraduate study. NB if rent is paid by the family member student and/or cooccupants, 

then this is considered as an investment property. 

3. Investment properties: dwellings owned, either outright or being purchased, by individuals/households 

to yield income and/or capital gain, but not occupied at all by the owners/purchasers: 

a. Privately rented accommodation: dwellings let to tenants, or leased to licensees, with the aim of 

generating rental income and in many cases longer-term capital gain, probably accessing tax relief 

against the cost of acquisition and/or running the investment. 

i. For example a terraced house in East Belfast let to tenants on a 6-monthly tenancy. 

b. ‘Buy-to-leave’ investment properties: dwellings that are purchased with a view to re-sale at a later 

date at a higher price, in anticipation of securing a capital gain, but that are left empty rather than let 

to tenants during the intervening period. 

c. Holiday homes: dwellings let on short-term holiday/leisure basis to other users, often using a 

management company. 

i. For example a cottage in Fermanagh managed by an agency specialising in holiday lettings. 

10 Second Homes in Northern Ireland - Growth, Impact & Policy Implications

ii. Time-share accommodation, typically on a leasehold basis, and other forms of partial ownership 

and use of dwellings. 

2.8 Conclusions and questions 

Until recently, there was very little in the housing literature about second homes, though many writers 

have re-visited Coppock’s thematic question about whether second homes are a curse or a blessing. The 

consensus appears to be that there is no single answer to the question as situations vary considerably. 

Questions about distributional aspects of second homes suggested that one person’s blessing may be 

precisely another person’s curse. 

There is considerable fluidity between definitions, numbers and functions of dwellings used as second 

homes: hence the typology in Section 2.7. There are often no simple and clear distinctions in practice 

between ‘primary’ and ‘second’ or ‘multiple’ homes, though second homes are clearly an area where 

housing and leisure markets overlap. 

There have been many myths and misconceptions about second homes, especially seeing them as the 

sole cause of changes such as booming markets or homelessness. There are causal relationships between 

second home ownership and other local issues, but such relationships vary enormously between places 

and over time. One crucial variable appears to be the nature and impact of planning restrictions on the 

development of second homes. 

Any simple distinction between ‘locals’ and second homes owners has to be replaced by an appreciation 

of many variations between locals as well as many overlaps between ‘locals’ and second home owners, 

including when they moved into localities and the ways in which they use and are attached to the places 

under investigation. 

There are clear parallels between ideas relating to ‘rural gentrification’ and the growth of second home 

ownership, through displacement of permanent residents by second home owners, to full-blown 

commercial redevelopment of existing dwellings and/or new development. In practice, however, there 

are many differences between places including when a second homes wave appears in a locality. There 

are many international and local variations, though there appear to be global tides of developer-led 

second home development in various forms. There is a growing transnational dimension to second home 

ownership as developments are strongly marketed by big businesses and many small businesses. 

Many questions remain unresolved in the literature on second homes. What are the sustainability 

implications, both environmentally and socially, of high concentration of second homes, especially large 

commercial developments? What are the implications of dependence on oil-based mobility? Will there 

be clashes of culture and/or class between wealthy global consumers and poor residents of places being 

consumed? Finally, as house price growth has slowed in the UK and Ireland, with signs of dramatic housing 

market collapses the USA, will recent growth come to a halt? And if so, would this be a temporary slowdown, 

followed by another growth surge, or will it be the first signs of a new trend? 


11

3: CASE STUDY I - THE CAUSEWAY COAST HOMES 

3.1. Introduction 

The Causeway Coast case study was examined in detail in the first report of this research study (Paris, 

2007). This area is defined as the coastal area of Coleraine Borough Council (CBC), primarily the four 

coastal settlements of Castlerock, Portstewart, Portrush and Portballintrae, together with Bushmills, in 

Moyle District Council area. The wider Causeway Coast area includes parts of Counties Londonderry and 

Antrim and extends outside of the case study area towards Ballycastle (Figure 3.1). 

The four CBC coastal settlements were the sites of the survey of second home owners, conducted in 

August 2006. The case study research also involved conducting semi-structured interviews with a range of 

individuals from a cross-section of organisations involved in issues relating to second homes in the area. 

This section of the report provides a basis for comparative analysis of the growth of second home 

ownership and its impact on local housing markets in the other two case studies in the Newcastle- 

Dundrum area in Co. Down, and Co. Fermanagh 5 . 

Figure. 3.1 Coastal areas of Northern Ireland discussed in this case study 

Source: map provided by the Housing Executive. 

3.2 The Causeway Coast case study 

The issue of second homes has been of particular interest and concern within CBC as local community 

groups have campaigned against the growth of second homes in their area. CBC has coordinated a forum 

known as the Balanced Communities in Coastal Settlements Review Group or Balanced Communities 

Review Group for short (BCRG). The Board of the Housing Executive thus agreed to support research in this 

area. It was agreed that in the first instance a local study should be undertaken in the Causeway Coast area 

and that subsequent case studies may be conducted in 2007. 

5 

The data reviewed here are reported fully in tables in the first report and so this section comprises summary discussion of tables 

and figures. 


13

Background 

There have been many changes in the socio-economic and demographic character of the case study 

area over the last 150 years. The leisure and tourist industry lost ground in the 20th century, exacerbated 

during the Troubles between 1970 and 1995, but partly due to the same factors that caused decline in many 

seaside resorts across the UK and Ireland, especially the growth of overseas package holidays and growing 

dissatisfaction with traditional ‘bed and breakfast’ (B&B) seaside holidays. Portrush was more affected than 

Portstewart, as the latter continued to attract relatively affluent retirees and maintained a more genteel 

atmosphere than that enjoyed by the more boisterous holiday-makers in Portrush. 

There has been a revival in leisure and tourism since the mid 1990s, partly due to the more relaxed post- 

Troubles environment. The Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) strongly markets the local product, 

frequently using photographs of the iconic Giant’s Causeway and there has also been growth in ‘event tourism’ 

including the North West 200 and the Milk Cup soccer tournament. However, many local hotels have closed 

and only Portrush has had significant growth in hotel accommodation. Many B&Bs also have closed, especially 

in Portstewart where two hotels also closed. Most of the B&Bs have been (or will be) redeveloped with new 

houses or apartments mainly marketed to second home buyers. Numerous additional B&Bs also have 

opened outside of the case study towns, aiming at tourist trade rather than weekly stays beside the seaside. 

The decision to locate Northern Ireland’s second university at Coleraine in the 1960s provided a major boost 

to the fortunes of settlements in the case study area. The establishment of the New University of Ulster 6 

(NUU) brought capital investment, created service jobs for local people and generated a surge of incoming 

population, especially to staff the university. Many incoming staff bought homes in Portstewart and Portrush 

as well as in Coleraine. 

Planning Service data were used in the first report to show that all of the Causeway Coast settlements increased 

rapidly in population during the 1960s, especially Portstewart and Portrush. Population growth slackened 

during the 1970s, but overall, population growth was much stronger in the 1980s and 1990s. During the 1990s, 

however, the population of Portballintrae fell significantly whereas that of Castlerock continued to increase. 

Bushmills had also experienced a surge of population growth in the 1960s but this slackened during the 1970s 

and its population has been falling so that by 2001 there were fewer residents than thirty years before. 

The growth of Portballintrae up to the early 1990s was driven by retirement migration. There was also 

retirement migration into Portstewart as well as in-movement to new homes for commuters working in 

Coleraine and other employment centres. There is also a strong ethno-religious dimension, with high 

proportions of Protestants in all Causeway Coast settlements, exceptionally Portballintrae and Bushmills 

(both 97%) but above the NI average (53%) in Castlerock (82%) and Portrush (71%). Portstewart more nearly 

approximates to the NI averages and may be considered a ‘mixed’ settlement and Portrush had the second 

highest proportion of Catholics, but at 24% this was only just above half the NI average. 

There were some differences in the age profiles of the settlements as well as levels of home ownership. 

Portballintrae had an exceptionally low proportion of under-16s and high proportion of over-60s as well as 

very high levels of home ownership, especially outright home ownership. All other case study settlements had 

higher proportions of over 60s (22-23%), than the NI average (18%) or the two main cities. Castlerock had high 

levels of home ownership including outright home ownership. Portrush and Portstewart both had overall 

levels of home ownership slightly below the NI average but Portstewart had a relatively high level of outright 

ownership. 

This tenure mix may reflect the large student population in Portstewart. Bushmills, by way of contrast, had a 

low overall level of home ownership as well as a low level of outright home ownership. Bushmills also had by 

far the highest level of unemployment and, together with Portrush, a much higher proportion of households 

comprising lone parents with dependent children than the other settlements. 

6 

The NUU amalgamated with other institutions in 1984 to form the University of Ulster (UU) with campuses at Coleraine, 

Jordanstown (Newtownabbey), Belfast and Magee (City of Derry). 


The impact of student demand for accommodation was specified in the brief and was explored during the 

semi-structured interviews in this case study. Students clearly have a significant impact on the area, with 

about 1,000 living there in 2001. Initially they created out-of-season demand for B&B proprietors but in 

recent years they have tended to reside in newly constructed dwellings, especially purpose-built HMOs on 

the edge of Portstewart 7 . Many former B&Bs near the sea have been replaced with new apartments. If the 

private sector had not responded with purpose-built new HMOs on the edge of Portstewart, then it is likely 

that students would have competed with other users for existing and new houses throughout the town and 

the impact of student demand would have been felt across a wider area. 

It was also worth asking how housing in the case study area would have developed if the NUU had not 

been located in Coleraine but had gone elsewhere. The establishment of NUU resulted in strong additional 

housing demand in Coleraine and the Causeway Coast in the 1960s and 1970s. Students also helped to 

keep some B&Bs viable for longer than otherwise might have been the case. The cost of retiring to the 

seaside may have been less until recently at least, but there is no reason to believe that there would have 

been lively communities capable of retaining all their young people within the area. 

There was widespread rural depopulation in NI during the 1960s and 1970s and it was only with the 

beginning of counter urbanisation from the late 1970s onwards that the non-metropolitan population 

began to grow again. This almost certainly also would have been the case along the Causeway Coast, 

though there would most likely have been a counter flow of retirement migration. 

Growing concerns about the impact of second homes 

Early concerns about the growth of second homes on the Causeway Coast led to the development of a 

policy review regarding apartments (Town & Country Planning Service, 1991). This noted the changing 

character of tourism in the area with a switch ‘away from hotel and guest houses, to various types of selfcatering 

accommodation’. Initially, it suggested, there was a rush of ‘shacks’ close to the coast, especially 

between Portrush and Portstewart. This was followed during the 1960s by increasing numbers of caravans. 

The report noted a significant shift during the 1980s towards permanent dwellings being used as second 

homes giving rise to a ‘perception that the traditional character of the coastal settlements is being changed 

for the worse’, firstly through the use of permanent dwellings as second homes and secondly through growth 

of apartments. Public opposition was strongest, the report noted, ‘when apartments are proposed with an 

anticipated end use as second homes’. The report aimed to resist conversion of hotels and guest houses 

‘to institutional or apartment use’ but noted that planning cannot regulate how people use their homes, as 

there are no means whereby it can dictate that a dwelling sold by a permanent resident may not be used as a 

second home, nor could it be required that only local permanent residents may acquire dwellings. 

The Planning Service estimated that the number of second home owners in the area had increased from 715 

to 973 at an annual average of about 51 between 1984 and 1989 8 . A subsequent report by the Planning Service 

(2003) to CBC and Moyle District Council (MDC) estimated that the number of second homes had increased 

to 1,463 in 2001. These estimates together indicate that the number of second homes in the case study 

settlements had increased by over 200%, representing a growing proportion of a growing housing stock. 

The Planning Service (2003) report stated that second homes were considered to be a problem from a 

local perspective for five reasons: adding demand and fuelling house price inflation thus forcing out local 

first time buyers; a declining permanent population was resulting in falling service demand and closure of 

facilities; the accumulating visual impact of growing numbers of low maintenance unoccupied properties; 

the ‘social impact’ of second home owners who ‘have little interest or involvement’ in local communities 

giving an impression of lifeless places; and, economic impact as second home owners contribute little to 

the local economy. 

7 

Planning Service records provided to the research team show that most of this newer HMO housing was completed and occupied by 

the time of the 2001 census. 8 The Housing Executive has expressed reservations about the method used by the Planning Service to 

estimate the number of second homes; the estimates are accepted here as they were based on a consistent methodology and are the 

best available evidence on the subject. 


15

The report also argued that second homes owners did contribute to the local economy and that they 

were an improvement on caravans and occupied for longer periods of time. It suggested that the buoyant 

local housing market was an advantage for locals selling property, that demand for second homes had 

stimulated some badly needed regeneration, and that ‘second homes often become permanent homes’. 

The recommended response to the growth of second home ownership accepted the limited capacity 

of planning to influence the actual use of dwellings and the view that planning controls could be 

best defended when they related to ‘demonstrable physical considerations’. It was decided to deter 

developments that were physically out of character in their proposed settings and to indicate areas 

where there would be ‘a strong presumption against approval for apartments’. Thus the Draft Northern 

Area Plan includes a set of map-based indications of areas where redevelopment for apartments was 

either more or less likely to be approved. The plan also indicated proposed new housing numbers for 

all of the settlements, together with tight development limits for expansion. In the settlement proposals 

as of September 2005, however, it was already evident that rates of new building had been much higher 

than anticipated and no clear indication was given regarding whether or not the proposed numbers 

and physical limits to growth were viable in the changed context of high demand by developers for new 

greenfield sites as well as redevelopment opportunities for apartments and houses. 

Despite the increasing numbers and proportion of second homes, the most recent Planning Service 

report (2003) estimated a 31% increase between 1984 and 2001 in the number of permanently occupied 

dwellings in the four case study settlements. Even in Portballintrae, where the permanent population 

fell between 1991 and 2001 the Planning Service estimated that the number of dwellings occupied 

permanently increased by 29% from 1984 to 2001. The slower rate of population increase, or decline in the 

case of Portballintrae, reflects falling average household size rather than a falling number of permanently 

occupied dwellings. The fact that fewer persons occupy dwellings, partly a function of the growing 

proportion of older people, may contribute as much to the sense that such places are becoming ‘ghost 

towns’ as the growth of second home ownership. 

These data, therefore, do not support suggestions that these settlements were becoming ‘ghost towns’ 

due to a fall in the number of permanently occupied dwellings. Rather, these data indicate that there have 

been a number of processes of change, including growth in the number and proportion of second homes 

and a growing number of small households in an increasing number of permanently occupied dwellings. 

Many of the small households are retirees, including in-migrants. Some complaints from resident groups, 

therefore, may reflect their members’ disappointment that areas in which they have retired do not match 

their expectations rather than that the areas have been changed solely by the growth of second home 

ownership. Indeed, inward retirement migration may be as important an element of local change as the 

growth of second homes. This is consistent with many other cases considered in the literature review. 

Other secondary data analysis 

Two other sources of relevant data were examined. Firstly, secondary analysis has been undertaken of data 

from a survey of residents’ attitudes to second homes, conducted by Professor Stephen Boyd during June 

and July 2005. Secondly, use was made of house price data from the University of Ulster Quarterly House 

Price Index. 

The re-analysis of Boyd’s data with a usable sample of 431, focused on the characteristics, views and 

attitudes of full-time residents to second homes. These data enable useful ‘ball park’ comparisons 

between permanent residents and second home owners. Overall, Boyd’s respondents were 

disproportionately older home owners and retirees whereas younger and tenant households were underrepresented. 

This somewhat skewed response may reflect many factors, such as interest in the study or 

the intensity of respondents’ feelings about the issues covered, and attitudes expressed may reflect the 

characteristics of this group more than the population as a whole. 


The majority of permanent residents in the sample (72%) said that the level of second homes development 

was a bad thing with smaller proportions considering it to be a good thing (11%) or stating that they were 

not sure or had no opinion (17%). There were no significant differences between respondents by age or 

between retired respondents and those of working age. Similar proportions expressed attitudes about 

further second home development: 72% against, 13% were for and 15% undecided. 

One striking characteristic of Boyd’s respondents was that two thirds had moved into the area from 

outside (34% during the previous 20 years and 31% more than 20 years). Many of these moves took place 

before second homes were seen to be a major local issue and in-movement by permanent residents has 

continued during the period when second home ownership was increasing. 

The best source of data on house prices in the area is the University of Ulster/Bank of Ireland House 

Price Index. These data cannot be used at the Causeway Coast level as they are only disaggregated into 14 

regional areas of similar size in numbers of house sales. The Causeway Coast case study area is within their 

‘Coleraine/Limavady/North Coast’ (CLNC) area. This data shows that average house prices fell from about 

4% above the NI average in 1994 to 5% below in 2002. After 2002, however, house prices increased in the 

CLNC area well above the NI average so that average local house prices had increased to 10% above the NI 

average in 2006. Even so, all NI house prices increased significantly above inflation after 2002. Many of the 

new dwellings constructed in the CLNC area, especially along the Causeway Coast, were significantly larger 

and more highly specified than dwellings that they were replacing. The CLNC area, moreover, includes 

many more dwellings than in the Causeway Coast alone. 

The University of Ulster/Bank of Ireland house price report for the fourth quarter 2006 showed an 

unprecedented growth of 37% in house prices overall in NI during 2006, but only around 14% in CLNC. By 

the end of 2007, however, house prices in the CLNC had surged again and the area had the second highest 

regional house prices in NI. 

The pattern of change in house prices in both absolute and relative terms in the CLNC area has been 

consistent with comments from participants in the semi-structured interviews who saw a step-change 

in the rate of increases after 2001. But rapid growth in house prices was by no means confined to this 

area and developments during 2006 and 2007 suggest that local house price growth should be seen as 

consistent with, but not greatly above overall NI trends 

The case study context: continuity and change 

The Causeway Coast case study area has experienced many changes over the last fifty years, including 

changes in the leisure and tourism industries, a changing pattern of settlement influenced strongly by the 

location of the University at Coleraine and also by growth in retirement migration. The overall resident 

population had increased by around 70%; this was consistent with the 66% of the permanent residents in 

Boyd’s survey who had moved into the area from outside. 

There has clearly been growth in the number and proportion of second homes but there was also an 

increase in the number of dwellings that are occupied on a permanent basis, even during the 1990s. 

The proportions may have changed since the 2001 census and the Planning Service (2003) estimate of 

permanently occupied dwellings, but the background review of the case study area does not support 

the contention that the settlements were becoming ghost towns. They were certainly changing, but not 

just through the effects of growing second home ownership. They also appear to have been affected by 

growth of the working residential population, many of whom commute to Coleraine or other places of 

work, the in situ retirement of previous in-migrants, in-migration by other retirees and gradually falling 

average household size. Changes since 2001, therefore, have occurred within an area that had already been 

changing rather than impacting on a stable and unchanging set of local communities. 

The surge in house prices on the Causeway Coast between 2002 and 2006 was above NI averages but 


17

overall house and land price inflation in NI during 2006 and 2007 was unprecedented. Thus much of what 

was observed in the case study was symptomatic of wider processes of change in NI rather than purely 

‘local’ effects caused by the growth of second homes. There is simply no objective way in which it would 

be possible to estimate the extent to which local house prices were directly affected by second home 

demand, nor are any objective data available at so small a scale to input into ‘guesstimates’ of the impact of 

second homes demand. 

3.3 The survey of second home owners 

The survey of second home owners was conducted in the four case study settlements during August 

2006, using a structured questionnaire (see Appendix 2). The survey achieved a quota of 100 completed 

interviews with some representation from all four settlements: 25 in Castlerock, 33 in Portstewart, 9 in 

Portrush and 33 in Portballintrae. Sampling was based on a combination of local knowledge of areas of 

high incidence of second home ownership as a first step, then continuous investigation of any homes in 

those areas in order to identify and interview second home owners. 

The questionnaire gathered data on household characteristics of second home owners, how they acquired 

the property, the reasons for acquiring a second home, when they purchased and how much they paid, 

their use of local services, local social networks, the likelihood of acquiring additional leisure residences, 

and details of their other or primary home. Most questions were answered although there were higher 

rates of refusals for some questions than others, especially regarding household income. 

Reasons for purchase and use of property 

Very few respondents had inherited their second homes. The great majority had purchased using their 

own savings (37%), traditional mortgages (28%) or a combination of the two (12%). There was little evidence 

of equity withdrawal from primary residences to fund these purchases, though around 10% had included 

some element of equity withdrawal. Most respondents (60%) owned their second homes outright, and the 

rest were paying off loans or mortgages. 

Over half of all respondents (51%) had purchased their second home to use at weekends and holidays 

and for other life style aspects. The other main reasons for purchase were as an investment (26%) and 

for future retirement (13%). Most second home owners in the survey were attracted to the area by its 

seaside location and other facilities (56%), and many had family or other associations with the area (22%). 

Other reasons for purchasing here included suitable travelling distance from permanent home (8%) and 

closeness to sports facilities (6%). Most had found their second homes through estate agents (39%), by 

driving around the area looking for properties for sale (32%), or through friends and/or relatives (14%). 

The extent to which respondents had local social networks was examined in questions about friends and 

family in the area. Overall it appears that these second home owners had substantial networks including 

both other second home owners and permanent residents. Around 70% of respondents had relatives and/ 

or friends with second homes in the area, and half had relatives or friends living there permanently. 

No respondent used their properties for fewer than 30 days a year (though some had purchased recently 

or did not know how often they used their properties). Around 50% use their properties for 30-90 days a 

year, about a quarter (23%) use them for 91-120 days; and similar proportions spend 121-150 days (12%) or 

151 days or more (13%). 

Age of property, dwelling types and duration of ownership 

Most of the second homes in this survey were built and/or purchased recently. The great majority (81%) 

of second homes in the sample were built after 1991. About 40% were houses with 24% bungalows and 

35% flats. Half of the second homes had been purchased newly-built, including both those on previously- 


vacant sites and dwellings on redeveloped sites; most of the latter effectively replacing permanent 

residents of the former dwellings. One quarter (25%) had been purchased from owner occupiers, thus 

transferring the dwellings from permanent to part-time use; another 16% had previously been used as 

second homes. 

Most of the second homes had been purchased recently: 55% since 2001 and 32% between 1991 and 2000. 

The high proportions of dwellings that were purchased new and/or since 2001 highlight a substantial 

increase in the number of newly constructed second homes since 2001. This is consistent with field work 

evidence of the volume of new building as well as Planning Service dwelling completions and approvals 

data. 

These findings show an image of an area in transition: older houses and bungalows changed from 

permanent occupancy to use as second homes, many new dwellings were purchased for use as second 

homes, especially flats on sites previously containing houses or bungalows. As further redevelopment 

removes older houses and bungalows, then second homes will increasingly comprise flats, town houses 

and maisonettes. 

The cost and estimated values of second homes 

Respondents were asked to state how much they had paid for their second homes and to estimate current 

values. Almost half (48%) were bought for less than £120,000, and about half were estimated to be worth 

over £200,000. Forty per cent of respondents did not know or refused to answer this question. Overall, 

respondents were very confident that values had risen considerably since they had purchased, and that 

values had increased faster after 2001 than in the 1990s. Their estimates were high, but consistent with 

house price trends in the CBC area and NI overall. 

When asked about future expectations, 89% said that they were not considering selling and only 8% 

indicated that they consider selling in the next five years (8%). Respondents were asked whether additional 

rate charges of 20% on second home owners would have affected their decision to buy a second home 

and/or would incline them towards selling. Although higher rates might have put some off buying, only 7% 

thought an additional rate impost of 20% now would incline them to think of selling. 

Main residences and ownership of other property 

Almost all of these second home owners were owner occupiers and none were social housing tenants. 

Their primary homes were mainly in north eastern NI (including Ballymena, Newtownabbey and 

Carrickfergus) or suburban Belfast metropolitan areas (especially Lisburn, Bangor, Newtownards, 

Hillsborough and Holywood). Only 16% came from Belfast City. 

The geographical distribution of primary residences means that journey distances to their second homes 

were mainly less than 70 miles; 29% less than 50 miles, 56% travelling between 51 and 70 miles and only 15% 

travelling over 70 miles. None used public transport as the main means of getting to their second homes. 

Respondents were asked to estimate the current value of their main homes. The great majority estimated 

the values of their main residences to be significantly above the NI average (around £170,000 in mid- 

2006). Over half thought their main residence was worth over £250,000 (60%) and 15% estimated 

£200,000-£250,000. 

A significant minority of second home owners owned other second homes, confirming the idea from 

the literature review that it may be better to refer to ‘multiple residences’ rather than ‘main/primary’ and 

‘second’ homes. Some 16% owned in total another 25 second homes, mainly in NI (12) and Spain (8). One 

third of all second home owners said they were considering buying more homes, mainly in NI or other EU 

countries. None owned second homes in the RoI and very few were considering buying there. 


19

Use of local services and attitudes about impact of second homes 

Most respondents said that they do their main shopping locally when staying in the area, in Coleraine 

(35%), Bushmills (24%) or Portstewart (23%). All those shopping in Bushmills had second homes in 

Portballintrae, and most second home owners at Castlerock did their main shopping in Coleraine. Most 

said that household members made regular use of other local services, especially bars and restaurants, 

golf, cinema, other leisure facilities and tourist attractions. 

The incidence of local shopping and use of services suggests that second home owners are more 

involved in the life of the settlements than some permanent residents believe. There was little evidence 

of a group of people who bring their shopping with them and lead self-contained lives within their 

second homes. Their use of facilities may be more like tourists and other leisure users, but that is 

consistent with the literature which shows that second home ownership is where housing and leisure 

markets overlap. The frequency of use of second homes, combined with their use of shops and local 

services, means that they could be considered ‘occasional locals’ rather than as ‘outsiders’. 

All second home owners were asked whether they had any other comments regarding second 

homes and the local area more generally. Their responses indicated some areas of agreement and 

disagreement with the attitudes of permanent residents surveyed by Boyd in 2005. The respondents 

to Boyd’s survey were generally antagonistic to the growth of second homes and considered their 

economic impact to be mainly negative. By way of contrast, significant numbers of second home owners 

considered second homes to be good for the local economy. Even so, some did identify some negative 

impacts: 16% commented that the growth of second homes was turning the area into a ‘ghost town’, 15% 

thought that there was a need for more affordable housing and 14% criticised over-development in the 

area. 

Other household characteristics of second home owners 

The demographic characteristics of households within the second homes survey contrast strongly with 

the permanent residents who responded to Boyd’s survey. The results are not strictly comparable, but 

there are such large differences that this is very unlikely to be due to sample error or method. 

Nearly three quarters of second home owners (73%) were family or couple households of working age. 

Only 20% were older households with both members aged 60 and over, compared to 33% over 65 in 

Boyd’s survey, which also recorded 50% of respondents to be retired. Thus the second home owners 

were on average younger than Boyd’s permanent residents and in households of significantly larger 

average size. 

Most second home owners had household incomes considerably above the NI medium of around 

£17,000 in 2007 (Housing Executive 2008). Only 15% said that household incomes were under £35,000; 

18 % stated incomes between £35,000 and £55,000, and 36% of household incomes were over £55,000. 

Almost one third (31%) of respondents did not know or refused to state their household income. 

The great majority of second home owners were Protestant (80%); with 9% refusals, of those who 

stated their religion 88% were Protestant and 8% ‘mixed’. Their perception of the religion of the area of 

their second homes was rather different: about a third refused or did not know, 43% thought the areas 

were Protestant and 25% said ‘mixed’. None thought that area to be mainly Catholic. The proportion of 

people thinking the area was mixed was highest in Portstewart, which is consistent with 2001 census 

data on religious composition of the permanent population. The proportion of Protestant second home 

owners in Portstewart was significantly higher than among the 2001 census resident population, so any 

growth of second home ownership could add to local religious concentration, especially if second home 

owners fulfil their expectation of retiring in their second homes. 


Conclusion 

The survey of second home owners reveals a group of affluent home owners with high household 

incomes. Most bought using savings or traditional mortgages/loans and believed that their second homes 

have increased considerably in value. They do not appear to be very sensitive to the level of rates or 

additional rate imposts. 

Most have purchased recently in the area, especially after 2001, constituting a major element of demand 

for new dwellings as well as purchasing formerly owner-occupied dwellings. They are mainly from the 

north east region and the Belfast metropolitan area, rather than the City of Belfast. About 1/6 have more 

than one second home, and a third are contemplating further acquisition of second homes in NI or 

overseas. 

Most of the second home owners in the case study have family or friendship networks locally in the area. 

They shop locally and use local facilities, especially leisure-related facilities. Most are Protestant but see the 

area as more mixed than census data or their own ethno-religious characteristics indicate. They do not live 

here permanently but many stay for considerable parts of the year, and may be a new kind of ‘community’ 

who could be thought of less as ‘outsiders’ and more as ‘part-time locals’. 

3.4 Semi-structured interviews with representatives of organisations 

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals from organisations with interest in and 

expertise relating to second homes and the housing market on the Causeway Coast: residents groups, CBC 

officers, the Housing Executive Area Office, the NI Planning Service and local estate agents. Discussions 

were guided by a semi-structured interview schedule (Appendix 3). Different groups had more or less 

to say about various issues, but these meetings enabled exploration in depth of many issues indicated in 

quantitative data sources such as surveys and the census. A version of the interview schedule was also sent 

to developers and the response is included in the following analysis. 

Perspectives on the local housing market 

There was little disagreement between respondents about recent trends in local housing markets: the 

main variations in Figure 3.2 9 are in terms of the emphasis that different respondents put on aspects of 

changing housing markets and the extent to which they were more or less able to comment on different 

aspects of housing market change. 

All thought that house prices had surged in recent years, marking a distinctive break from the previous ten 

years. All indicated surprise at the scale and speed of house and land price increases. They agreed that the 

scale of development and demand was greater than had been anticipated before 2000, and the planners 

remarked that their housing growth indicators had proven to be underestimates of actual demand. 

All respondents said that prices were led by Portstewart but had increased at similar rates in other 

settlements. They also agreed that the mix of new dwellings had changed with more compact development 

in all areas, including apartments and town houses. 

All agreed that the main purchasers of existing dwellings, especially in areas zoned as suitable for 

apartment development, were builders and developers, and that most other purchasers of existing 

dwellings were second home owners. The estate agents were best informed about who was buying 

newly constructed dwellings: mainly second home owners but also investors, some of the latter leaving 

properties vacant at least for short periods of time. The community groups suggested that most existing 

housing was being purchased by outsiders, both developers and second home owners, and suggested that 

some investors buy new apartments and leave them empty for long periods. 

9 

This is an abbreviated version of the same figure in the first report (Paris, 2007). 


21

Figure 3.2 Perspectives on changes in the local housing market 

Community 

groups 

CBC 

officials 

Planning 

Service 

HE Area 

officials 

Estate 

agents 

House prices House building Recent 

changes 

Rapid recent 

increases all 

areas 

Spiralling land 

& house prices 

Rapid increases 

recently all 

areas 

Very high 

prices, little 

land left 

Very rapid 

recent growth 

Mainly redevelopment 

for 2nd homes 

More apartment 

building may be for 

outsiders 

More redevelopment 

with apartments, no 

bungalows 

More high density 

developments 

Much redevelopment, 

compact dwellings; no 

bungalows 

Developer No comment Mostly apartments/ 

terraces in Portstewart 

& Portrush 

Accelerating 

trends esp. 2nd 

homes 

Rocketing land 

prices 

Surge since 

2000; locals 

priced out 

Development 

surge last 2 

years 

‘Total sea 

change’ 

Increase in 

redevelopment 

House purchasers 

New 

Existing 

Not sure Outsiders & 

developers 

Don’t know 

Don’t know 

Don’t know 

Investors & 

2nd homes 

Over 45s: 

holiday 

homes 

Not sure: 

variety of 

buyers 

Don’t know 

Mainly 

developers 

Developers, 

builders & 

2nd homes 

No 

comment 

Source: Semi-structured interviews with key respondents; all responses were provided in a personal capacity and do not 

necessarily reflect the official views of agencies or organisations. 

Discussions about the local housing market revealed a picture of dramatic changes in recent years in the 

cost of land and housing, the types of new housing constructed and the purchasers of dwellings. Extensive 

redevelopment was replacing many properties, especially bungalows, with different structures at higher 

building densities. This process spells the demise of bungalows in zones shown as possible areas for 

apartment development in the Northern Area Plan. All estate agents had copies of this plan, which was 

described by one of the resident group members as ‘a developer’s charter’. 

There were some strong disagreements over second homes, redevelopment and the impact of student 

demand (Figure 3.3 10 ). The community groups were very critical of many recent developments and wanted 

stronger regulation of future development. All other respondents, however, viewed most changes as 

elements of dynamic private markets over which public policies had little or no control. 

Respondents all agreed that house prices had risen much faster than inflation. None thought that 

household growth was a major factor affecting local demand: they saw growing demand as coming from 

outside the local population. Most thought that private house building had been at a higher level than 

expected, except the planners who had handled a growing level of development applications. 

10 

This is an abbreviated version of the same figure in the first report (Paris, 2007). 


Figure 3.3 Perspectives on the local housing market & second homes 

Community 

groups 

CBC 

officials 


Service 

NIHE 

officials 

Estate agents 

Developer 

More private 

building than 

expected 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Disagree: 

saw it 

coming 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree strongly 

Agree 

House prices 

increased > 

inflation 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 


No comment 

Household 

growth major 

demand factor 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

Too much 

good housing 

redeveloped 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Disagree: 

uses land 

better 

Disagree 

strongly 

Agree 

Disagree 

Locals priced 

out of the 

market 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Disagree: all 

prices up 

in NI 

Agree, esp. 

Portstewart 

Agree 

Need social 

&/ affordable 

housing 

Agree 

strongly 

Neither A 

nor D 

Agree; 

where can 

it go? 

Agree in 

Portstewart 

Disagree: not 

planning issue 

Agree 

Too many 2nd 

homes 

Agree 

strongly 

Neither A 

nor D 

Neither A 

nor D 

Disagree 

Agree but can’t 

be controlled 

Disagree 

Planning should 

stop more 2nd 

homes 

Agree 

Neither A 

nor D 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree: it is 

the market 

Disagree 

Student 

demand 

distorted local 

market 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

but only 

Portstewart 

Disagree, 

very 

localised 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree 

No comment 

Future trends? 

More 

damage to 

community 

No sign of 

slowdown 

No change 

imminent 

Upward 

trend 

continuing 

More growth, 

but will slow 

Steady 

growth 



The community groups argued that there had been too much redevelopment of good housing and CBC 

officials suggested that planning policy was largely responsible. The community groups claimed that some 

residents felt pressured by developers to sell and move out, redevelopment was transforming some streets 

and some permanent residents felt isolated and even afraid. Some estate agents agreed that too many 

good homes had been lost and suggested that planning policies had driven the redevelopment surge. 

The planners, however, suggested that there had not been much redevelopment of good housing, that 

development at higher densities was desirable, and that the character of areas largely had been preserved. 

Housing officials suggested that redevelopment resulted in better quality housing than that which had 

been demolished. The developer also disagreed that too much good housing had been redeveloped. 

Most respondents agreed that locals had been priced out of the housing market, though the estate agents 

pointed out variations between settlements. Housing officials, however, argued that house prices had risen 

strongly across all of NI and that many expensive properties were owned by locals. 


23

Views also varied regarding the need for more local social or affordable housing. The community groups 

were strongly in favour, and planning officials agreed but were concerned about where such housing could 

be developed and the likely impact of the right to buy. CBC officials felt unable to take a view either way and 

also suggested that the right to buy could result in any new social housing soon passing into the private 

market. Housing officials saw housing need only in Portstewart with little social housing demand in the 

other settlements. The views of estate agents varied; one saw a need for more social housing but ‘I don’t 

know how you would keep it social housing’. 

Opinions differed most strongly over second homes. The community groups argued that there were 

already too many second homes in the area and that planning should try to stop the development of more. 

They accepted, however, that planning probably could not stop such development and so the process 

should be managed better. CBC and planning officials considered second homes to be a legitimate part of 

the local housing market and suggested that planning can neither stop such developments nor implement 

any restrictions that might be attempted. Housing officials did not agree that there were too many second 

homes and strongly disagreed with the proposition that planning should stop the development of more 

second homes. Estate agents tended to agree that there may be too many second homes but did not think 

that there was anything that planning could or should do about the further development of second homes. 

The developer neither agreed that there were too many second homes nor that planning should constrain 

the development of more. 

Views varied about the possibility that student demand has distorted the local market, though all saw this 

issue as confined primarily to Portstewart. Most noted that students had occupied out-of-season B&B 

accommodation up to the 1990s but increasingly shifted to houses, especially purpose-built HMOs, in the 

late 1990s. The community groups argued that student demand had distorted the market and helped to 

drive up prices. All others disagreed, seeing the effect as highly localised, as good quality new provision had 

coped with student demand and there may even by over-supply. 

Most respondents expected recent trends to continue into the future. This was regretted by the 

community groups who said communities were being destroyed, but accepted as inevitable by other 

commentators. The estate agents suggested that the recent levels of land and house price increases, and 

volume of redevelopment, were unlikely to be sustained for long, but that there would be intensification 

of development and strong growth in house prices. The planners confirmed the inevitability of further 

development based on planning approvals and applications in the pipeline. 

Conclusions from the semi-structured interviews 


to the local housing market. There was widespread agreement about many changes in recent years, with 

an intensification of previous trends, rapidly rising land and house prices, and redevelopment replacing 

houses and bungalows with higher density new dwellings, especially apartments. 

There was less agreement about the impacts of recent developments and what policies should or could 

be implemented to overcome perceived problems, with the community groups generally expressing 

different views than other respondents on most issues. The community groups felt that their areas 

were being overwhelmed by second home purchasers of existing dwellings and redevelopment aimed 

at second home buyers and investors. They wanted less redevelopment and limits to be imposed on 

further development of second homes, though they accepted that planning has limited powers to achieve 

these objectives. They also felt that student demand had distorted the local housing market, primarily 

in Portstewart, acting as another factor driving up land and house prices. They wanted more social and 

affordable housing in their area. 

Other respondents saw the changing local housing market as an outcome of market forces with 

second home buyers having as much right as anybody else to own local dwellings. Some thought that 


edevelopment had removed good houses but others argued that poor quality housing had been 

replaced by better quality dwellings making better use of urban land. They agreed that planning had few 

if any powers to affect the development of second homes. Some argued that redevelopment and sale 

to second home owners was a vital element of the local housing market rather than something external 

that ‘impacted’ upon the local housing market. 

Apart from the community groups, all respondents saw student demand as a mainly positive factor in the 

local economy, noting that many new dwellings would never have been built if NUU and its students had 

not come to Coleraine. There was little support for the idea of increasing social and affordable housing 

in the area and concerns were expressed that any additional social housing would not stay in the sector 

in any case due to the right to buy. The Housing Executive also noted that new social tenants would 

come from the Common Selection Scheme and thus may not fit the ‘family’ profile that residents’ groups 

wanted to see living in their areas. 

3.5 Conclusions from the case study 

The Causeway Coast case study area had been changing in many ways over the previous forty years, with 

many changes completely unrelated to second homes, especially local population growth associated 

with the creation of NUU, changing local economies, the growth of commuting and retirement 

migration. Concern about the growth of second home ownership in the area had resulted in specific 

planning analyses and policy developments. Boyd’s survey of residents in 2005 had revealed widespread 

disquiet about the growth of second home ownership in the area and local residents groups continued 

to campaign on this issue. 

The overall picture is one of gentrification with a second homes ‘life cycle’ which can be sketched out 

thematically here. Second home ownership along the north coast started with artisanal construction of a 

few shacks for occasional use at weekends or holidays. Later, there was a wave of ‘pioneer’ purchasing of 

existing dwellings. This process overlapped with the third wave of purchasing new dwellings constructed 

as speculative homes for whoever might be interested. The most recent phase was one of developerled 

acquisition of existing dwellings to redevelop primarily for the second homes market, especially in 

Northern Area Plan areas where permission is likely for apartments subject to a range of design and 

other criteria. There has also been a long-standing tradition of holiday-making in caravan parks in the 

case study area. Although outside the case study brief, anecdotal interview evidence suggested a parallel 

‘life cycle’ with people moving on from caravan holiday rental, to owning caravans, to buying a second 

home. 

Since the 1960s, however, there have many other processes of change in the case study area and its subregional 

setting. The creation of the NUU led to demand from home buyers working for the university 

and students seeking term-time accommodation. If the university had not been developed then much of 

this housing would not have been built. Student tenancies provided income for older accommodation 

which was becoming anachronistic as B&B or short-term holiday lets in a style of seaside holiday resort 

that was going out of fashion across the UK and Ireland. Since the late 1990s, students have mainly 

moved into new HMOs on the edge of Portstewart, in what has become a de facto student quarter 11 . 

These never would have been constructed in the absence of student demand. As the students were 

moving into new accommodation, many former B&Bs were bought by developers and replaced with 

apartments. 

With increasing planning restraint on further development, there has been significant inflation in land 

and house prices, though much new housing is more substantial than the dwellings it has replaced. 

Higher prices thus partly reflect a bigger and better product. These developments have changed the 

built environment of these settlements; with a rapid increase in apartments but far fewer bungalows. 

11 

This is unusual in the UK as most newly constructed student housing is provided usually by universities themselves, often in 

public-private partnerships with developers. Other student housing areas are typically in inner parts of cities, usually comprising 

older terraced housing. 


25

The survey of second home owners identified an affluent group with substantial household incomes and 

housing assets, and a high proportion owning their second homes outright. Most have bought recently, 

especially in the last five years, especially in apartments. Many have associations with the area with friends 

and relatives owning second homes or living permanently locally. They use local shops and other local 

services, albeit mainly leisure-related. A significant minority own other second homes and a third are 

contemplating acquiring additional properties for leisure use. 

The results of the survey of second home owners raised questions about some assertions made by 

residents’ groups, especially where the second home owners have their primary residences, their use of 

local shops and facilities and their attachment to the area. These were all consistent with findings from 

other studies discussed in the literature review. 

The interviews with public officials, estate agents and community groups confirmed the image of an area 

experiencing rapid change in recent years. There was agreement about the scale of land and house price 

increases, the changing pattern of development and redevelopment and the intensification of land use, 

albeit not accompanied by an increasing permanently resident population. These changes suggest that 

these settlements are in part at least ‘recreational communities’. Many home owners in these settlements 

use their dwellings primarily for recreational purposes on a periodic basis, while others are permanent 

residents whether working locally, commuters or retirees, some of whom were among the most active 

members of the residents’ groups. Some dwellings are also used as holiday lets thus in a way replacing the 

former B&B accommodation with self-service rented holiday accommodation. 

All estate agents and public officials had copies of the Northern Area Plan. Many recent developments in 

the case study are consistent with changes in the NI planning regime in recent years. The emphasis on 

brownfield development, tighter restraint on expansion of settlements, tight housing growth indicators 

and recently PPS14 all push towards greater restriction on land supply, increasing land and housing prices. 

This has led to densification of development, consolidation and ‘cramming’, more apartments and higher 

density. The regional setting of the case study area also has other planning constraints, especially World 

Heritage listing of the Giants Causeway and Causeway Coast, AONB designation and conservation status in 

Bushmills. 

Overall, there is sufficient evidence that demand from second home owners has been a factor in driving up 

land and dwelling prices in the case study area, especially in terms of the demolition of older properties 

and replacement with high quality apartments and townhouses aimed specifically at the second homes 

market. In the absence of reliable good quality local level data on prices, however, and in the light of other 

factors affecting demand (including retirement migration, commuters opting for primary residences in 

a high amenity area and student demand in Portstewart), it is impossible to estimate how much this one 

factor has affected the local housing market. Hence the value of case studies in other areas, as discussed 

in the next two sections, as a basis for informed comparative analysis of the various factors affecting local 

housing markets. 


4: THE NEWCASTLE-DUNDRUM CASE STUDY 


This section examines issues relating to second homes in two other case study areas which both had been 

identified in the 2001 NIHCS as places with above-average concentrations of second homes: Newcastle- 

Dundrum in south Down and the Fermanagh Lakelands. Research methods were the same as in the 

Causeway Coast case study. Background material was gathered from census and other published sources. 

Primary research comprised surveys of second home owners, surveys of permanent residents, and semistructured 

interviews with key actors and experts. 

The surveys of second home owners were conducted during summer 2007 with the aim of achieving 100 

face-to-face interviews in each of the Newcastle-Dundrum and Fermanagh Lakelands areas. Sampling was 

based on a combination of local knowledge of areas of high incidence of second home ownership as a first 

step, then investigation of homes in those areas to identify and interview second home owners. Field work 

was managed and conducted by Housing Executive research staff under the direction of the University 

of Ulster researchers. In practice, despite intensive fieldwork team effort, it was difficult to find second 

home owners in residence, after many visits to dwellings which permanent residents identified as second 

homes. This problem was compounded in Fermanagh because second homes, in common with much of 

the housing stock, were widely scattered geographically. In some cases, therefore, questionnaires were 

left for respondents to complete and return to the researchers. Overall, the fieldwork only achieved 39 

completed interviews in Newcastle-Dundrum and 18 in Fermanagh. The results are thus indicative rather 

than representative. Despite the small overall response, there are many parallels with the findings from the 

Causeway Coast survey. 

Unlike the Causeway Coast case study, where it was possible to re-analyse Boyd’s survey data, there was 

no existing data in Newcastle-Dundrum or Fermanagh on the attitudes of permanent residents to second 

homes in their areas. It was therefore decided to survey permanent residents, aiming to achieve quotas of 

100 in each of the two case study areas, preferably on a face-to-face basis but in some instances leaving 

questionnaires for respondents to complete and return to the researchers. The target of 100 was achieved 

in Newcastle-Dundrum but only 53 were managed in Fermanagh. Again, the results are indicative rather 

than representative but they do indicate many parallels with the situation on the Causeway Coast. 

The semi-structured interviews conducted with local actors in the case studies followed the same set 

of questions as in the Causeway Coast case study. Respondents came from the same groups as on the 

Causeway Coast: estate agents, some councillors, resident group members and advisers, and planning and 

housing officials. In Co. Fermanagh, however, it was not possible to identify any local groups campaigning 

against, or protesting in any way about second homes. The semi-structured interviews were conducted by 

Chris Paris, assisted by Housing Executive Research Unit staff. 


29

Figure. 4.1 The Newcastle-Dundrum area discussed in this case study 


The rapid growth of house prices has been a common feature of all three case study areas, and indeed of 

NI overall, during the last few years. Data are not available at the local level for any of the three case studies, 

but they are included within three of the University of Ulster /Bank of Ireland house price index regions: 

Newcastle-Dundrum is within the ‘Mid & South Down’ (MSD) region; Fermanagh is within ‘Enniskillen, 

Fermanagh & South Tyrone’ (EFST) and the Causeway Coast is within ‘Coleraine, Limavady and North 

Coast’ (CLNC). Table 4.1 shows that all three regions had house prices slightly above the NI average in 2003, 

but that house price changes have subsequently varied between the three regions. 

Table 4.1 House prices case study areas and NI, Q4 2003-2007 

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Change 

2003-2007 

(%) 

Mid & South Down 107.8 125.1 154.1 219.5 256.3 138 

Enniskillen, 

107.3 123.2 160.7 222.5 210.8 96 

Fermanagh & South 

Tyrone 

Coleraine, Limavady & 108.2 127.7 174.1 198.7 279.9 157 

North Coast 

NI total 105.8 118.3 146.0 195.8 231.2 119 

Source: University of Ulster Quarterly House Price Index. 

Table 4.1 also shows overall growth in house prices in NI of nearly 120% in four years. This rate of growth 

was quite unprecedented in NI and is almost certainly unsustainable. At a regional level, the growth in 

house prices was clearly strongest in the CLNC region (157%), though growth in MSD (138%) was also well 

above the NI average. 


By way of contrast, overall house price growth in the EFST region at 96% was well below the NI average. 

It is impossible to use these data specifically to focus on our case study areas, though they are consistent 

with comments from participants in the semi-structured interviews, within which respondents tended to 

remark most on spectacular price increases on the Causeway Coast and Newcastle-Dundrum areas but 

were less emphatic about increases in Fermanagh. 

The Newcastle-Dundrum case study is examined in this section and the Fermanagh case study is 

presented in section 5. 

4.2 Background to the Newcastle-Dundrum case study 

The development of second homes in the Newcastle-Dundrum area of south Down has many similarities 

with the situation on the Causeway Coast. Newcastle has an established reputation as a site of resort and 

leisure industries, with a range of visitor attractions and accommodation, including a major hotel, many 

B&Bs, smaller hotels and extensive caravan park provision. Unlike the situation along the Causeway Coast, 

however, there was no strong growth stimulus from an incoming major employer, such as the NUU, and in 

the absence of tertiary education institutions there was no growth of student accommodation. 

Changes in the level of tourist accommodation appear to have been less marked in Newcastle-Dundrum 

than was the case of the Causeway Coast, though separate data were not available at the local level for 

Newcastle and Dundrum. The total number of hotel rooms in Down District Council was between 700 and 

750 for most of the period 1997-2007; there was a slight fall in the number of B&B establishments from 

480 in 1997 to 370 in 2002, with a slight recovery to 730 in 2006 (source: Down District Council). 

There was significant overall growth of the resident population in the Newcastle-Dundrum area between 

1971 and 2001, together with net in-migration, partly for retirement and partly longer-distance commuters 

(Table 4.2). Most growth occurred during the 1970s and 1980s, with slower net population growth during 

the 1990s. Population growth was stronger in Newcastle than in Dundrum and the latter actually recorded 

a loss of resident population between 1991 and 2001. 

Table 4.2 Recorded census populations for Newcastle and Dundrum 1971-2001 

% change 

1971 1981 1999 2001 1971-1981 1999-2001 

Newcastle 5,044 6,246 7,214 7,444 48 3 

Dundrum 858 1,037 1,131 1,065 24 -6 

Total 5,902 7,283 8,345 8,509 44 2 

Source: NISRA census data. 

Whereas overall population growth between 1971 and 2001 was at a higher rate in Newcastle-Dundrum 

than on the Causeway Coast, the net increase during the 1990s was much lower: only 3% compared to 7% 

on the Causeway Coast. Likewise, whereas overall population growth in the Newcastle-Dundrum area was 

above the NI average between 1971 and 2001 (44% compared to 10%), that was not the case during the 

1990s, when local population just increased by 2% compared to 7% overall. The general picture in terms of 

the resident population, therefore, was one of slackening population growth during the 1990s. 

Newcastle had a similar resident population to Portstewart in 2001, but the Newcastle-Dundrum case 

study overall is smaller and more isolated than the Causeway Coast. It is strongly constrained by mountains 

to the west and there are no other significant coastal settlements between Dundrum and Ardglass to 

the east. It is significantly nearer to Belfast, hence the growth of commuting, but lacks a large nearby 

employment centre such as Coleraine near to the Causeway Coast. 


31

Table 4.3 presents key census data on the population in the case study area, with the totals also provided 

for Belfast, Derry and NI overall as the basis for comparison. The area does not stand out particularly in 

terms of age, except that the proportion of over-60s is above the NI average, signifying the element of 

retirement migration within the population. The overall level of home ownership was the same as the NI 

average, with a slightly higher proportion of outright owners than NI overall. Newcastle had a substantially 

higher proportion of Catholics than the NI average. The proportions of lone parents and unemployed 

persons were both at the NI average. 

Table 4.3 Key census population indicators, 2001 

Age Male Home owners AHS Lone parents Religion Unemployed 

>16 60< % All Outright % RC Prot. 

Newcastle 24 22 47 70 33 2.5 8 69 28 4 

Dundrum 23 18 50 64 31 2.5 11 57 39 4 

Belfast 22 20 47 56 24 2.4 11 47 49 5 

Derry 27 13 48 58 19 2.9 14 78 21 7 

NI total 24 18 49 70 29 2.7 8 44 53 4 


The issue of second homes had not attracted so much attention in Newcastle-Dundrum as on the 

Causeway Coast up to the late 1990s. The Issues Paper for the Down Area Plan 2015 (Planning Service 

2000), however, noted growing pressures on the Newcastle housing system to meet locally-generated 

demand and to cope with demand from new arrivals, including both commuters and second home 

owners. The paper also noted the falling supply of available land, real physical planning constraints 

(mountains, flood plains, coastal zone) and growing concerns about the impact of new development on 

value townscapes. Other constraints on development include wider landscape considerations, both along 

the sensitive coastal zone and relating to the proposed Mourne National Park. 

Local organisations also began to campaign around planning and development issues in the late 1990s. 

The Newcastle 2000 group has lobbied for a different approach to local planning and strongly criticised 

some recent developments on town centre and coastal sites, especially an apartment development in 

Dundrum (‘out of place, out of character and of dreadful twee design’), ‘barrack’ block developments in 

the harbour area (‘out of scale, out of place and totally alien in style’). Strongest criticism was levelled at the 

replacement of an old house with large apartment blocks on the main sea frontage: 

It contains 52 units, of which 3 are permanent residences. The other 49 lie empty most of the year...The 

ground floor windows are regularly smashed by vandals who know the place is empty...This kind of 

building gives no economic benefit to the town. The block is out of scale...hopelessly out of character. 

The turret was supposed to make it look like the Slieve Donard Hotel. So what? 

The 2007 survey of 100 permanently resident households sought to identify whether such views were 

widespread and especially relating to the growth of second homes in the area. There was clear evidence of 

concern about the impact of second homes: 79% of comments were negative with only 10% of comments 

suggesting that second homes had a positive effect on the local community. This level of negative comment 

was very similar to the level of concern on the Causeway Coast (72% negative comments and opposed to 

further development of second homes). 

12 

The questionnaire was essentially the same as in the 2006 Causeway Coast case study, but modified slightly to specify the 

different case study area and to identify other issues more precisely, especially the period of construction of second homes and 

the extent of outright ownership of primary residences. It also included a section for permanent residents only. 



The survey of second home owners was conducted in the Newcastle-Dundrum area during July and 

August 2007, using a structured questionnaire 12 (see Appendix 2). The survey achieved a total of 39 

completed interviews with second home owners. Sampling was based on a combination of local 

knowledge of areas of high incidence of second home ownership as a first step, then continuous 

investigation of any homes in those areas in order to identify and interview second home owners. 

The questionnaire gathered data on household characteristics of second home owners, how they acquired 

the property, the reasons for acquiring a second home, when they purchased and how much they paid, 

their use of local services, local social networks, the likelihood of acquiring additional leisure residences, 

and details of their other or primary home. 

The research team experienced much greater difficulty in contacting second home owners in Newcastle- 

Dundrum than on the Causeway Coast. The findings of this survey thus provide a useful basis for 

understanding some aspects of second home owners and their homes in the case study area, but the total 

number contacted was too small to form a basis to generalise about all second home owners in the area. 


None of the respondents had inherited their second homes (Table 4.4). Most had purchased using their 

own savings (19), traditional mortgages (15) and/or a combination of savings and mortgages. There was 

little evidence of equity withdrawal from primary residences to fund these purchases, though around 10% 

had included some element of equity withdrawal. Most respondents (26/39) owned their second homes 

outright, and the rest were paying off loans or mortgages. 

Table 4.4 Second home purchase & ownership in Newcastle-Dundrum 

Savings Mortgage Savings & mortgage Total 

How did you finance this property? 19 15

Most respondents found their second homes through estate agents (15) or by driving around the area 

looking for properties for sale (15) (Table 4.6) 

Table 4.6 How they found the properties 

How did you find this 

property? 

Estate agent Driving in areas Relative/friend Other, no answer 1 

or refused 

15 15

Table 4.9 Period of construction of second homes 

towards second home buyers, however, may have the unintended consequence of deflecting demand for 

second homes onto dwellings that are currently occupied permanently, including bungalows near to the 

beach, golf course and other amenities. 



values (Table 4.13). Almost half (18/39) were bought for less than £120,000 and 15 cost £121-199,000, with 

the median around £120,000. Respondents’ estimates of current market values all indicated the view that 

values had risen considerably, to a median of around £200,000. As on the Causeway Coast, therefore, 

all respondents who answered these questions were confident that property values had increased 

substantially. Such views were consistent with available data on house prices in the MSD region as well as 

comments from respondents to the semi-structured interviews (below, section 4.14). 

Table 4.13 Cost and estimated value of second homes 

Table 4.15 Distance between main home and second home 

Up to 20 miles 21-40 miles 41< miles DK 

9 21 7

Table 4.18 Main shopping when at second home 

Do main shopping in: 

Newcastle 33 

Bring own supplies

Table 4.20 Household types, second home owners and permanent residents 

Household types: 2nd home owners Permanent residents 

Small and large family 11 22 

Two adults 10 22 

Older households 6 25 

Large adult

Table 4.22 Household religion and perceived religion of areas 

Household 

religion 

2nd home owners 

Perceived religion of 

the area 

Household 

religion 

Permanent residents 

Perceived religion of 

the area 

Protestant 23 0 38 0 

Mixed religion

Conclusion 

Many of the findings of this case study parallel the situation on the Causeway Coast, though the number 

of respondents was too low to generalise with the same degree of confidence. Second home owners 

comprised a group of affluent home owners, mostly owning their primary residences outright, and 

with above-average household incomes. Most bought their second homes using savings or traditional 

mortgages/loans. They believe that their second homes have increased considerably in value. They do not 

appear to be very sensitive to the level of rates or additional rate imposts. 

Most have purchased recently in the area, mainly after 2001, constituting a significant element of demand 

for new apartments; some also purchased formerly owner-occupied dwellings. They are mainly from 

the Belfast metropolitan area and southern areas of NI. There was evidence of a significant degree of 

ownership of more than one second home, and of consideration being given to further acquisition of 

second homes, especially overseas. 

Some of the second home owners in the case study have family or friendship networks locally in the area, 

though to a lesser degree than on the Causeway Coast. Many shop locally and use local facilities, especially 

leisure-related facilities. A majority were Protestant but the religious distribution appears to be less skewed 

than on the Causeway Coast. They appear to use their second homes less frequently than those on the 

Causeway Coast, but many stay for considerable parts of the year, and so, again, may be a new kind of 

‘community’ who could be thought of less as ‘outsiders’ and more as ‘part-time locals’. 

4.4 Semi-structured interviews with representatives of organisations 

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals with interest in and expertise relating to 

second homes and the housing market in the Newcastle-Dundrum area: residents groups, Down District 

Council officers, the Housing Executive Area Office, the NI Planning Service and local estate agents. 

Discussions were guided by a semi-structured interview schedule (Appendix 3). Different groups had 

more or less to say about various issues, but these meetings enabled exploration in depth of many issues 

indicated in quantitative data sources such as surveys and the census. A version of the interview schedule 

was also sent to developers and the responses are included in the following analysis. 


The interviews explored trends in the local housing market and sought views and attitudes about 

second homes and other local housing issues. Respondents were asked about the main trends in local 

housing markets, in terms of house prices and house building, whether these changes were similar to 

developments during the 1990s, and whether they knew who was buying new and existing houses in the 

area; their responses are summarised in Figure 4.2. 

There was very little disagreement between respondents about recent trends in local housing markets: 

the main variations were in terms of the emphasis that different respondents put on aspects of changing 

housing markets and the extent to which they were more or less able to comment on different aspects of 

housing market change. 


41


House prices House building Recent changes House purchasers 

New dwellings 

Existing dwellings 

Community 

groups 

Very rapid 

recent 

increases 

esp. 

Newcastle 

Some 

redevelopment, 

growing number 

of apartments 

Major uplift in 

recent years 

Often 

outsiders, it’s 

a dual market 

Mainly locals, but 

growing threat 

from developers 

Council officials 

& councillor 

Spiralling 

land & house 

prices esp. 

coastal areas 

Rapid growth 

in apartments; 

larger 

houses being 

demolished for 

redevelopment 

Concerns 

since 2000, 

intensifying 

recently 

Apartments: 

2nd home 

buyers; 

semis & 

townhouses: 

rental 

investors & 

local home 

buyers 

Same as new 


Service 

No view 

expressed 

Development 

is happening all 

over, esp. coastal 

and attractive 

areas 

Change in level 

and pattern; 

pressure to 

redevelop van 

parks 

Don’t know 

Don’t know 

HE Area officials 

Very high 

price growth, 

hotspot is 

Newcastle 

Higher density 

developments: 

many town 

houses & 

apartments 

Definite 

acceleration in 

last few years 

People trading 

up, incoming 

commuters 

& 2nd home 

owners 

Same as new 

Estate agents 

Very rapid 

price 

increase last 

5 years 

Development all 

areas, Dundrum 

has doubled in 

size 

Big increase 

in apartments; 

previously able 

to redevelop 

caravan parks 

but not now 

Depends on 

dwelling type: 

apartments 

to outsiders, 

Castlewellan 

1st time 

buyers, 

Generally same 

as new, more 

interest from 

developers for 

higher densities 

Developers No comment Newcastle 

seafront & 

Dundrum, 

semis, town 

houses & 

apartments 

Growing 

redevelopment 

stimulated 

by investor 

demand 

Investors; 

some 

first time 

buyers; 60% 

Newcastle 

apartments 

2nd homes 

Locals, first 

time buyers for 

ex-HE stock,; 

other demand 

in-migrants from 

Belfast 



All respondents said that house and land prices had surged in recent years, with a distinctive break from 

previous years. All were surprised at the scale and speed of price increases and agreed that the scale of 

development and demand was greater than had been anticipated before 2000. 

House prices have gone through the roof (Community groups). 


The increase has been phenomenal. This is an area without a great deal of employment opportunities 

but average house prices are over £200,000 (Newcastle estate agent). 

House prices are spiralling out of control in Newcastle (Down councillor). 

Respondents agreed that prices were led by hotspots within Newcastle but had increased at similar 

rates across the area. They also agreed that the mix of new dwellings had changed with more apartment 

developments, especially by the sea front. Other new developments on the inland edges of Newcastle 

were more conventional houses and town houses. Some respondents saw growing pressures for 

redevelopment of caravan parks, despite the parks being excluded from development limits. 

From 2000 onwards there has been a growth in townhouses. There are two markets in Newcastle: 

1. apartments, 2. family houses. Second home owners like apartments for their simplicity and low 

maintenance (Newcastle estate agent). 

Developers will build wherever they can get ground (Newcastle estate agent). 

Caravan parks are generally excluded from development limits, to avoid the scale of development 

and to protect a valuable tourist resource. There have been caravan parks sold in the past for 

redevelopment, and there are a lot of objections to the protection of caravan parks which will go to 

appeal (Planning official). 

There was general agreement that the local housing market had distinctive segments, with strong interest 

from second home buyers but also a healthy local housing market driven by the local economy, together 

with a growing ‘commuter’ element as people moved into the area but worked in Belfast or other 

employment centres. 

All agreed that there were signs of growing developer interest in acquiring existing dwellings for 

redevelopment at higher densities. This had not occurred to the same extent as on the Causeway Coast, 

and there was less evidence of redevelopment for second homes with sea views. Growing shortages of 

available residential land generally appear to contribute to a growing tendency for developers to seek to 

redevelop sites for higher densities for a range of market segments, including commuters, second homes 

buyers, retirees and locals. 

The estate agents were best informed about who was buying newly constructed dwellings, with dwelling 

type being emphasised more than whether or not it was recently constructed. They described a mixture 

of locals ‘trading up’ to bigger homes and second home buyers looking for apartments. They also 

suggested that investors have been active across all dwelling types. Nobody reported experience of 

investors deliberately leaving properties vacant, as had been the case on the Causeway Coast, though many 

remarked that second homes were often left vacant for most of the time. 

As on the Causeway Coast, the discussions about the local housing market presented a picture of 

dramatic changes in recent years in terms of the cost of land and housing, the types of new housing being 

constructed and the purchasers of dwellings. Some redevelopment had replaced existing dwellings, 

though not as extensively as on the Causeway Coast. The question of demand for redevelopment of caravan 

parks was raised by a few commentators and may be likely to figure strongly in future debates about 

changing land use in an increasingly tight local land market. 

There were some disagreements over other issues relating to housing market developments, second 

homes and redevelopment, though attitudes were not as polarised as on the Causeway Coast. A series of 

statements about these issues was read to respondents and they were asked to indicate whether or not 

they agreed with the statements. 


43

Respondents were also asked to elaborate on their responses, whether any other factors were important 

and how they saw the area developing over the next few years. Figure 4.3 lists the statements about the 

local housing market and Figure 4.4 indicates areas of agreement and disagreement. 

Figure 4.3 Statements about issues in the local housing market 

Private house building has been at a higher level than expected 

House prices have increased above the general rate of inflation. 

Household growth was a major factor affecting local demand. 

There has been too much redevelopment of perfectly good housing. 

House price increases have priced locals out of the housing market 

More social or affordable housing should be provided locally 

There are too many 2nd homes in the area. 

Planning should stop the development of more 2nd homes in the area. 

Source: Semi-structured interview schedule. 

The community groups were critical of some recent developments and would like to see stronger 

regulation of future development, though they recognised the limited capacity of the planning system 

to limit the development of second homes. All other respondents viewed many changes as elements of 

dynamic private markets over which public policies had very little control. 

There was agreement about many issues. All respondents strongly agreed that house prices had risen at 

a much higher rate than inflation. Views varied regarding whether household growth was a major factor 

affecting local demand: some saw growing demand as coming primarily from outside the local population 

but others emphasised that many incoming migrants chose to live permanently locally, whether they were 

retirees or commuters. The community groups and HE officials thought that private house building had 

been at a higher level than expected, whereas council officials had expected a high level of building. Estate 

agents complained that there would have been more new development but for highly restricted land 

availability. 

Opinions varied regarding the suggestion that there had been too much redevelopment of perfectly good 

housing, though there was consensus that there had not been anything like the level of redevelopment as 

on the Causeway Coast. The community groups thought that there had been too much redevelopment, 

but council, Planning Service and HE officials suggested that this was still rare and very recent. The estate 

agents did not agree that too many good homes had been lost; rather they argued that there was a need for 

more redevelopment, albeit ideally in keeping with the general character of the area. 

Locals argue that the face and character of Newcastle is being destroyed. Given the high house prices, 

normal people can’t buy, so redevelopment means that they don’t lie empty. It’s about the type of 

redevelopment rather than the amount. Developers are not ensuring that there is a mix of housing; 

instead it’s all apartments (HE officials). 

I’m torn by this statement [about too much redevelopment]. I agree with the sentiment but we need 

development and quality housing. It’s a pity to lose some buildings (Down councillor). 



Community 

groups 

Council 

officials & rep 

NI Planning 

Service 

NIHE Area 

Office 

Estate agents 

Developers 

More private 


expected 

Agree 

strongly 

Disagree: 

expected it 

Neither A 

nor D 

Agree: 

thought it 

would have 

peaked 

Disagree: 

land 

constraints 

have slowed 

building 

Agreed 

House prices 



Agree 

strongly 


Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

Agree 

strongly 

No comment 

Household 

growth 

major 

demand 

factor 

Neither 

agree nor 

disagree 

Generally 

disagree: 

demand from 

outsiders 

Neither A 

nor D: many 

factors 

Disagree 

strongly 

Agree, also 

strong inmigration 

Agreed 

Too much 

good 


redeveloped 

Agree 

Generally 

disgree 

Neither A 

nor D 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree: 

need more 

due to land 

constraints 

Disagreed 

Locals priced 

out of the 

market 

Agree 

strongly 


Disagree: 

some do 

well, 1st time 

buyers are 

hit 

Disagree: 

all NI 

prices up 

Partly agree, 

but can buy 

in nearby 

areas 

Views differ: 

one agreed one 

neither A nor D 

Need more 

social &/ 

affordable 


Agree 

strongly 


Agree: 

difficult 

to define 

‘affordable’ 

Agree 

strongly: 

many 

RTB sales 

& high 


stress 

Agree 

Views differ: 


disagreed 

Too many 

2nd homes 

in area 

Neither A 

nor D 

Generally 

agree but 

they add to 

economy 

Not sure: not 

the same as 

north coast 

Disagree: 

not like 

north coast 

Varied 

responses; 

not like 

north coast 

Views differ: 


disagreed 


should stop 

more 2nd 

homes 

Disagree: it 

can’t 

Neither agree 

nor disagree 

Disagree 

Disagree 

strongly 

Disagree: 

don’t see 

how it can 

Disagree 

Other factors 

need to be 

considered? 

Commuting, 

retirement, 

leisure 

industry 

Retirees; 

likely impact 

of National 

Park 

No comment 

Flood plain 

concerns; 

National 

Park 

Commuting, 

investor 

activity 

Delays in area 

plan causing 

problems 

Other 

comments 

Need more 

research 

New sewage 

works 

No No Area plan: 

parts will be 

built out 

Need for 

upgraded 

sewerage 

Future 

trends? 

Continuing 

development 

surge 

No sign of 

slowdown 

Key issue is 

densification 

Upward 

trend 

continuing 

More growth, 

probable; 

no bust 

expected 

More 

redevelopment 

probable 




45

The community groups and council officials thought that locals had been priced out of the housing market, 

but others queried this idea. The estate agents pointed to price variations between settlements, with prices 

lower outside of Newcastle, so first time buyers could find affordable housing if they were prepared to 

move a few miles. As on the Causeway Coast, housing officials argued that house prices had risen across all 

of NI and that many expensive properties were owned by locals. 

Some locals have been priced out but many have done well by the rise in prices. Lower income first 

time buyers lose out (Housing Executive officials). 

There were few disagreements with the suggestion that more social or affordable housing should be 

provided locally. Housing Executive officials had evidence of more housing stress in the area than had been 

the case on the Causeway Coast, suggesting that Newcastle is a more ‘typical’ local housing market, with a 

wider mix of incomes and household. As on the Causeway Coast, however, a number of respondents raised 

concerns about the sustainability of social housing in the light of the right to buy. 

Opinions differed over second homes, but not as strongly as on the Causeway Coast. The community 

groups thought that there were too many second homes in the area, though they recognised that planning 

could do little if anything about this. Council officials generally agreed but argued that second homes are 

a significant element of tourism which is vital to the local economy. Others disagreed with the idea that 

there were too many second homes and noted that the situation in Newcastle-Dundrum was nothing like 

the north coast. No respondent believed that planning had the powers or responsibility to try to stop the 

growth of second homes in the area. 

It’s a tourist area. I’m not against second homes but in concentration they are empty areas of town. They 

do add to the local economy (Elected representative). 

We know there are second homes but in Newcastle we don’t have the ‘ghost town’ effect in the off 

season like the north coast...People are more likely to have caravans in Newcastle. Second homes here 

are not an issue like they are on the north coast (HE officials). 

There were some comments about other factors affecting the local housing market: concerns about delays 

over the area plan and the limited amount of land available for development; limited sewerage facilities; 

and the possible impact on the area of the proposed Mourne National Park. Some respondents raised 

concerns relating to caravan parks. These were considered to be an important tourism resource, but it 

was felt that there would be continuing demands for redevelopment of caravan parks, partly because this 

would enhance land values. This issue is unlikely to go away and may arise in other parts of NI as local land 

shortages in high amenity areas incline caravan park owners and developers to seek to change designation 

of the sites. Many caravan licensees will object to such a change, though they have limited rights of tenure 

under current circumstances. If there should be significant change of use in caravan parks, then this would 

be consistent with the idea of second homes gentrification, albeit in a distinctive and novel form. Indeed, as 

‘caravans’ are increasingly replaced by more substantial ‘mobile homes’, there may already be a process of 

gentrification underway. 

Most respondents expected recent trends to continue into the future, though concerns were raised about 

land availability and the possible flattening of house prices and demand in the near future. 



to the local housing market. There was widespread agreement that there had been significant changes in 

recent years, with an intensification of previous trends, rapidly rising land and house prices, and the first 

signs of redevelopment replacing houses with higher density new dwellings, especially apartments. 


There was less agreement regarding an evaluation of the impacts of these developments and what policies 

should or could be implemented to overcome perceived problems. Overall, however, views were not as 

sharply polarised as on the Causeway Coast. The community groups were concerned about the growth 

of apartment development, including its physical impact on valued townscapes. They accepted, however, 

that planning has limited powers to restrict the growth of second home ownership or higher density 

housing forms, especially as the latter are consistent with wider planning objectives in the RDS. Nearly all 

respondents saw a need for more social and affordable housing in their area. 

As on the Causeway Coast, most respondents saw the changing local housing market as the outcome of 

market forces. Some argued that redevelopment had removed good houses but others argued that there 

had actually been little redevelopment so far and that more, rather than less, may be desirable. 


This section reviews evidence relating to the impact of the growth of second home ownership on the case 

study area. The area had been changing gradually over the previous twenty years, with more incoming 

retirees and commuters. There had not been the same level of concern expressed about the growth of 

second home ownership in the area as on the Causeway Coast, though there was growing community 

action, and the survey of permanent residents identified a reservoir of dissatisfaction about the growth of 

second homes. 

The issue of second home ownership within a buoyant local housing market has been much more recent 

in Newcastle-Dundrum than on the Causeway Coast and in a context where a large proportion of leisure 

users have caravans rather than second homes. There appeared to have been relatively less transfer of 

stock from permanent to second home use than on the Causeway Coast, as a large proportion of second 

homes were in recently constructed apartments. In some cases, such apartments were not constructed 

specifically for the second homes market: some developments well away from the coast comprise a mix of 

permanent residences and second homes. 

In terms of the gentrification life cycle, therefore, Newcastle-Dundrum largely missed the first two waves of 

artisanal construction and extensive transfers from permanent to non-permanent use, and is currently in 

an early stage of developer-led acquisition of existing dwellings to redevelop largely for the second homes 

market. 

This case study has not experienced some of the key factors affecting the Causeway Coast, especially 

the impact of university staff and students on the latter. In common with the Causeway Coast, however, 

Newcastle-Dundrum has experienced significant inflation in land and house prices and a changing built 

environment with a rapid increase in the proportion of apartments and townhouses. 

The survey of second home owners in Newcastle-Dundrum suggests that they are similar in most ways to 

those on the Causeway Coast: an affluent group with substantial household incomes and housing assets, 

with a high proportion owning their second homes outright. Most have bought during the last few years, 

with a very large proportion of those purchasers having bought apartments. Some have associations with 

the area with friends and relatives also owning second homes or living permanently locally. They use 

local shops and many other local services, albeit mainly leisure-related services. A significant minority 

own other second homes and others are contemplating acquiring additional properties for leisure use. 

In this case study, as on the Causeway Coast, there was evidence that second home owners do use local 

shops and facilities and are attached to the area. These were all consistent with findings from other studies 

discussed in the literature review. 

Also in common with the Causeway Coast case study, the interviews with public officials, estate agents and 

community groups confirmed the image of an area experiencing rapid change. There was agreement about 

the scale of land and house price increases, the changing pattern of development and redevelopment and 


47

the intensification of land use albeit not accompanied by an increasing permanently resident population. 

These changes suggest that the local settlements increasingly can be seen, in part at least, as ‘recreational 

communities’. Many home owners in these settlements use their dwellings primarily for recreational 

purposes on a periodic basis, while others are permanent residents whether working locally, commuters 

or retirees. Some dwellings are also used as holiday lets thus in a way replacing the former B&B 

accommodation with self-service rented holiday accommodation. 

Many of the developments described in this case study, as well as the Causeway Coast, are consistent with 

changes in the NI planning regime over the last 10 years. The strong emphasis on brownfield development, 

tighter restraint on expansion of settlements, tight housing growth indicators and most recently PPS14 all 

push in the same direction: towards greater restriction on land supply and hence inevitably increasing land 

and housing prices. This has led generally to densification of development, consolidation and ‘cramming’, 

more apartments and higher density. 

Overall, there is sufficient evidence that demand from second home owners has been a factor in driving 

up land and dwelling prices in the case study area, though to a much lesser degree than on the Causeway 

Coast, especially in Portstewart. There has been much less demolition of older dwellings and replacement 

with new dwellings aimed at the second homes market. A range of other demand factors also appear more 

evident in Newcastle, in particular, than on the Causeway Coast, including commuters and locals trading up 

to more substantial dwellings. As on the Causeway Coast, it is impossible to estimate how much the factor 

of second homes has affected the local housing market. On balance, however, it appears to have been a 

less important factor in the Newcastle-Dundrum case study than on the Causeway Coast. 


5: THE FERMANAGH LAKELANDS CASE STUDY 

5.1. Background 

Research methods for the Fermanagh Lakelands case study were identical to those used in the Newcastle- 

Dundrum case study in the summer of 2007: background material was gathered from census and other 

published sources; primary research comprised surveys of second home owners, surveys of permanent 

residents, and semi-structured interviews with key actors and experts. 

The survey of second home owners was conducted during summer 2007 with the aim of achieving 100 

completed face-to-face interviews in the Fermanagh Lakelands. In practice, despite intensive fieldwork 

team effort and many repeat visits, it was extremely difficult to find second home owners actually in 

residence. This was especially problematic in this case study because second homes, in common with 

much of the permanently-occupied stock, were very widely scattered geographically. It was decided, 

therefore, in some cases to leave questionnaires for respondents to complete and return to the 

researchers. Overall, the fieldwork team only achieved 18 completed interviews in Fermanagh. The results 

are thus indicative rather than representative, though despite the low response there are still parallels with 

the findings from the Causeway Coast and Newcastle-Dundrum surveys. 

Figure. 5.1 The Fermanagh Lakelands area as discussed in this case study 



51

As in the Newcastle-Dundrum case study, the research team also attempted to achieve a quota of 100 

interviews with permanent residents in Fermanagh to assess their attitudes to second homes in their areas. 

However, it was only possible to achieve 53 completed questionnaires. As in the Newcastle-Dundrum case 

study, therefore, the results are indicative rather than representative although there are many parallels with 

the situation in the other two case studies. 

The semi-structured interviews conducted with local actors in the case studies followed the same set of 

questions as in the other case studies. Respondents came from the same groups except that in Fermanagh 

it was not possible to identify any local groups campaigning against, or protesting in any way about second 

homes. 

The growth of second homes in the Fermanagh Lakelands has been in a different geographical context 

than the other case studies. Fermanagh is a land-locked county, albeit renowned for attractive scenery and 

with the extensive River Erne system, including diverse waterways through Upper Lough Erne and Lower 

Lough Erne. The local equivalent to the seaside resort dimension in the other two case studies, therefore, is 

a strong orientation to waterside development or water views. 

County Fermanagh had long experienced slower population growth than other parts of NI, and suffered 

many job losses in ‘traditional’ countryside occupations. As was noted in section 4, overall growth in house 

prices between 2003 and 2007 was much lower in the region containing Fermanagh than in the other two 

case study areas; this is consistent with comments from participants in the semi-structured interviews. 

Unlike the other two case studies, however, there has been an increase in the level of hotel rooms in 

Fermanagh, from around 560 in 1997 to 740 in 2006; there has been little net change, however, in the 

number of B&B establishments with around 680 in 1997 and 670 in 2006 (source: Fermanagh District 

Council). 

The population of Fermanagh only grew very slowly between 1971 and 2001, mainly from natural increase 

with overall net migration loss especially before the 1990s (Table 5.1). This provides a less dynamic 

population and housing market context than the other two case studies of second homes. The strongest 

period of growth was during the 1990s, so there was no equivalent to the slowing down of overall 

population increase or localised population losses recorded in parts of the other case studies during 

the 1990s; differences in the scale of population data, however, militate against making too much of that 

observation. 

Table 5.1 Recorded census populations for Co. Fermanagh 1971-2001 

Total census 

population 

% change 

1971 1981 1999 2001 1971-2001 1991-2001 

50,252 51,008 53,568 57,527 14 7 


Table 5.2 presents key census data on the population in the case study area, with totals also provided for 

Belfast, Derry and NI overall as the basis for comparison. The area does not stand out at all in terms of 

age, with the proportions of under-16s and over-60s being the same as the NI average. The overall level 

of home ownership was above the NI average, with a much higher proportion of outright owners than NI 

overall, reflecting the relatively static population and high level of primary industrial activity. Fermanagh as 

a whole had a substantially higher proportion of Catholics and lower proportion of Protestants than the NI 

averages. The proportion of lone parents was relatively low but the proportion of unemployed persons was 

slightly above the NI average. 


Table 5.2 Key census population indicators, 2001 

Age Male Home owners AHS Lone Religion Unemployed 

parents 

>16 60< % All Outright % RC Prot. 

Fermanagh 24 18 50 74 41 2.8 6 59 40 5 

Belfast 22 20 47 56 24 2.4 11 47 49 5 

Derry 27 13 48 58 19 2.9 14 78 21 7 

NI total 24 18 49 70 29 2.7 8 44 53 4 


The issue of second homes had not attracted much attention in Fermanagh though some planning restraints 

had been introduced in high amenity areas. It was impossible to identify any residents’ groups that were active 

on this issue, despite extensive searching through prospective listings and enquiries to the local council. 

The 2007 survey of permanently resident households sought to identify what views were held relating to 

the growth of second homes in the area. Despite the smaller number of respondents than in Newcastle- 

Dundrum (53 compared to 100) there was still some evidence of concern about the impact of second homes: 

53 out of 75 responses on this topic involved negative views about the impact of second homes and only 10/75 

suggested that second homes had a positive effect on the local community. More expressed agreement with 

the idea that planning or other restrictions should be imposed on second homes. 

This level of negative comments was similar to the levels of concern expressed on the Causeway Coast and 

in Newcastle-Dundrum. The concern about second homes expressed by permanent residents may be 

indicative of the possibility that concern over second homes is at least latent in Fermanagh, albeit not to the 

degree that it was articulated in the other two case studies, most notably on the Causeway Coast. 


The survey of second home owners was conducted in the Fermanagh Lakelands area during July and August 

2007, using a structured questionnaire 13 (see Appendix 2). The survey achieved a total of 18 completed 

interviews with second home owners. Sampling was based on a combination of local knowledge of areas of 

high incidence of second home ownership as a first step, then continuous investigation of any homes in those 

areas in order to identify and interview second home owners. The questionnaire was essentially the same as 

in the Newcastle-Dundrum case study apart from references to specific localities. 

The low response level in this case study means that survey findings only can provide an indicative basis 

for understanding some aspects of second home owners and their homes in the case study area. The total 

number contacted was much too small to form a basis to generalise about all second home owners in the 

area and mean that some of the tables used in other case studies are not included in this section. 


Most of the respondents had purchased their second homes, though a few had inherited (Table 5.4). Most 

purchases had involved using their own savings (9), traditional mortgages and/or a combination of savings 

and mortgages (5). There was little evidence of equity withdrawal from primary residences to fund these 

purchases. Most respondents (60%) owned their second homes outright, and the rest were paying off loans 

or mortgages. 

13 

The questionnaire was essentially the same as in the 2006 Causeway Coast case study, but modified slightly to specify the 

different case study area and to identify other issues more precisely, especially the period of construction of second homes and 

the extent of outright ownership of primary residences. It also included a section for permanent residents only. 


53

Table 5.4 Second home purchase & ownership in Fermanagh Lakelands 

Savings 

Mortgage/ mortgage 

& savings 

Other 1 

How did you finance this property? 9 5

then they would help to explain why the research team had greater difficulty contacting second home 

owners in these areas than on the Causeway Coast during 2006. 

Table 5.7 Frequency of use of second homes 

As in Newcastle-Dundrum, it appears that the growth of second home ownership has been more recent 

in this area than on the Causeway Coast. However, in other ways the growth of second home ownership 

in Fermanagh is furthest along a continuum from the Causeway Coast through Newcastle-Dundrum. Few 

second homes in Fermanagh have been provided through redevelopment and there had been less in-situ 

change of use among this sample, though the number of respondents is too small to provide the basis for 

a meaningful generalisation to all second homes in the Fermanagh Lakelands. Most of the second homes 

within which interviews were conducted in Fermanagh are on greenfield sites, except some waterside 

apartments in Enniskillen. The Fermanagh case is also distinctive in that most recently built second homes 

are houses or bungalows rather than apartments. 

There is less obvious evidence in Fermanagh of an area in transition, partly due to lower levels of restraint 

on development as well as the scattered nature of much development. There has only been a modest 

development of apartments, mainly in Enniskillen and some lakeside sites. There is little evidence of 

demand for redevelopment for second homes, though there is growing redevelopment of brownfield sites, 

mainly in Enniskillen. Some areas show signs of more intensive development, for example on parts of Boa 

Island, but it was not possible to identify sufficient numbers of second home owners to enable further 

generalisations on the basis of this survey. Local knowledge, however, suggests that many dwellings that 

were previously occupied on a permanent basis have recently become second homes, often after having 

been vacant or abandoned, in some cases for many years. 



values (Table 5.12). More than half (10/18) were bought for less than £200,000 with a median around 

£150,000. As in the other case studies, respondents who answered these questions were confident that 

property values had increased substantially, in this case to a median of around £250,000. 

When asked about future expectations, very few had considered selling. Respondents were asked whether 

additional rate charges of 20% on second home owners would have affected their decision to buy a 

second home and/or would incline them towards selling (Table 5.13). Although higher rates might have 

put some off buying, most thought an additional rate impost would not incline them to think of selling. 

These responses are similar to the responses to the same questions in the other case studies, though they 

suggest a slightly higher tendency to be put off second home ownership if additional rates were levied; 

the number of responses is too low, however, to see this as any more than a possibility that cannot be 

considered further at this stage. 

Table 5.12 Cost and estimated value of second homes 

Table 5.13 Possible impact of additional rates levy 

Would an extra 20% on rates 

have put you off buying? 

Would an extra 20% on rates make 

you more likely to sell? 

Yes 6 5 

Maybe/don’t know/doesn’t apply 1 6 5 

No 

Note: includes inheritance 

Table 5.16 Ownership of any other second homes 

Own any other second homes 

Considering buying another 

second home or homes 

No 12 12 

Yes 6 6 

Where are they located 

Where would be likely to buy? 

NI

permanent residents believe. As in the other case studies, again, their use of facilities may be more like 

tourists and other leisure users, but this is consistent with the literature which shows that second home 

ownership is where housing and leisure markets overlap. The frequency of use of second homes in 

Fermanagh appears to be similar to Newcastle-Dundrum and less than on the Causeway Coast, but it may 

still be appropriate to think of second home owners more as ‘occasional locals’ than as ‘outsiders’. 

All second home owners were asked whether they had any other comments regarding second homes and 

the local area more generally, but the level of responses was too low to enable significant analysis 

Other household characteristics of second home owners 

The demographic characteristics of households in the second homes could not be contrasted 

meaningfully with the respondents to the survey of permanent residents because of the very small 

numbers in the various household types. 

Table 5.19 shows that most of the second home owners had household incomes considerably above the NI 

median (around £17,000 in mid-2007), with 7 reporting household incomes over £55,000 and fewer than 

5 under £35,000. Almost one third (5/18) of respondents did not know or refused to state their household 

income. This income range contrasts sharply with the reported incomes of permanent residents, over 

half of whom (28/53) stated incomes below £35,000 with fewer than 5 having incomes over £55,000. This 

pattern is very similar to the contrasts between second home owners and permanent residents in the 

other case studies. 

Table 5.19 Household incomes of second home owners and permanent residents 



Table 5.20 Household religion and perceived religion of areas 

Household 

religion 


Perceived religion 

of the area 

Household 

religion 


Perceived religion 

of the area 

Protestant 8


The interviews explored trends in the local housing market and sought views and attitudes about second 

homes and other local housing issues. Respondents were asked what they considered to be the main 

trends in local housing markets in the Fermanagh Lakelands area in terms of house prices and house 

building, whether changes were similar to developments during the 1990s, and whether they knew who 

was buying new and existing houses in the area; their responses are summarised in Figure 5.2. 

Overall, there was very little disagreement between respondents about trends in local housing markets 

during recent years: the main variations in Figure 5.2 are in terms of the emphasis that different 

respondents put on aspects of changing housing markets and the extent to which they were more or less 

able to comment on different aspects of housing market change. 

All respondents commented that house and land prices had surged in recent years though many 

suggested that price increases were slowing down during 2007. They generally agreed that the scale of 

development and demand was greater than had been anticipated before 2000. 

House prices are rising but there is a definite slowdown (Enniskillen estate agent). 

There has been a substantial increase in house prices over the last 2-3 years although it is levelling off 

now (Enniskillen estate agent). 

House prices have risen most in Enniskillen and within a 5 mile radius...Recently this radius has 

increased as people are compensating distance for money (Enniskillen estate agent). 

Respondents agreed that prices were led by Enniskillen but had increased at similar rates across the 

area. They also agreed that the mix of new dwellings had changed with more terraced/townhouse 

developments and apartments, though this trend was not so marked as in the other case studies. Other 

new developments in villages within easy commuting distance of Enniskillen were more conventional 

houses and town houses, rather than apartments. The Planning Service official noted that much approved 

development had not yet happened, and there was ample land available for housing, but estate agents 

suggested that planning delays and de facto land supply shortages were causing difficulties for developers. 

People are building wherever they can get land (Enniskillen estate agent). 

There was general agreement that the local housing market had attracted considerable investor interest, 

partly in response to growing rental demand from migrant workers, especially for properties valued up 

to £200,000. Most respondents considered that second home buyers were a smaller sector of demand 

than in the other case studies. Much demand for existing and additional housing was locally-generated, 

including local home owners trading up to more substantial homes, with first time buyers often looking 

outside of Enniskillen for cheaper properties, or purchasing former Housing Executive stock. None 

reported any demand from long-distance ‘commuter’ households. 


61


Council 

officials & 

councillor 


Service 

HE Area 

officials 

Estate agents 

House prices 

Escalating land 

& house prices 

Driven by 

Enniskillen 

High price rises 

everywhere 

but slowing 

now 

Rapid price 

increase last 

few years, now 

easing 

House 

building 

‘Everywhere’, 

esp. villages 

, some 

growth of 

apartments, 

slowing 

recently 

Development 

throughout 

Fermanagh, 

Much in 

villages, most 

apartments in 

Enniskillen 

All areas, esp. 

accessible to 

Enniskillen 

Developer No comment Mainly 

Enniskillen 

Recent changes 

Significant 

changes in 

recent years 

Increased level 

of applications 

for terraces & 

townhouses 

Continuation of 

trends in 1990s 

Continuation 

of trends; 

not much 

redevelopment 

but at growing 

scale 

Increasing 

redevelopment, 

more 

townhouses & 

apartments 

New dwellings 

50% locals, 25% 

investors & 

speculators, 25% 

2nd homes 

Don’t know 

Don’t know 

Investors up 

to £200k; over 

£200k locals 

trading up; 2nd 

homes 10% of 

sales 

Existing home 

owners or 

speculators 

House purchasers 

Existing dwellings 

Lower cost: buyto-let, 

higher 

cost: locals 

trading up 

Don’t know 

Don’t know 

More ‘buyto-live’ 

than 

investors, FTBs in 

former HE stock; 

5-6% buying as 

2nd homes 

Same as new, 

varies by size & 

price 



Some respondents noted growing developer interest in acquiring existing dwellings for redevelopment at 

higher densities, primarily in Enniskillen, though generally it was emphasised that this had not yet occurred 

to any great extent. None of the respondents thought that there had been any redevelopment of existing 

dwellings and replacement aimed at the second homes market. Rather, they said that most second home 

buyers want cottages, though some others prefer waterfront apartments. The estate agents suggested 

that second home buyers were a smaller sector of demand than in the other case studies. Estate agents 

suggested that growing shortages of suitable residential land were behind tendency for developers to aim 

for higher densities, especially for rental and investment markets. They even suggested that there had not 

been enough redevelopment in Enniskillen. Both the estate agents and the developer expected that there 

would be more redevelopment in future, though not primarily related to the market for second homes. 

The discussions about the local housing market presented a picture of less change in recent years than in 

the other case studies, though the cost of land and housing in Fermanagh had surged between 2003 and 

2006. Some changes were noted in the types of new housing being constructed and the purchasers of 

dwellings, though nobody thought that demand for second homes was a major factor in the local housing 

market. Some redevelopment had replaced existing dwellings, though not yet to any great degree. The 

question of demand for redevelopment of caravan parks was not raised by any commentators, though it 


could potentially emerge in the future, as there are numerous caravan parks in lakeside or near-lakeside 

locations. 

There were relatively fewer disagreements over other issues relating to housing market developments, 

second homes and redevelopment, compared to the other case studies. A series of statements about 

these issues was read to respondents and they were asked to indicate whether or not they agreed with the 

statements. Respondents were also asked to elaborate on their responses, whether any other factors were 

important and how they saw the area developing over the next few years. Figure 5.3 lists the statements 

about the local housing market and Figure 5.4 indicates areas of agreement and disagreement. 

Figure 5.3 Statements about issues in the local housing market 

Private house building has been at a higher level than expected 

House prices have increased above the general rate of inflation. 

Household growth was a major factor affecting local demand. 

There has been too much redevelopment of perfectly good housing. 

House price increases have priced locals out of the housing market 

More social or affordable housing should be provided locally 

There are too many 2nd homes in the area. 

Planning should stop the development of more 2nd homes in the area. 

Source: Semi-structured interview schedule. 

All respondents generally saw housing market changes as elements of private markets over which public 

policies had limited control. None thought that planning had much ability to limit second home ownership; 

indeed, most saw increasing second home ownership as largely beneficial to the local economy. 

All respondents strongly agreed that house prices had risen at a much higher rate than inflation. Views 

varied regarding whether household growth was a major factor affecting local demand. Some respondents 

saw growing demand as coming largely from outside investors. Council officials questioned whether there 

was any significant growth in local households but others suggested that falling average household size was 

a factor in generating increased local housing demand. Some respondents also suggested that there was a 

steady trickle of incoming retirees, though none had a clear idea of the numbers involved. 

The council officials thought that private house building had been at a higher level than expected, whereas 

HE officials had expected a higher level of building. Estate agents argued that the level of new building was 

not particularly high and that more development would be welcomed. They complained about planning 

delays and restricted land availability. By way of contrast, the planning official pointed out that many sites 

with planning permission, especially in rural areas, had not yet been developed. 


63


More private 


expected? 

House prices 



Household 

growth major 

demand 

factor 

Too much 

good housing 

redeveloped 

Locals priced 

out of the 

market 

Need more 

social &/ 

affordable 


Too many 

2nd homes in 

area 


should stop 

more 2nd 

homes 

Other factors 

need to be 

considered? 

Other 

comments 

Future 

trends? 

Council 

officials 

Strongly agree 

NI Planning Service NIHE Area office Estate agents Developer 

Agree, could have 

been higher 

Disagree: they 

expected it 

Disagree: it 

hasn’t really 

taken off 

Agree 

Agree strongly Agree strongly Agree strongly Agree strongly No comment 

Disagree: 

most demand 

by outsiders 

Disagree : not 

an issue in 

Fermanagh 

Agree : for 1st 

time buyers 


Disagree but 

could become 

a problem 

Neither A nor 

D 

Declining 

farm 

employment, 

need 

economic 

renewal 

No 

Uncertain: 

PPS 14 could 

be important 

Strongly agree: due 

to falling average 

household size but 

also immigration 

Neither agree nor 

disagree: though 

redevelopment can 

bring benefits 


disagree: locals vary 

in buying capacity 

Don’t know: need to 

liaise with HE’ 


disagree 

Disagree : not a 

planning matter 

Retirement 

migration 

Many outstanding 

rural permissions 

Land values to fall, 

house values will 

stay high 

Agree: there 

is strong local 

demand 

Disagree : 

not much 

redevelopment 

yet 

Agree: but not 

all and many 

variations 


Neither agree 

nor disagree 

Disagree; not 

an issue in 

Fermanagh 

No 

Emphasis 

varied: outside 

investors and 

local demand 

Varied 

responses, 

but not much 

redevelopment 

yet 

Views varied: 

main issue is 1st 

time buyers 

Agree: most HE 

stock has been 

sold 

Strongly 

disagree: want 

more 

Strongly 

disagree: 

Some inmigration, 

investors 

driving up 

prices 

Agree 

Agree 

Agree 

Neither A 

nor D 

Disagree 

Disagree 

2nd 

homes are 

welcomed in 

Fermanagh; 

many may be 

let to tourists 

No No Speculators 

have paid 

too much for 

sites 

Continuing 

demand but 

prices will level 

off 

Inward 

investment 

crucial to local 

economy, do 

not expect 

falling prices 

Slow 

development 

likely 




There was little support for the idea that there had been too much redevelopment of good housing. Most 

respondents said that there had been very little redevelopment and that it generally had resulted in much 

better quality new homes. Overall, there was no indication that any redevelopment had replaced single 

dwellings with second homes; rather any local redevelopment was for other market sectors. 

It is a positive thing to knock down one detached house and put eight there instead. Redevelopment has 

not been to the detriment of the housing market or the area in general (Enniskillen estate agent). 

There are a lot more apartments planned for the town [Enniskillen], which will probably be gated and 

aimed towards the retirement market (Enniskillen estate agent). 

Some respondents, including the developer, thought that some locals had been priced out of the housing 

market, though most suggested that this really only applied to first time buyers, and that many locals had 

done very well out of price increases. The estate agents pointed out that there were variations between 

settlements, with prices generally lower for former Housing Executive houses and in some villages within 

easy commuting distance of Enniskillen. 

There was general agreement with the suggestion that more social or affordable housing should be 

provided locally, especially in the light of high levels of sales of former Housing Executive stock. Housing 

Executive officials argued that land prices made housing association development almost impossible. This 

suggests that in common with the Newcastle-Dundrum case study, Fermanagh and especially Enniskillen 

is a more ‘typical’ local housing market, albeit in a country area. There is a wider mix of incomes and 

households in these two cases than on the Causeway Coast, suggesting the latter is in many ways extremely 

distinctive. 

There were no significant differences of opinion regarding second homes. The consensus that there 

were not too many second homes in Fermanagh and that planning should not try to restrict further 

development. Indeed, the estate agents and the developer emphasised that second homes were welcome 

in Fermanagh and they wanted to see many more. 

Council officials thought that second homes might become a problematic issue in future, especially if 

PPS14 restricted the development of houses in the countryside and locals felt priced out by ‘outsider’ 

second home buyers. None of the respondents believed that planning had the powers or responsibility to 

try to stop the growth of second homes in the area. 

It’s better to have some people living in rural areas some of the time than to have no people living there 

all the time (Fermanagh council officials). 

There aren’t enough second homes! They haven’t had an impact on the local market as yet. More would 

be good for the local economy (Enniskillen estate agent). 

Second homes don’t dominate the market or force people out. Investors force people out (Enniskillen 

estate agent). 

There were few comments regarding other factors affecting the local housing market though council 

officials and estate agents expressed concerns about the changing local economy and the need for inward 

investment. No respondents raised concerns about possible changes in the functions of caravan parks or 

any pressure to redevelop them as housing. Most respondents expected a slackening of house and land 

price increases though none predicted falling house prices. 


65


The interviews revealed few areas of disagreement across a range of issues relating to the local housing 

market. There was widespread agreement that there had been numerous changes in recent years, with 

an intensification of previous trends, rising land and house prices, and the first signs of redevelopment 

replacing houses with higher density new dwellings. There were no signs of redevelopment related to the 

second homes market and no objections to further growth in the number of second homes. In any case, 

respondents accepted that planning has limited powers to restrict the growth of second home ownership 

or higher density housing forms. Nearly all respondents saw a need for more social and affordable housing 

in their area. 


This section reviews evidence relating to the impact of the growth of second home ownership on the case 

study area. The area had been changing gradually over the previous twenty years, with slow household 

growth and some incoming retirees. There were no concerns expressed about the growth of second 

homes, apart from some respondents wanting more. There was no community action relating to second 

homes, though the survey of permanent residents identified a possible reservoir of dissatisfaction about 

second homes. 

This case study has not experienced any of the major drivers of economic growth near to the Causeway 

Coast. It is currently too far from, and poorly connected with, major sources of employment, so has not 

experienced growth in a commuter population, as in Newcastle-Dundrum. 

The survey of second home owners in Fermanagh suggests that they are similar in most ways to those in 

the other case studies: an affluent group with substantial household incomes and housing assets, with 

a high proportion owning their second homes outright. Most have bought recently, though more have 

houses and bungalows rather than apartments as in the other case studies. Some have associations with 

the area, having friends and relatives also owning second homes or living permanently locally. They use 

local shops and many other local services, albeit mainly leisure-related services. A significant minority own 

other second homes and others are contemplating acquiring additional properties for leisure use. These 

were all consistent with findings from the other studies and in the literature review. 

Unlike the situation in the other case studies, the interviews with public officials and estate agents did 

not reveal opposition to second homes or evidence of redevelopment. There were no local residents 

groups active on the issue. There was less evidence of an area experiencing rapid change. House and land 

prices had surged between 2003 and 2006 but not as much as in the other case studies and there were 

signs of slackening by the summer of 2007. There was agreement about the scale of land and house price 

increases, the changing pattern of development and redevelopment and the intensification of land use 

albeit mainly in Enniskillen and unrelated to second homes. 

In terms of the gentrification second homes life cycle, Fermanagh is at the stage of self-provision with small 

scale development of one-off houses or small groups of dwellings, and little large scale redevelopment. 

There was some evidence of transfers from permanent to non-permanent use, but no signs yet of 

developer-led acquisition of existing dwellings to redevelop for the second homes market. There has been 

some rehabilitation of older stock, both for permanent residence and for use as second homes. There have 

almost certainly been transfers of use from permanent to second homes, but the small number of second 

home owners contacted in this survey was insufficient to enable any wider generalisations. 

Overall, there was no evidence that second homes have had a significant impact on the local housing 

market in the Fermanagh Lakelands, or that the issue was controversial at this stage. There was an 

indication in the survey of permanent residents that some hold negative views about second homes and 

the council officials warned of the possibility of growing concern in future. Some respondents noted some 


uild-up of development in environmentally-sensitive areas, including Boa Island, but this was as much 

by permanent residences as second homes. At present, therefore, this case study presents a very different 

picture of the issue than the other two case studies. Whereas there were strongly divided opinions on the 

Causeway Coast, and growing concerns expressed in Newcastle-Dundrum, second homes in Fermanagh 

were not a significant local issue in the summer of 2007. 


67

6: SECOND HOME OWNERS IN NORTHERN IRELAND 


This section of the report provides a perspective on the ownership of second homes by Northern Ireland 

residents, based on evidence from the NISRA omnibus survey and analysis of census data on tenure. 

Section 6.2 introduces the NISRA omnibus survey and the questions that we placed within it on the 

ownership of second homes. Section 6.3 presents and analyses the survey data to provide an indicative 

picture of the overall level of second home ownership among NI residents, both within and outside NI, 

as well as the likelihood of future purchase of dwellings for use as second homes. Section 6.4 examines 

census data on changing levels of outright home ownership to assess the likelihood that growing numbers 

of households will be in a position where the acquisition of a leisure-oriented second home is a possibility 

for them during their working lifetimes. Section 6.5 presents conclusions on overall second home 

ownership in NI, based on the omnibus and census data as well as findings of the case studies. 

6.2 The NISRA omnibus survey 

NISRA conducts regular omnibus surveys within NI and offers other public or private agencies the 

opportunity to place questions within a ‘module’ on a specific topic. This has the advantage to other 

researchers that the general data which are collected in the survey are also available for cross-tabulation 

with data generated in the module. The placing of questions in the omnibus survey is thus a cost-effective 

way of achieving usable samples without incurring the much higher cost of a one-off survey. The overall 

achieved sample size of 1,200 to 1,300 is large enough for generalisations about the whole population of 

NI, together with some disaggregation at smaller spatial scales. 

One drawback of using this method is that topics which are only relevant to a minority of households will 

generate smaller numbers of responses. In some cases, therefore, it may be necessary to place questions 

over two or more successive omnibus surveys in order to achieve a statistically reliable sample size. There 

are three other disadvantages in using this method. Firstly, the omnibus survey accepts any household 

member as the respondent, rather than requiring a consistently-specified reference person. Most of the 

data collected refer to that person rather than to the household as a whole, though useful tenure and some 

other data apply to the whole household. Data on religion refer to respondents only and so it is impossible 

to identify instances of ‘mixed’ religion households. Secondly, outside researchers cannot change NISRA 

questions or categories, and these may not always fit exactly with other researchers’ priorities. Thirdly, 

there are limits on the number of questions that other agencies are able to ask; this reduces the scope for 

data capture but has the beneficial effect of requiring researchers carefully to rank their own priorities and 

design good questions. 

On balance, it was decided that this approach was suitable for this topic of second home ownership. 

Questions were designed to maximise comparability with the surveys of second home owners in the NI 

case studies as well as the English SEH, though the number of questions was limited by the capacity of the 

overall omnibus survey. Interviewers were instructed to ensure that respondents were clearly aware of 

our definition of a second home: ‘a property which is used for leisure purposes by you, your family and 

friends’. They were instructed to ensure that dwellings which were permanently occupied by other people, 

including family members, should be excluded from this group 14 . 

6.3 Results of the second homes module 

It was necessary to insert the module into both the January and April 2007 omnibus surveys in order to 

obtain a sufficiently large number of respondents to enable some generalisations at the NI level. The 

14 

In a very small number of cases respondents stated that their second homes were used by family members studying elsewhere; 

this does not affect the overall situation described in this section but should be taken into account in any further surveys relating to 

this topic and emphasised in interviewer training. 


69

combined total response to the January and April omnibus surveys (subsequently ‘the omnibus survey’) 

was 2,360 within which a total of around 90 households currently own a second home or homes and 

another 90 were likely to buy a second home during the next two years. The cell sizes were too small 

to allow statistically reliable disaggregated analysis by religion, income or other variables, though the 

findings are used here to indicate some possible interpretations and further lines of enquiry. The findings 

are sufficiently robust to provide some estimates of levels of second home ownership overall by NI 

households, as well as where the second homes are located, likely future growth in overall second home 

ownership and where they are likely to buy. 

Table 6.1 shows the levels of second home ownership within NI indicated in the omnibus survey. Overall, 

around 4% of households owned second homes and a further 4% were considering purchasing second 

homes. Of those who currently own second homes, around a quarter, 1% of all households, were 

considering buying others. This proportion was similar to the third of second home owners in the case 

study surveys who were contemplating additional second home purchases. Around 1% of all households 

did not yet own second homes but were actively seeking to buy and another 3 % of households considered 

that they were likely to buy a second home over the next couple of years. 

Table 6.1 Second home ownership in NI 

Whether own second home &/or considering purchase in next two years % 

Currently own second home or homes 3 

Currently own & considering buying another 1 or more 1 

Do not own but actively seeking to buy 1 

Do not own but likely to buy next two years 3 

Do not own & not currently considering buying one 92 

Source: NISRA NI Omnibus Survey January & April 2007 

These findings can be used as a basis for an indicative estimate of the level of second home ownership 

by NI households, including dwellings within and outside of NI. The NISRA 2002-based household 

projections for 2006 (668,000) and 2007 (676,900) provide a basis for estimating that there were around 

672,000 households in NI between January and April 2007. On that basis, Table 6.2 shows the approximate 

levels of second home ownership and probability of purchasing second homes by NI households. The 

table suggests that around 27,000 households in NI owned second homes, including 7,000 who were 

considering further purchases. As some of these are likely to own more than one second home (see 

below), then a ball-park estimate of the number of second homes owned by NI households would be 

about 30,000. 

Including current second home owners who are considering further purchases, Table 6.2 also suggests 

that around 33,000 NI households could be likely to purchase second homes during the next couple of 

years. 

These findings suggest that the total number of existing second home owners may be much larger 

than previous estimates. The ‘first estimate’ of 5,000 based on the 2001 census and NIHCS was only for 

second homes located in NI, rather than all second homes owned by NI households, many of which 

are outside the jurisdiction (Paris, 2007). Table 6.2 shows an estimate of all second homes owned by NI 

households, so it is necessary to estimate what proportion are held within NI and which are outside the 

jurisdiction. 

The overall estimate of around 4% of NI households owning second homes is similar to the estimated 

level of second home ownership indicated in the 2005/06 SEH provisional results: around 592,000 English 

households owned second homes, representing about 2.9% of all English households. A recent Australian 


housing survey estimated that 2.4% of Australian households owned ‘holiday homes’ (the term in Australia 

is equivalent to our definition of ‘second homes’) (Beer et al, 2007). Even given the small overall size of the 

omnibus second homes module sample, it was noticeable that very similar proportions of respondents 

were recorded in the various categories in both the January and April omnibus surveys. 

The likelihood that second home ownership is in the order of 3-4% of NI households, therefore, is 

consistent with evidence from England and Australia as well as the wider literature review within which 

it was noted that analysts frequently consider that second homes are under-counted in censuses and 

surveys and are often wrongly classified as vacant dwellings. 

Table 6.2 Indicative numbers of NI households owning second homes 

Whether own second home &/or considering purchase in next two years Number % 

Currently own second home or homes 20,200 3 

Currently own & considering buying another 1 or more 6,700 1 

Do not own but actively seeking to buy 6,700 1 

Do not own but likely to buy next two years 20,200 3 

Do not own & not currently considering buying one 618,200 92 

Total NI households 672,000 100 


Table 6.3 presents omnibus survey data relating to the distribution of ownership by NI households within 

and outside the jurisdiction by showing where respondents’ second homes are located and where they 

are considering buying. These are not statistically valid cell sizes for purposes of generalisation to the 

whole population so are only illustrative at this stage. The numbers are smaller than total responses as not 

all responses to every question were valid. Table 6.3 shows that over half of the second homes owned by 

NI households were within NI (64/116), another 16 were in the RoI, 8 elsewhere in the UK and 18 more in 

other countries outside the UK. Extrapolating these proportions for indicative purposes only, and based 

on estimates in Table 6.2 with around 30,000 second homes owned in total, the estimated numbers of 

second homes by location would be about 19,000 within NI, plus about 4,000 in the RoI, 2000 in other UK 

countries and a further 5,000 in other countries. 

Table 6.3 Location of second homes owned & likely future purchases by NI households 

Second home 

owners & prospective 

purchasers 

All currently own 

second home/s 

NI RoI Other UK Other 

countries 

All NI 

74 16 8 18 116 

All considering 

43 7 7 27 84 

buying 1 

Total NI households 1 117 23 15 45 200 

Note: 1. includes households that own & are considering buying more & excludes ‘don’t know’ responses. 


On the same basis, Table 6.3 suggests where NI households may be purchasing second homes over 

the next two years: around 17,000 within NI, around 3,000 in each of the RoI and other UK countries 

and 10-11,000 in other countries. The cell sizes of responses are too small to make too much of these 

extrapolations. Overall, however, the indication of a significant growth in overseas second home 


71

ownership corresponds with trends noted in the literature review, especially the SEH. The proportions 

also are very similar to those found in the Causeway Coast case study where a larger proportion of future 

purchases were likely to be overseas. The cell sizes in the other two case studies were too small for valid 

generalisation. 

Tables 6.4 to 6.6 present other findings from the omnibus survey in raw form. As with other tables in this 

section, these should be interpreted with caution and taken to be indicative only. Table 6.4 shows how 

respondents acquired their second homes and their current financial status. This shows a much higher 

level of inheritance than was the case in the Causeway Coast or Newcastle-Dundrum surveys of second 

home owners, suggesting that inheritance may be a more significant factor in second home ownership 

outside hot spot areas. The Fermanagh case study, albeit with a small overall total of respondents, did 

include more evidence of inheritance. 

Table 6.4 Second home purchase & ownership (total responses) 

How did you 

finance this 

property? 

Current financial 

position 

Savings 

Equity 

withdrawal 

Standard 

mortgage 

BTL 

mortgage 

NA: inherited 

33 8 22 13 17 93 

Own outright 

Paying mortgage or loan 

33 42 77 

Total 

Source: NISRA NI Omnibus Survey January & April 2007; counts are only of those who fully answered the relevant questions 

Table 6.4 also indicates that many more second homes were purchased by standard mortgages, and even 

buy-to-let mortgages, than through the use of equity withdrawal from primary residences. The table also 

indicates that around 40% of second home owners owned their second homes outright; that proportion is 

lower than in the three case studies, despite the higher proportion of inherited properties among omnibus 

respondents. 

About 20% of the second home owners in the omnibus survey reported owning more than one second 

home; most of these owned two ‘second’ homes with a small minority owning three or more. Although the 

actual cell sizes are too small to extrapolate to NI as a whole, this is a similar proportion to the 16% of second 

homes owners in the Causeway Coast survey, and similar proportions in Newcastle-Dundrum and Fermanagh, 

who reported owning more than one second home. This element of the omnibus survey data is thus at least 

indicative of the likelihood that many existing second home owners are likely to purchase additional homes, 

although more were considering buying overseas rather than in the UK, including NI, or the RoI. 

Table 6.5 Frequency of use of second homes (total responses) 

Table 6.6 shows the main reasons given for buying a second home. Respondents were asked to rank the 

three main reasons in order of importance. The idea of buying a second home as an investment came 

through more strongly than in our case studies. This difference again raises the possibility that purchasers 

take different perspectives on second homes within NI and overseas. Small numbers of respondents also 

noted buying second homes as a base for commuting or for use by family members studying away from 

home. These reasons are consistent with the wider literature and highlight the diversity of reasons for the 

ownership of multiple dwellings. 

Table 6.6 Reasons for acquiring a second home 1 (total responses) 

Use weekends 

& holidays 

Investment 

Future 

retirement 

Other 

First reason given 35 37

6.4 Other data analysis 

Growth in the level of outright home ownership may indicate the likelihood of households purchasing a 

second or multiple dwellings for leisure use. This is consistent with the literature that identified growth of 

household assets, particularly housing assets, as a key driver of further investment in property or leisure 

and growing consumption of goods and services (Forrest, 2005; Smith, 2005). 

The first report on second homes in NI (Paris, 2007) showed that outright home ownership has 

been growing at a much higher rate than home ownership overall. The 1991 and 2001 censuses both 

distinguished between outright ownership and purchase with loan or mortgage and thus provided a more 

reliable indicator of growth in outright home ownership. Taken together with an estimate of the number of 

outright owners for 1981, Table 6.7 shows that the total number of outright owners increased from about 

115,000 in 1981 to 138,000 in 1991 and then to 184,000 in 2001 (by 20% between 1981 and 1991 and by a 

further 33% from 1991 to 2001). These rates of increase were much greater than growth in the total number 

of households, which grew by 12% and 18% respectively during the same periods. 

Table 6.7 Outright home ownership NI 1981-2001 (000) 

Census year Inter-censal change (%) 

1981 1 1991 2001 1981-1991 1991-2001 

Households owning outright 115 138 184 20 33 

Total number of households 475 530 627 12 18 

Source: census & estimates derived from Paris, Holmans & Lloyd (2004) 

Note: estimate only as outright homeownership not identified separately 

Overall, therefore, Table 6.7 shows that the number of households owning outright increased at a 

considerably faster rate than the total number of households between 1991 and 2001 (33% compared 

to 18%). These data suggest the likelihood that there has been a significant increase in the number of 

households which own outright and have one or more members still in the labour force and thus may have 

the capacity to purchase additional homes. 

The rapid increase in the number of outright home owners can only ever be indicative of the possibility 

that larger numbers of households have the capacity to contemplate the purchase of a second or more 

homes. Many outright owners are retired and thus may no longer have sufficient income to contemplate 

the purchase of additional homes. It was decided, therefore, to examine the age distribution of households 

by tenure, in order to assess whether growth in outright home ownership simply reflected growth of the 

older population owning outright, or whether there may have been an increased level of outright home 

ownership among younger age groups. 

Cross-tabulated census data on tenure by age are available for 1991 and 2001. There is one definitional 

difference between 1991 and 2001: the change from counting the number of households by ‘head of 

household’ in 1991 to ‘household reference person’ (HRP) in 2001. This change has virtually no effect on 

the total number of households and mainly affects the gender composition of household counts by ‘head’ 

or HRP. The change is unlikely to have had any significant effect on the distribution of households by age 

because the HRP is defined primarily as the household member in whose name the accommodation is 

owned or rented. By definition, there cannot be any difference between the numbers of ‘heads’ and HRPs 

in the case of single person households. In the case of households with joint householders, then the HRP 

is taken to be the one with the highest income 

Table 6.8 is based on the two cross-tabulations of age by tenure for 1991 and 2001. It shows that over- 

65s accounted for the biggest share of overall increase in absolute terms, 19,000 out of a total of almost 


47,000. Overall, however, Table 6.8 shows that growth in the level of outright home ownership was widely 

distributed across all age groups. Indeed, the fastest rates of growth were among younger households, 

especially households with HRPs under 34. Outright ownership in under-35s group grew by almost 140%, 

albeit from a relatively low level (from 5,200 to 12,500). The age groups with the next highest rates of 

increase in outright home ownership were among the groups aged 35-44 (up by 49%) and 45-54 (33%). 

The lowest rate of growth was in the group aged 55-64 (24%) and growth in the level of outright ownership 

in the 65+ group was 27%. 

Table 6.8 Households by age of head of household, 1991 & household reference person, 2001 (000) 

Owns 

outright 

1991 2001 

Total number of households in census (000) 

Buying with 

mortgage or 

loan 

All 

households 

Owns 

outright 


mortgage or 

loan 1 

All 

households 

Table 6.9 Outright home ownership England & Wales, and Scotland 1991-2001 

Census year Inter-censal change (%) 

1991 2001 1991-2001 

England & Wales (000) 

Households owning outright 4,849 6,381 32 

Total number of households 19,789 21,660 9 

Scotland 

Households owning outright 332 514 55 

Total number of households 2,020 2,192 9 

Source: census & estimates derived from Paris, Holmans & Lloyd (2004) 

Note: estimate only as outright homeownership not identified separately 

Table 6.10 is based on cross-tabulations of age by tenure for 1991 and 2001 in Scotland. It shows many 

similarities with the situation in NI. Over-65s accounted for the biggest share of overall increase in absolute 

terms, around 83,000 out of a total of about 181,000. As in NI, Table 6.10 shows that growth in the level 

of outright home ownership was widely distributed across all age groups with the fastest rates of growth 

among younger households, especially households with HRPs under 34. Outright ownership in under-35s 

group grew by almost 175%, albeit from a relatively low level (from 8,700 to 23,800). The age groups with 

the next highest rates of increase in outright home ownership were among the groups aged 35-44 (up by 

102%) and 45-54 (80%). The lowest rate of growth was in the group aged 55-64 (38%) and growth in the 

level of outright ownership in the 65+ group was 46%. This is exactly the same as the pattern in NI in terms 

of the rates of increase in outright home ownership by age. 

Table 6.10 Households by age of head, 1991 & HRP, 2001, Scotland 

Owns 

outright 

1991 2001 



mortgage 

or loan 

All 

households 

Owns 

outright 


mortgage or 

loan1 

All 

households 

Finally, in this section, census data on tenure by age of head of household were examined for England and 

Wales between 1991 and 2001. In comparison to NI and Scottish data, Table 6.11 shows a similar trend in 

rates of growth and distribution across age groups in England and Wales with the fastest rates of growth 

among younger households. Outright ownership in the under-35s group grew by almost 177% (from 

93,000 to 257,200) with the next highest increases in outright ownership among the 35-44 age group (up 

by 76%) and 45-54 age group (an increase of 54%). Outright ownership increases in the older groups were 

lower with a 21% increase in ownership for the 55-64 age group and a 20% increase for the over 65s. 

If these rates of increase in the level of outright home ownership have been sustained since 2001, then 

there will have been further growth in the capacity of younger households to acquire second homes in 

NI as well as Scotland and England and Wales. During the same period, however, growing concerns have 

been expressed in NI about housing affordability and difficulties faced by first time buyers (Semple, 2007). 

Growing problems of affordability for some first time buyers, however, are not necessarily inconsistent 

with growth in levels of outright home ownership. Rather, they highlight growing differentials between 

those households with substantial property wealth, on the one hand, and those seeking to get on the first 

rung of the property ladder or wholly dependent on social housing provision. 

Table 6.11 Households by age of head, 1991 & HRP, 2001, England & Wales 

Owns 

outright 

1991 2001 



mortgage or 

loan 

All 

households 

Owns 

outright 


mortgage or 

loan 1 

All 

households 

The omnibus survey module also provides a basis for estimating the likely future purchase of second 

homes, though actual behaviour may not follow respondents’ current expectations. Even so, 1% 

of households were seeking actively to buy a second home and overall as many households were 

contemplating purchase of second homes as already owned second homes. A higher proportion of 

households were considering overseas purchase, but the probability is also of substantial demand for 

second homes within NI in the near future. The estimate of 17,000 additional second home purchases 

may over-state the level of demand, but it also could under-state it. Whatever the actual level, demand for 

second homes within NI is likely to be considerable. It is likely to be spatially selective and concentrated in 

areas that already have relatively high proportions of second home ownership. The analysis of census data 

suggests that there will be a growing pool of more affluent households able to contemplate the purchase 

of second or more homes primarily for leisure use by family and friends. 

There were few socio-economic, demographic or housing differences between second home owners 

in the omnibus survey and in the case studies. In both sets of respondents, second home owners were 

typically prosperous home owners, active in the labour force, with relatively high incomes, and nuclear 

families in middle age rather than singles, retirees or low income earners. Whereas the Causeway 

Coast second home owners were predominantly Protestants, there was no equivalent ethno-religious 

differentiation in the other case studies or across NI as a whole. 

Rapid recent growth of second home ownership was shown clearly in the case studies discussed in this 

report. During field work, however, it was impossible to establish whether particular dwellings were 

second homes, despite intensive efforts and numerous return visits, as the dwellings were always empty 

when visited by the field work team. This was especially the case in Fermanagh but it was also more 

difficult to contact second home owners in Newcastle-Dundrum than on the Causeway Coast. In the 

absence of other data sources, it is concluded that it is currently not possible to provide robust estimates of 

the number of second homes in case study areas. 

There was clear evidence of a cooling of the overall NI housing market since late 2007 (Housing Executive, 

2008), so some of the expectations about future purchase of second homes could be put on hold or 

postponed indefinitely. However, unless the current recession should turn into a major depression, it 

seems more likely that the housing market will pick up again before too long and growing second home 

ownership will continue to be a significant dynamic within the housing system. 


7: TAXATION ISSUES AND SECOND HOMES 

7.1 Overview 

This section of the report provides a perspective on taxation issues relating to second homes, in response 

to the study objective ‘to examine taxation and subsidy issues in relation to second homes with a view to 

providing a clear understanding of the dynamics of the second homes market’. The analysis here is based 

partly on an interview with an official in HM Revenue & Customs (subsequently HMRC) and examination 

of taxation advice guidance notes 15 (Help Sheet IR283). The interview set out to establish how HMRC deals 

with tax matters relating to second home ownership; it was designed to clarify issues arising from the 

literature review and did not seek any personal opinions of the official. It was not possible to identify any 

subsidies specifically relating to second homes and so this review focuses on tax issues. 

7.2 Taxation issues in the literature review 

The literature review in the first report (Paris, 2007) explored issues related to investment aspects of 

second homes, the tax treatment of such investment, and how they are treated in terms of local property 

taxes (rates in NI and council tax in GB). It was noted that second home owners had been able to claim 

50% relief against council tax in England, Wales and Scotland, but that this concession has effectively been 

abolished in most cases, though English councils may offer a small relief (typically 10%) as a measure 

designed to identify the number and location of second homes in their areas. It was concluded that there 

was no evidence that the rate of house and land price increases had fallen as a result of this measure. 

Indeed, the ARHC report and the SEH indicate continuing growth in second home ownership in GB. 

Second home owners in NI have been required to pay full rates for their properties and there has not been 

any proposal that this situation should change, except where some commentators have proposed that 

additional rates surcharges should be levied on second homes. 

The literature review noted that second home ownership has been identified as an element of life-course 

planning and personal or family investment strategies. The case studies and omnibus data analysis in 

this report also show that many second home owners cite ‘investment’ as one reason for acquiring the 

property. Where second homes are used purely for leisure purposes, then the investment can only be 

liquidised when the property is subsequently sold. Thus the investment element in these cases may be 

considered a form of speculation aimed at achieving a capital gain. In theory, capital gains arising from such 

sale of second homes are liable for capital gains tax (CGT), but in practice this may usually not be paid. 

In some cases, where second home owners combine ‘investment’ with ‘future retirement home’ as 

reasons for purchasing a second home, such investment can be realised in another way. If a household 

moves from a ‘primary residence’ to live permanently in their ‘second home’, then the second home 

becomes their new primary residence. At this stage the former ‘primary’ residence becomes an asset to 

be liquidised through sale or let privately to generate an income stream. Thus what was the ‘second’ home 

ceases to be an item of leisure consumption and becomes the ‘primary’ home facilitating the utilisation 

of assets accumulated in the previous residence. As capital gains resulting from the sale of a household’s 

primary residence are exempt from capital gains, such a move may constitute a valuable opportunity to 

generate untaxed capital gains on retirement. 

The literature review also noted that owners may calculate what is most beneficial in terms of defining 

their properties as ‘primary’ or ‘second’ residences, because some tax or other advantages may accrue 

to one or other definition. Gallent et al (2005: 10) suggested that weak or non-existent statutory guidance 

about ‘what constitutes a second home leaves the system open to abuse or honest misinterpretation’. 

Different analysts may interpret the same phenomenon in different ways. Birch (2006) complained that 

official statistics under-estimated the number of second homes because couples owning two dwellings 

each claimed one of them as their main residence to avail of single person’s rate of council tax in each 

15 

HM Customs & Revenue Help Sheet IR283, For the year ended 5 April 2006. 


81

dwelling; he noted other ‘scams’ including classifying second homes as small businesses to avail of lower 

council tax. Discussing the same issues in the Sunday Times Money section Francis (2006) referred 

positively to ‘tax perks’. 

The typology of second homes and multiple residences in section 2.7 of this report shows that the use of 

dwellings can and does change frequently in some cases. Thus it may be a matter of personal choice whether 

and when a particular dwelling is used as a ‘second home’ for personal consumption, and/or to let on a shortterm 

commercial basis to other leisure users as a ‘holiday home’, or let as an investment property to private 

tenants. Such changes of use may or may not be recorded for tax purposes. These concerns lead to the 

conclusion that it is impossible, other than in the most abstract sense, to identify ‘the second homes market’ 

as specified in the brief. This reflects a longstanding analysis of the complexities involved in defining second 

homes because they overlap housing and leisure/tourism ‘markets’ (Dower, 1977). 

The case for levying additional council tax (or rates) charges on second home owners has been advocated 

by various commentators including the AHRC. The AHRC report (2006) suggested developing ‘a robust 

measure for identifying second homes based on the system of self certification for tax purposes’, that 

consideration should be given to a ‘second homes impact tax’ in stress areas, and that local authorities 

ensure that holiday home owners pay full local property taxes. Unless there are advantages in any scheme 

of self-certification, it is difficult to see how this would be enforced and regulated, as second home owners 

may not want to be identified for tax purposes. In practice, it may be very difficult for local authorities to 

enforce any additional tax on second homes and such attempts may easily be evaded. As well, it may be 

necessary to impose very heavy penalties indeed for such a tax to have much effect because most second 

home owners have high levels of disposable income. It may thus be a useful generator of additional 

tax revenue which could be used to support social or affordable market housing, but might equally be 

siphoned off by Treasury into general tax income. 

The tax treatment of second homes owned overseas is potentially more complex, due to differences in 

national tax regimes. In addition, it has been reported that HMRC was likely to target families who have 

settled overseas or who own second homes overseas because such investments may be considered 

liable for inheritance tax on the death of the owner (Budworth, 2006). It was reported that UK citizens 

who own property abroad through an offshore account may be taxed as a benefit in kind. The report also 

examined various ways of tax minimisation and legitimate tax avoidance by strategies involving moving 

abroad for shorter or longer periods of time (Budworth, 2006). It would require specialist accounting and 

legal expertise fully to explore these issues, but for present purposes it is concluded that there are many 

complex taxation issues which overlap with the concerns of this study but also extend into the realms of 

international corporate investment. 

7.3 The tax treatment of second homes 

The interview with the official from HMRC, together with Help Sheet IR283 clarified aspects of the tax 

treatment of second homes specifically with regard to capital gains. Firstly, there is no official HMRC category 

‘second home/s’. Rather, there is only a distinction between the ‘only or main residence’, on the one hand, 

and any or all other dwellings that may be owned and subsequently sold. Thus the HMRC position on CGT 

does not differentiate between second homes and investment properties as discussed in the typology in 

section 2.7. HMRC does not have any record of second homes, as it does not use the category. Therefore, 

there is no specific tax treatment of second homes because all the use types specified in the typology in 

section 2.7 are reduced to two categories: ‘only or main residences’ and other ‘dwelling-houses’. 

Owners would normally have to pay CGT tax after disposal of the following: 

• A dwelling-house (including a house, flat, houseboat or fixed caravan) which is your home, or 

• Part of a dwelling-house which is your home, or 

• Part of the garden attached to your home. 


However, owners are entitled to full ‘private residence relief’ from CGT where the following conditions are 

met: 

• The dwelling-house has been their only or main residence throughout the period of ownership, and 

• They have not been absent, other than for allowed periods of absence during their period of ownership 

or through living in job-related accommodation, and 

• The garden or grounds including the buildings on them are not greater than the permitted area, and 

• No part of the home has been used exclusively for business purposes during the period of ownership. 

Such relief is only available for individuals, not companies. Even where some conditions are not met, it may 

still be possible to get some relief and some other possible bases exist for relief, for example if the dwelling 

was occupied by a dependent relative rent-free. In such circumstances, a dwelling purchased for use and 

occupied by students living away from the family home may be eligible for relief. 

With regard to any other properties owned in addition to the main residence, HMRC specify that ‘you 

may only have one main residence at a time for private residence relief.’ Thus it is legitimate to claim such 

relief if selling a main residence, for example on retirement, before moving to live permanently in what 

previously had been a ‘second home’. After one week’s residence in the former second home, moreover, 

they may nominate it as their main residence, and thus could subsequently sell it without having to pay 

CGT. Furthermore, any CGT that should become payable would be charged on the basis of marginal 

income tax in the year of sale, thus retirees would be wise to wait until after 1 April in any year before 

becoming eligible for CGT. It is almost certain that specialist tax accountants and other professional tax 

advisers are well versed in such considerations and able to give expert advice to their clients. 

The specified ‘period of ownership’ begins on the date that a property was acquired ‘or on 31 March 1982 

if that is later’. However, the final 36 months of a period of ownership always qualify for relief ‘regardless of 

how you use the property in that time, as long as the dwelling-house has been your only or main residence 

at some point’. The levels of CGT payable are calculated using formulae related to length of period of relief 

and indexed actual capital gains. 

In the case of investment properties where an owner or owners have claimed tax relief against costs 

associated with purchasing and maintaining the dwelling, HMRC will have records of ownership. If 

an owner sold such a dwelling without advising HMRC then they would potentially be traceable and 

retrospective tax levied or other measures taken. In the case of dwellings used as second homes, 

however, where owners have never made any claims for tax relief, then it would be entirely up to such 

owners to notify HMRC on disposal of their properties with a view to estimating the level of CGT that 

should be paid. HMRC does not seek actively to identify such sales and so it is very likely that in many 

cases where second homes are sold, possibly in the vast majority of instances, HMRC is not notified and 

thus no CGT is paid. 

Thus whilst CGT in theory should be paid on disposal of second homes at a profit, in practice such 

payments are only likely to be made by owners who voluntarily contact HMRC and/or have previously 

sought tax relief against some of the costs of buying or using second homes. Second homes may thus in 

practice constitute an attractive mechanism for achieving untaxed capital gains, though it should be noted 

that many owners would not have benefitted from tax relief against the cost of purchase and maintenance 

of these dwellings. If owners of dwellings which are used primarily as second homes, within the typology 

in section 2.7, should claim tax relief against interest payable on purchasing the dwellings, then they would 

be expected to declare rental income or provide evidence that the dwellings were primarily available for 

rent rather than used for personal leisure purposes. In such cases, if no rental income were declared at all, 

HMRC would be likely to reject claims for relief after a period, though this could in practice be a period of 

years rather than months. 


83

7.4 Conclusions 

In responding to the brief, firstly, no specific subsidies could be identified that were available to second 

home owners, so this review has focussed primarily on tax issues. 

Secondly, it is unlikely that the present situation regarding rates or council tax has any significant deterrent 

effect on second home ownership. Any additional charges specifically aimed at second home owners 

would probably have to be very high to have any impact and may be very difficult in practice to enforce. 

Thirdly, there is no identifiable and separate ‘second homes market’ either analytically, due to overlaps 

between housing and leisure/tourism markets, or in terms of HMRC definitions, which simply do not 

recognise a category of ‘second homes’. It is the case, however, that second homes are bought and sold 

within markets, thus the key issues concern how such purchases and sales are treated by HMRC. 

In practice, where no relief has been claimed against the purchase of second homes, then it is almost 

inconceivable that HMRC would know about their disposal and hence no CGT would be paid. It is possible 

that some second home owners may volunteer such information, but many may not. Indeed, it is likely 

that few second home owners are either aware of, or want to know about, tax liabilities associated with the 

disposal of second homes. The likely impact of these considerations on the purchase and sale of dwellings 

used as second homes is that they may constitute an attractive form of investment for affluent households, 

combining free leisure use with the possibility of untaxed capital gains. The opportunity to organise and 

reorganise residential circumstances on and after retirement, moreover, means that such investments 

may become especially attractive towards the end of a working life as a legitimate way of minimising tax 

liabilities. 

On balance, the taxation and subsidy issues relating to second homes can be both straightforward and 

complex. At a straightforward level, there are no specific subsidies available within the NI or UK systems 

relating to the purchase and disposal of second homes. Such purchase and resale may effectively go on 

entirely outside HMRC cognisance. Thus, at one level, the purchase and disposal of second homes may 

be an effective tax minimisation measure and form of tax shelter. Some commentators have suggested 

that such purchase and resale may constitute a form of money laundering, but that possibility cannot 

realistically be explored in this study. 

Subsidy and taxation issues become more complex when knowledgeable owners and investors, especially 

when advised by expert finance and legal professionals, organise their affairs to minimise tax obligations 

and maximise untaxed income. Such possibilities, however, are outside the technical expertise of this 

study. 


8: CONCLUSIONS 

8.1 Overview 

This study has demonstrated that the growth of second home ownership in NI has much in common 

with experiences in many other countries, though it has taken off more recently in NI, GB and the RoI 

than in other EU countries. There is a large international literature on the topic, especially in leisure 

studies and rural studies, with a growing body of research in planning and housing studies. The literature 

review shows that the growth of second home ownership is rarely, if ever, the only process of change 

affecting communities and local housing markets. It also highlighted the variable impacts of different 

planning regimes on the development of second home ownership in different countries. The literature 

review concluded by taking a perspective on second home ownership as a form of gentrification, with an 

increasingly strong transnational dimension. 

8.2 Conclusions & recommendations 

The first case study on the Causeway Coast was set in a context of significant sub-regional change 

before and during the growth of second home ownership. The survey of second home owners revealed 

an affluent group of households, mainly from the broad north east of NI. Despite the claims of local 

community groups, it appears that second home owners make substantial use of local shops and services 

and have significant levels of place attachment and local networks of family and friends in the Causeway 

Coast. The survey also revealed the ownership of multiple ‘second’ homes and a likelihood of further 

purchases in the near future. The semi-structured interviews highlighted the step change in local land 

and house prices and a new pattern of development, including extensive replacement of houses and 

bungalows with apartments and other higher density buildings. Views on the impact of second homes 

varied considerably, with community groups generally commenting adversely but others taking a less 

critical stance. 

The semi-structured interviews with key respondents highlighted the step change in local land and house 

prices and a new pattern of development, including extensive replacement of houses and bungalows with 

apartments and other higher density buildings. Views on the impact of second homes varied considerably, 

with the community groups generally commenting adversely on the impact of growing second home 

ownership but others taking a less critical stance. The community groups echoed the findings of Boyd’s 

survey, which had shown high levels of opposition to further development of second homes. 

Many of the developments in the Causeway Coast case study area are clearly distinctive, especially the 

highly concentrated nature of redevelopment for the second homes market, but the step change in house 

and land prices and intensification of development have also been evident throughout NI during the last 

few years. One view of the impact of second homes in the case study area which has emerged from the 

case study is that it is not so much that second home ownership has ‘impacted’ on an otherwise-stable 

market, but that it is a core local driver of change within markets that were changing already. 

The Newcastle-Dundrum case study had many similarities with the Causeway Coast, except that the 

process of developer-led replacement of single dwellings had begun more recently and was less focussed 

specifically on the second homes market. The Fermanagh Lakelands case study differed from the others in 

three key ways: there were no organised community groups actively campaigning on this issue; there was 

no significant evidence of displacement or redevelopment for the second homes market; and there was 

generally support for the future growth of second homes in the area, subject to environmentally sensitive 

regulation. 

The NISRA omnibus survey results led to the conclusion that the level of second home ownership in 

NI is substantially higher than previous estimates and to a likelihood of continued growth in second 


87

home ownership both locally and outside the jurisdiction. Analysis of census data on tenure and age 

of household reference persons indicated rapid growth of outright home ownership especially among 

younger age groups. This suggested that there could be a tendency for larger numbers of households to be 

able to purchase additional dwellings for leisure use in future. 

The review of taxation issues concluded that second homes are unlikely in practice to be subject to any 

effective capital gains tax and are thus an untaxed form of household wealth acquisition and disposal. 

The main conclusions and recommendations from this report are listed 1-6 below, as well as other issues 

considered separately in the first report, listed 7-9. 

1. To examine the motivations of owners and residents in the second homes housing market: NI 

second home owners are motivated mainly by a wish to own dwellings for leisure use by family and 

friends, with the possibility of retiring there, and seeing this purchase as an investment. 

2. To provide a socio-economic profile of the owners of second homes and an insight into the 

attitudes of other residents to the second home owners: Second Home Owners are predominantly 

owner-occupiers, especially outright owners, of high value primary residences, significantly younger 

than retiree households and with higher incomes: Attitudes of other residents varied significantly 

from strong opposition on the Causeway Coast to milder concern on the Fermanagh Lakelands. 

3. To examine taxation and subsidy issues in relation to second homes with a view to providing a clear 

understanding of the dynamics of the second homes market: any capital gains arising from the 

sale of second homes are liable for capital gains tax but in practice this is unlikely to be paid, thus 

investment in second homes may constitute an effective tax shelter. 

4. To further refine the second home (multiple residences) typology developed in phase 1 of the 

research: the typology is based on how dwellings are used at any time, not on enduring physical 

aspects as measured by the NIHCS: primary residences; second homes and multiple residences 

(including pieds-a-terre and other non-commercial family uses; investment properties (privately 

rented and holiday homes). 




Lakelands and Newcastle areas: the 2006 NIHCS estimated that there were around 8,000 second 

homes in NI. The NISRA Omnibus survey results indicate around 18-20,000 in 2007, with another 

10-13,000 second homes owned elsewhere in the UK, RoI or overseas. Second homes are likely 

to constitute a major component of demand for dwellings in NI over the next few years. It is not 

possible to provide more robust estimates at the local level on the three case study areas. 

6. To make recommendations in relation to the concerns expressed by local residents and the 

problems emerging from the research in relation to the (physical and social) character of the 

area, affordability, implications for planning and housing policy: planning cannot stop dwellings 

being used as second homes and tighter restrictions increase the likelihood of existing dwellings 

becoming used as second homes. The only possible planning recommendation relating to residents’ 

concerns are how best to manage development related to second homes and other demand 

factors. The implications for housing policy are that, combined with factors, growing second home 

ownership increases problems of affordability and access, especially for low income households 

and first time buyers. The NI Assembly could consider exempting designated areas from right to 

buy/right to acquire. Given sufficient local support, Community Land Trusts or other non-charitable 

bodies could provide ongoing subsidised affordable rental or home purchase opportunities. 


Other objectives considered in the first report (Paris, 2007): 

7. To evaluate data sources and advise on suitable sources of information: there is no systematic 

reliable source of data on second homes. This could be addressed by including questions in the 

NISRA Continuous Household Survey, and/or a module in the socio-economic section of the NIHCS, 

and/or by a periodic housing survey modelled on the SEH. 

8. To assess the combined impacts of second homes, holiday homes and student houses in multiple 

occupation: the impact is localised in Portstewart, with little or no impact on other local housing 

markets in the case studies. 

9. To review relevant UK policies on second homes in relation to NI: policy initiatives have mainly 

been developed in National Parks and other high amenity areas and relate primarily to limiting new 

housing development or restricting initial access to people with specified ‘local’ connections. Little 

has been done to address concerns about the loss of existing or potential future social housing 

through the right to buy except in Scotland and Wales. 


89

9: ADDENDUM, JULY 2008 

9.1 Introduction 

This Addendum to the final report is written in July 2008 in response to changes in housing markets 

since the main research in this report was conducted. Many respondents to the case study surveys and 

the omnibus module expected to purchase a second home, or additional ‘second’ homes, during the 

forthcoming couple of years, with a growing proportion expecting to purchase overseas. This indicated that 

there was probably a strong likelihood of such purchases throughout the whole NI population. 

Subsequently, however, there has been a sea change in the NI housing market. The wider context of the 

credit crunch and a rapidly increasing cost of living has resulted in growing fears of a serious recession. 

There have been significant falls in house prices and a dramatic fall in the volume of house sales. These 

developments may dampen potential demand for second homes whether within NI or elsewhere. As well, 

some current owners of second homes may decide to liquidise their asset through sale. Second home 

owners’ estimates of the value of their properties may have to be revised. 

This Addendum reviews changes in the NI housing market since the research discussed in this report 

was completed and considers possible implications of these developments for the findings, analysis, 

conclusions and recommendations in this report. 

9.2 The changing NI housing market 

Expectations about the future performance of the housing market, and thus the likelihood of future 

investment decisions, may have been influenced in NI by previous experience. Unlike most of GB, NI was 

not affected by the UK housing boom and bust of the late 1980s and early 1990s. Rather, local house prices 

were relatively low and grew gently more or less in line with inflation to the mid 1990s. There was then a 

significant increase in the rate of house price increases after the mid 1990s and a largely unanticipated 

surge in prices after 2003. The University of Ulster Quarterly House Price Bulletin, supported by the Bank 

of Ireland and the Housing Executive, showed average house prices increasing by almost 120% from just 

under £100,000 in early 2003 to £240,000 in 2007. 

Most of the research discussed in this report was undertaken during the housing boom when local 

experience had been of previous long-term growth in house prices followed by very strong increases 

in the cost of land and housing. The first report on second homes in NI noted that increased land and 

house prices on the Causeway Coast, whilst above NI averages, reflected wider house and land increases 

across the whole of NI (Paris, 2007). Field work for the case studies in Newcastle-Dundrum and the 

Fermanagh Lakelands was carried out during the summer of 2007. By that time, some commentators were 

suggesting that house price rises were unsustainable and that some kind of correction was inevitable. 

Some respondents to the semi-structured interviews identified signs of slackening demand, especially in 

Fermanagh. Owners’ estimates of house values may have reflected over ‘buoyant’ expectations. 

Figure 9.1 shows that house prices had increased during the study period for this report at a much faster 

rate after January 2006 in NI than in Scotland or the UK, and peaked at a rate 40% higher than Scotland 

in June and July 2007. Such a price increase was unprecedented in NI and was not explicable in terms 

of demographic or supply factors: there was no major demographic surge in housing demand and there 

was no significant supply problem as private sector housing output was at an all-time high. The downturn 

occurred sharply from August 2007 and has continued up to and including the most recent data. Figure 9.1 

shows that falls in NI house prices exceeded those in Scotland or the UK as a whole. As well, the Quarterly 

House Price Bulletin for the first quarter of 2008 identified a significant market ‘correction’ in house prices 

and expressed concern that house sales had fallen by 60% compared to the same quarter during the 

previous year and represented the lowest volume of sales since the survey started in 1984. 


91

Figure 9.1 Regional house price changes 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

NI 

Scot 

UK 

10 

0 

-10 

Jan-06 

Mar-06 

May-06 

Jul-06 

Sep-06 

Nov-06 

Jan-07 

Mar-07 

May-07 

Jul-07 

Sep-07 

Nov-07 

Jan-08 

Mar-08 

Source: NIHE; original source DCLG 

Falling house prices in NI are partly due to wider national and global processes including the credit 

crunch, as in GB, and have clear parallels with the RoI, where large stocks of new homes remain unsold, 

house building has declined massively, and house prices have fallen by between 10 and 20%. House price 

falls in NI also reflect a local housing market that had spiralled out of any relationship between incomes, 

demographics and prices, within which it appears that a surge of investment had pushed prices out of the 

reach of first time buyers as investors anticipated large capital gains and growing demand from migrant 

workers and others dependent on rental housing. Estate agents in Fermanagh, in particular, had identified 

investor purchases as a key driver of house prices; this is consistent with Sprigings’ (2008) analysis of the 

inflationary impact of buy-to-let investors in England. 

In May 2008 Bridle (2008: 1) commented that the housing market was ‘technically in recession’. He 

suggested that average house prices later in 2008 would be around £200,000, representing a 20% decline 

from the July 2007 peak, but still over 20% higher than in the summer of 2006. The Housing Executive 

Head of Research cautioned that whereas first time buyers may welcome falling house prices they would 

face increased difficulties relating to securing mortgages and funding their deposits so that, together with 

other price increases ‘the position for the first-time buyer (and therefore developers and estate agents) has 

not improved significantly in the past 6 months’ (Frey, 2008: 2). 

9.3 Housing market change and the future of NI second homes 

What are the implications of the changing housing market for second homes and this report? Any answers 

to these questions must be heavily qualified by recognition that there is a high degree of uncertainty 

regarding how current developments will play out over the next few years. We cannot know at this stage 

whether current circumstances are a short-term ‘correction’ or the harbinger of longer-term recession. 

The implications of the former would be less far-reaching than the latter. 

Experience elsewhere suggests that demand for second homes is likely to slacken and there could be 

some off-loading of second homes, especially if the housing market correction is deep and enduring. 

Gallent et al (2005) reported that the level of second home ownership fell in England after the housing 

market correction of 1989-2003. Coppock’s (1977) review of second homes had indicated similar 

developments after the economic shocks of the early 1970s. These experiences suggest that there could 

be similar responses in NI, other parts of the UK and the RoI during the next few years. Hence the level 

of second home ownership may not grow as strongly in NI as the survey evidence had suggested, and 

some dwellings currently used as second homes may pass back into use as primary residences. These 


developments would be spatially uneven as there may be less demand for dwellings in areas with a high 

proportion of second homes, thus owners wishing to sell may have to do so at reduced prices. This, 

however, could in turn stimulate other potential second home purchasers to ‘pick up a bargain’. 

After the reported fall in second home ownership in England in the early 1990s, Gallent et al (2005: 

11) noted growth after 1995/6, suggesting that the observed trend ‘follows the recent pattern of peaks 

and troughs in England’s wider housing market’. This is consistent with evidence that growing housing 

and other wealth stimulated growing demand for second homes throughout the UK and RoI from the 

mid-1990s. Thus the likelihood that second home ownership would increase would only be delayed 

if the housing market correction should turn out to be short-lived. If the housing correction turns into 

something more damaging and long-term, however, significant proportions of dwellings aimed at the 

second homes market currently for sale or under construction may not easily find purchasers. Again, 

this has different implications for different places. There appears to be much more demand from a 

range of other users in Newcastle and on the Causeway Coast, for example, than in Fermanagh. Recent 

developments in relatively remote coastal areas across the island of Ireland may also risk remaining unsold 

or selling at substantially reduced prices. 

The likelihood of increased purchase of second homes overseas may also become more problematic as a 

result of changing housing market conditions and the wider economic context. There has been extensive 

media coverage of dramatic changes in the Spanish housing market, especially in coastal areas with high 

levels of second homes, as well as retiree and ‘life style’ migrants. Property prices have fallen rapidly and 

there is evidence of widespread corruption and illegal development. Despite the incessant advertising of 

many agencies, some potential purchasers of overseas second homes may become reluctant to invest in 

such markets. Some commentators have raised the spectre of large numbers of new apartment blocks 

remaining unsold and vacant. Again, however, if the correction should turn out to be short term only then 

there could be many available dwellings at reduced prices for prospective second home owners. 

Growing fuel costs generally, and especially the growing cost of air travel, may affect behaviour relating 

to overseas second home ownership. Any reduction in demand for overseas second home ownership, 

however, could result in growing demand for local second home ownership. Falling levels of disposable 

income, moreover, could make cheaper second home options more attractive, including caravans and 

mobile homes; thus the overlap between these forms of ‘holiday’ accommodation and housing markets 

remains worthy of further investigation. 

Housing market change and report conclusions 

Recent housing market changes do not affect the conclusion that growing second home ownership in 

NI has much in common with experiences in other countries. The analyses of the growth and impacts of 

second homes in the case studies are also unaffected by recent housing market changes. Likewise, analysis 

and conclusions about similarities and differences between the case studies up to mid-2007 remain 

unchanged. The conclusion that the NISRA omnibus survey results indicate a higher level of second home 

ownership in NI than previous estimates also remains unaffected by recent housing market changes. 

Figure 9.2 reviews the implications of the housing market changes directly against the main conclusions 

and recommendations relating to the research objectives. In practice, few of the conclusions and 

recommendations are affected by recent housing market changes, with the sole exception of future 

behaviour of households regarding the possible acquisition or disposal of second homes. As well, the 

recent housing market changes do not affect any conclusions relating to objectives specifically considered 

in the first report (Paris, 2007): data sources, the combined impact of second homes and student 

accommodation, and consideration of the relevance of GB policies to NI. 

The report already indicates that actual behaviour may differ from respondents’ expectations of their 

future behaviour and suggests that a cooling NI housing market could result in expectations about future 


93

purchase of second homes being put on hold or postponed indefinitely. Unless the current correction 

becomes a long-term recession, it suggests that when the housing market picks up then it is probable 

that second home ownership will constitute a significant dynamic within the housing system. In any case, 

second homes remain a significant part of the overall housing system and an area of overlap between 

housing and leisure markets. 

Recent housing market changes, finally, may further strengthen the advantageous position of outright 

owners compared to other participants in the housing market. The analysis of census data in this report 

suggests that growing outright home ownership, especially among younger households, has expanded the 

pool of potential second home owners. This is not likely to be affected by recent housing market changes 

because outright owner occupiers are insulated from any rising costs of purchase except when they chose 

to buy second homes or investment properties. Falling house prices overall may make it relatively easier 

for them to buy second homes. 

Fig. 9.2 Housing market change and report conclusions and recommendations 

Conclusions and recommendation 

NI second home owners are motivated mainly by a wish to own 

dwellings for leisure use by family and friends, with the possibility of 

retiring there, and seeing this purchase as an investment 

NI second home owners are predominantly owner-occupiers, 

especially outright owners, of high value primary residences, 

significantly younger than retiree households and with higher 

incomes 

Capital gains arising from the sale of second homes are liable for 

capital gains tax but in practice this is unlikely to be paid, thus 

investment in second homes may constitute an effective tax shelter. 

The second home (multiple residences) typology is based on how 

dwellings are used at any time: primary residences; second homes 

and multiple residences (including pieds-a-terre and other noncommercial 

family uses; investment properties (privately rented 

and holiday homes). 

The 2006 NIHCS estimated about 8,000 second homes in NI but 

the NISRA Omnibus survey results suggest 18-20,000 in 2007, and 

another 10-13, owned elsewhere in the UK, RoI or overseas. Second 

homes are likely to constitute a major component of demand for 

dwellings in NI over the next few years. It is not possible to provide 

more robust estimates at the local level on the three case study 

areas. 

The recommendation in response to concerns of local residents 

relates to how best to manage development related to second 

homes and other demand factors. The implications for housing 

policy are that, combined with other factors, growing second 

home ownership increases problems of affordability and access, 

especially for low income households and first time buyers. The NI 

Assembly could consider exempting designated areas from right 

to buy/right to acquire. Given sufficient local support, Community 

Land Trusts or other non-charitable bodies could provide ongoing 

subsidised affordable rental or home purchase opportunities. 

Impact of housing market change 

Not affected. 

Not affected. 

Not affected. 

Not affected. 

The estimated level of second 

home ownership is not affected 

but it is possible that demand for 

second homes could fall relative 

to demand for primary residences. 

Not affected. 


10: REFERENCES 

Atkinson, R & Bridge, G eds. (2004) Gentrification in a Global Context (London, Routledge). 

Affordable Rural Housing Commission (2006) Final Report (London, Affordable Rural Housing 

Commission). 

Ball, M (2005) RICS European Housing Review 2005 at http://www.rics.org 

Bauman, Z (1995) Life in Fragments: Essays in Post-modern Morality (Oxford, Blackwell). 

Beer, A, Faulkner, D & Cutler, C (2007) The State of Australian Housing - Overview Melbourne, AHURI). 

Birch, J (2006) The great second homes swindle Roof May/June pp. 22-24. 

Bridle, A. (2008) An extended adjustment, Northern Ireland Quarterly House Price Bulletin, 94, p. 1. 

Budworth, D (2006) Taxman targets overseas homeowners, Sunday Times 10 September, Money Section p. 

1. 

Coppock, J T ed. (1977) Second homes, curse or blessing (Oxford, Pergamon Press). 

Dower, M (1977) Planning aspects of second homes, pp. 155-164 in Coppock, J T ed. Second homes, curse 

or blessing (Oxford, Pergamon Press). 

Francis, C (2006) Families with second homes set to double Sunday Times 30 April, Money Section p. 1. 

Frey, J. (2008) The issue of affordability hasn’t gone away, Northern Ireland Quarterly House Price Bulletin, 

94, p. 2. 

Gallent, N, Mace, A and Tewdr-Jones, M (2005) Second Homes (Aldershot Hampshire, Ashgate). 

Hall, C M and Muller, D K eds. (2004) Tourism, Mobility and Second Homes (Clevedon Buffalo and Toronto, 

Channel View Publications). 

Hall, C M (2005) Tourism: rethinking the social science of mobility (Edinburgh Pearson). 

House of Commons ODPM Housing Planning, Local Government and the Regions Committee (2006) 

Affordability and the Supply of Housing (London, Stationery Office). 

Housing Executive (2008) Northern Ireland Housing Market, Review and perspectives 2008-11 (Belfast, 

Housing Executive). 

Jones, C & Murie, A (2006) The Right to Buy, (Oxford: Blackwell) 

McIntyre, N, Williams, D & McHugh, K eds. (2006) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism (CABI, Cambridge MA) 

Paris, C (2007) Second Homes in Northern Ireland: Growth, Impact and Policy Implications, First Report to 

the Housing Executive (Belfast: Housing Executive). 

Paris, C, Holmans, A & Lloyd, K (2004) Demographic trends and future housing need in Northern Ireland, 

Report to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE: Belfast) 


97

Pearman, H (2006) Water margin, Sunday Times, Homes supplement, 6 May 2007, p.41. 

Phillips, M (1993) Rural gentrification and the processes of class colonisation, Journal of Rural Studies, 9, 

pp. 123-140. 

Phillips, M (2005) Differential productions of rural gentrification: illustrations from North and South 

Norfolk, Geoforum, 36, pp. 477-494. 

Planning Service (2000) Ards and Down Area Plan 2015: Issues Paper (Downpatrick, Planning Service). 

Planning Service (2003) Second Homes on the North Coast (Coleraine, Planning Service). 

Semple, J (2007) Review into Affordable Housing, Final Report (Belfast, DSDNI). 

Sheller, M & Urry, J eds. (2004) Tourism Mobilities (London and New York, Routledge). 

Shirlow, P & Murtagh B (2006) Belfast: Segregation, Violence and the City (London, Pluto). 

Smith, D P (2002) Extending the temporal and spatial limits of gentrification: a research agenda for 

population geographers, International Journal of Population Geography, 8, pp. 385-394. 

Smith, D P & Phillips, D A (2001) Socio-cultural representations of gentrified Pennine rurality, Journal of 

Rural Studies, 17, pp. 457-469. 

Smith, D and Butler, R (2007) Conceptualising the sociospatial diversity of gentrification: ‘to boldly go’ into 

contemporary gentrified spaces, the final frontier’? Environment and Planning A 39 (1) pp. 2-9. 

Sprigings, N. (2008) Buy-to-let and the wider housing market, People, Place & Policy Online, 2/2, pp 76-87 

Stedman, RC (2006a) Places of escape: second home meanings in Northern Wisconsin, USA, in McIntyre, 

Williams & McHugh eds. (2006) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism (CABI, Cambridge MA). 

Stedman, RC (2006b) Understanding place attachment among second home owners, American 

Behavioural Scientist 50,2 pp 187-203. 

Town & Country Planning Service (1991) Second Homes on the North Coast: a policy for apartments in the 

coastal settlements of Coleraine District (Coleraine, Department of the Environment (NI)). 

Tuulentie, S (2006) Tourists making themselves at home: second homes as a part of tourist careers, in 

McIntyre, Williams & McHugh eds. (2006) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism (CABI, Cambridge MA). 

Urry, J (1995) Consuming Places (London and New York, Routledge). 

Urry, J (2000) Sociology beyond Societies (London and New York, Routledge). 


Appendices 

APPENDIX 1: 

Individuals Consulted in Semi-structured Interviews & Focus Groups 

Community Groups: Mrs Y Hamilton, Mrs C Rae and Mr I Binnie (Causeway Coast case study); Miss J Forbes, 

Mr P Law and Mr D Maginn (Newcastle-Dundrum case study). 

Coleraine Borough Council: Mr W Moore, Mr K Docherty and Mr P Fleming; Down District Council: Mr G 

Bradley, Mr J Dummigan and Mr D Brannigan; Fermanagh District Council: Mr R Conor, Mr G Knox, Mr R 

Ford and Mr B Hegarty. 

NI Planning Service: Mr A Meenagh, Mr J Coulter and Ms K Dickson (Causeway Coast case study); Mr P 

Rooney (Newcastle-Dundrum case study); Dr C Boomer (Fermanagh case study). 

Housing Executive officers: Mr F O’Conor and Ms M Conway (Causeway Coast case study); Mr N Hagan, 

Mr S Graham and Mr O Brady (Newcastle-Dundrum case study); Mr M Callaghan, Ms E Bell and Mr C 

Cunningham (Fermanagh case study). 

Estate Agents: Mr M Pollock, Mr R Telford, Mr D Gordon and Mr P Gordon (Causeway Coast case study); Mr 

C Adams and Mr K Graham (Newcastle-Dundrum case study); Mr K Graham and Mr T Findlay (Fermanagh 

case study). 

Developers responded in confidence: one each in the Causeway Coast and Fermanagh case studies, two in 

the Newcastle-Dundrum case study. 

Others: NI Housing Council representative from Down Council: Councillor E O’Neill 


101

APPENDIX 2: 

Second Homes Questionnaire 

The questionnaire inserted below has been edited for clarity of presentation. It only includes questions 

relating to second home owners whereas the actual questionnaire included sections for other categories 

of dwelling users. The actual questionnaires also reflected the different geographical locations and 

circumstances of the three case studies. 

CONFIDENTIAL SURVEY 

2nd Homes/holiday Homes Survey 2006 

This survey is being undertaken by the Research Unit of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to 

evaluate the role of second homes/holiday homes in the housing market and examine their impact on 

local markets and the community. 

The survey is being carried out in the Portrush/Portstewart/Portballintrae/Castlerock area of North 

Antrim and Derry. 

(INTERVIEWER: The definition of a ‘holiday home’ is a residence which is rented regularly to holiday 

makers on a weekly or other basis) 

The definition of a ‘2nd home’ is a property which is used for leisure 

All information provided by you is confidential and will only be used for the purpose of this survey. 

1. Can you please tell me if you are......? One response 

• The owner of this property 

• Renting the property on a permanent basis 

• Renting the property on ‘short-term holiday let’ basis (holiday home) 

• Staying on a short-term basis (1-2 weeks, month), rent free, as the dwelling belongs to family/friends 

• Other (please specify). 

2. Do you...? One response 

• Live in the dwelling as a permanent resident to the area (Terminate interview) 

• Use the dwelling as a 2nd home (interviewer: own & using it now as a holiday home) [go to q3] 

• Use the dwelling as a 2nd home and also rent the dwelling on a short-term basis at other times 

(interviewer: use as holiday home and also let out to students/holiday makers) [go to q3] 

• Other (i.e. warden; house sitter etc) Please specify (Terminate interview) 

I would like to ask you some questions relating to the reasons why you have purchased a property in this 

area and the main reason for purchasing a holiday home. 

3. I would like to ask you how you got this dwelling, did you...? One response 

• Inherit the property 

• Inherit the site and built the property 

• Purchase the property 

4. How did you finance building/purchasing the property? All that apply 

• Used savings and/or investments 

• Used equity withdrawal from primary residence 

• Used a traditional mortgage 

• Used a buy-to-let mortgage 

• Other Please specify 


5. What is the current position, do you ...? One response 

• Own the property outright 

• Have a traditional mortgage 

• Have a buy-to-let mortgage 


6. Here is a list of why people may have a second home. [Show card] Please tell me the top 3 reasons, 

starting with the 1st, why you have a holiday home? 1st, 2nd & 3rd choices 

• Holiday home/weekend retreat 

• Retirement home (now or in the future) 

• As an investment 

• Life style motivation 

• A base for work or commuting to work 

• Health reasons 

• A home for family members who are study away from the family residence 

• Inherited the property 

• Property purchased due to marital breakdown 


7. Please tell me the top 3 reasons starting with the 1st, what attracted you to purchase in this area? 

[Show card] 1st, 2nd & 3rd choices 

• Wanted to live in this town/village 

• Close to the sea 

• Close to tourist attractions 

• Close to sports facilities 

• Good area/facilities for children 

• Association with the area 

• Family connections in the area 

• Friendliness of the area 

• Price of property in the area 

• Services within the area i.e. Doctors, hospital, shops, restaurants etc 

• Within travelling distance from permanent home 


8. Approximately, how many days per year do you spend here? Write in number 

• ...................days 

9. Do you have any relatives/friends who own a 2nd home/holiday home in this area? Please circle one response 

• Yes 

• No 

• Don’t know 

10. Do you have any relatives/friends who live permanently nearby? Please circle one response 

• Yes 

• No 


11. How did you find this property to purchase as a 2nd home? One response 

• Through an Estate Agent 

• Via the Internet 

• Driving around the area 

• Through a relative/friend 



103

12. Do you know if the previous occupier was? One response 

• Owner occupier 

• Privately rented 

• Used as2nd home/holiday home 

• Vacant 



13. Can you please tell me what facilities you use/intend to use when you are staying here? 

[Show card] All that apply. 

• Cinema (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Leisure facilities (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Water sport facilities (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Golf facilities (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Library (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Community centre (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Tourist attractions (use/have used) (intend to use) 

• Bars and restaurants (use/have used) (intend to use) 


14. Do own any other 2nd home/holiday homes? 

• Yes [to next question] 

• No [skip next 2 questions] 


15. You have stated you own another 2nd home/holiday home; how many do you own? 

• ...................[record number] 

16. Can you tell me where your other 2nd home/holiday home(s) is (are) located? 

• ....................[record location/s] 

17. Would you consider buying a 2nd home/holiday home in another location? 

• Yes [to next question] 

• No [skip next question] 


18. You stated that you would consider buying a 2nd home/holiday home in another location, can you 

please tell me where you would consider purchasing? All that apply 

• Northern Ireland (state location) 

• Republic of Ireland (state location) 

• Rest of UK (state location) 

• Other countries outside the UK (state location) 


19. Where you do your main grocery shopping when you are staying here? [Show card] 

• Portrush 

• Portstewart 

• Portballintrae 

• Bushmills 

• Coleraine 

• Castlerock 

• Bring main supply of food with me 



I now want to ask you a series of questions regarding the property which is your 2nd home. 

20. Is your 2nd home accommodation.......? 

• End terrace 

• Terraced house 

• Semi-detached house (or bungalow - specify which) 

• Detached house (or bungalow - specify which) 

• Purpose built flat 

• Converted flat 

• Flat in a commercial dwelling 

21. When was this property built? [Prompt as necessary] 

• Before 1991 

• 1991-1944 

• 1945-1964 

• 1965-1980 

• 1981-1990 

• After 1990 


22. When did you purchase this property (regardless of when you moved in)? 

• ............(year of purchase) 

• Other: indicate whether ‘Don’t know’ or ‘inherited’ 

23. Do you intend to sell this property within the next five years? (from interview) 

• Yes 

• No 


24. Can you please tell me how much you paid for this house/apartment when you purchased it 

(estimate cost)? 

• £................................(estimated cost) 


25. Can you please tell (if possible) what the estimated value of the property would be at today’s market 

value? 

• £................................(estimated value) 


26. Have you carried out any renovations or modernisations to here in the past 5 year? One response 

• Yes 



27. Can you tell me how much you spent on renovations/modernisations (estimated cost)? 

• ................................(estimated cost) 


28. Can you please tell me what the rateable value of the property is? 

• ................................(rateable value) 



105

29. If the Government proposed an additional 20% rates on 2nd homes/holiday homes to be brought in 

during 2009, how would this alter your decision to purchase. One response 

• Yes definitely 

• Yes probably 

• Yes - maybe 

• Not sure either way 

• No - maybe 

• No probably 

• No definitely 



30. Would it make you consider selling (interviewer: an extra 20% rates). One response 

• Yes definitely 

• Yes probably 

• Yes - maybe 

• Not sure either way 

• No - maybe 

• No probably 

• No definitely 



31. Is this house/apartment larger/smaller than your primary residence? 

• Larger 

• Smaller 

• The same size 

I now want to ask you a series of questions regarding your main home. 

32. Is your main home a......? Please circle one response 

• House 

• Bungalow 

• Flat/maisonette/apartment 


33. What is the distance between your main/own home and this house/apartment? 

• ................................(record distance) 


34. How do you mainly travel to this house/apartment? Please circle one response 

• Car/van 

• Train 

• Bus, minibus or coach (public or private) 

• Motorcycle, scooter or moped 


35. What is the current estimated value of your main/own home? One response 

• Less then £99,999 

• £100,000 to 149,999 

• £150,000 to 199,999 

• £200,000 to 249,999 

• £250,000 plus 


36. Is your main home...? Please circle one response 

• Owner occupied 

• Private rented 

• NIHE 

• Housing association 

37. What is your postcode for your main/own home? (interviewer: first part is enough). 

• ..................(record postcode) 

38. The next questions ask about the people you live with in your main household. I do not require names. 

I will start with the Household Reference Person (HRP) 

Person HRP 1 2...n 

Age last birthday 

Gender 

Male 

Female 

Relation to HRP 

HRP 

Partner (married) 

Partner (cohabiting) 

Partner (civil partnership) 

Child 

Parent 

Other relative 

Lodger 

Other non-relative 

Marital status 

Single (never married) 

Married (first marriage) 

Re-married 

Family Unit 

Civil partnership 

Separated (but still legally married) 

Divorced (but not legally remarried) 

Widowed(but not legally remarried) 

Co-habiting 

Employment status (persons 16+ only) 

Self employed 

Employed Part Time 

Not working -seeking work 

Not working - not seeking work 

Retired from work - excludes looking after family/home 

Retired from work - excludes looking after family/home 

Student (Further /Higher Education) 

Perm Sick/Disabled 

Looking after family/home 

Other (including schoolchild 


107

Relation to HRP HRP 1 2...n 

Ethnic groups 

White 

Chinese 

Irish Traveller 

Indian 

Pakistani 

Bangladeshi 

Black Caribbean 

Black African 

Black other 

Mixed ethnic (please specify) 

Any other (please specify) 

Now I want to ask you a question about your income. Answers of individual respondents will not be 

disclosed to anyone outside the Housing Executive’s Research Unit. 

39. What is the total income before tax and other deductions of yourself and your partner (if you have one)? 

Please include all income from employment, benefits and other sources. [Show card] One only 

• Less then £14,999 

• £15,000 to 24,999 

• £25,000 to 34,999 

• £35,000 to 44,999 

• £45,000 to 54,999 

• £55,000 plus 

• Refused 


40. How would you describe the religious make-up of this household? Please circle one response 

• Protestant 

• Catholic 

• Mixed religion (Protestant/Catholic) 

• Other 

• None 


• Refused 

41. How would you describe the religious make-up of this area? 

(Castlerock/Portrush/ Portstewart/ Portballintrae) Please circle one response 

• Protestant 

• Catholic 

• Mixed religion (Protestant/Catholic) 

• Other 

• None 


• Refused 

42. Do you have any comments? 

Thank you very much for taking part in the Survey 


APPENDIX 3: 

Semi-structured interview schedule 

Introduction: of interviewers & brief overview of research. 

1. Time & place of interview. 

2. Names of respondent/s & organisations. 

3. Area of operations. 

4. Performance of the local housing market: we would like to discuss some aspects of the performance 

of the housing market in the Causeway Coast area, especially Castlerock, Portstewart, Portrush and 

Portballintrae. 

4.1. Firstly, thinking just about the last five years: what were the main trends in the local housing market 

in terms of prices, new building, conversion or redevelopment? (Prompts: house prices including 

apartments; where prices have risen most rapidly; house building including apartments, conversions 

& redevelopment; where is most new building going on?) 

4.2. Secondly, thinking over a longer period: have recent trends been similar to or different from trends 

before 2000? 

4.3. Who are the main purchasers of newly-built dwellings in this area? (Prompt: household types, ages, 

social classes, locals, outsiders or mix.) 

4.4. Who are the main purchasers of existing dwellings - not newly-built? (Prompt for significance of 

developers & 2nd home purchasers.) 

5. Views about the local housing market: I’d like to explore your perceptions of the housing market 

and the community in the Causeway Coast area. Please say whether you agree or disagree with the 

following statements & how strongly you feel, on a 5-point scale: agree strongly -agree - neither agree 

nor disagree - disagree -strongly disagree - don’t know 

• Private house building has been at a higher level than expected. (Comments?) 

• House prices have increased above the general rate of inflation. (Comments?) 

• Household growth was a major factor affecting local demand. (Comments?) 

• There has been too much redevelopment of perfectly good housing. (Comments?) 

• House price increases have priced locals out of the housing market. (Comments?) 

• More social or affordable housing should be provided locally (If respondent agrees, ask ‘how’ & 

explore possible constraints including RTB; any other comments?.) 

• There are too many 2nd homes in the area. (Any comments on impact of 2nd homes?) 

• Planning should stop the development of more 2nd homes in the area. (If respondent agrees ask 

‘how?’; if disagrees ask ‘why?’; prompt about changes to policy or management of process; any 

other comments?) 

6 Do you have any other comments on planning & 2nd homes? 

7. Have other factors had major effects on the local housing market? (Explore if ‘yes’.) 

8. How do you see the area developing over the next 5 years? 


109

APPENDIX 4: 

NISRA Omnibus Module on Second Homes 

NB: the actual questions have been edited for clarity of presentation here. 

The next questions are about 2nd homes. The definition of a 2nd home is a property which is used for 

leisure purposes by you, your family or your friends. 

Which of the following statements applies to you? 

• I/we currently own a 2nd home (or homes) 

• I/we currently own a 2nd (or homes) and considering buying another one or more 

• I/we do not own a 2nd home but am/are actively seeking to buy one 

• I/we do not own a 2nd home but likely to buy one in next 2 years 

• I/we do not own a 2nd home and not considering purchasing one at present 

[For respondents who may purchase a 2nd home] Can you tell me where you are considering purchasing? 

• NI 

• RoI 

• Other UK 

• Other countries outside UK 

• No definite location at this stage. 

[For respondents stating a location] Where exactly? 

[For respondent that own a 2nd home] How many 2nd homes you own? 

• ...................(record number) 

Where is/are the second home/s? (Starting with the one visited most often) 1 

• NI 

• RoI 

• Other UK 

• Other countries outside UK 

Where exactly [in NI/the RoI/rest of UK/outside UK]? 

• ...................(record place) 

[For respondents that own a second home] As a 2nd home owner, can you please tell me how you got this 

property? 

• Inherited the property 

• Inherited the site and built the property 

• Purchased the property. 

[For respondents that built or purchased] How did you finance the building or purchase of the property? 

• Used existing savings and/or investment 

• Used equity withdrawal from primary residence 

• Used a traditional mortgage 

• Used a buy-to-let mortgage 

• Other (specify). 

[For respondents that built or purchased] At the moment, do you? 

• Own the property outright 

• Have a traditional mortgage 

• Have a buy-to-let mortgage? 



[For respondents that own a 2nd home] List your top 3 reasons in order of importance why you have a 2nd 

home? 

• Holiday home/weekend retreat/lifestyle motivation 

• Retirement home (now or in future) 

• An investment 

• Base for commuting to work 

• Health reasons 

• Home for family members studying away from the family residence 

• Inherited it 

• Purchased due to marital breakdown 


[For respondents that own a second home] Approximately how many days per year do you spend at your 

(main) 2nd home? 

• Up to 29 

• 30 - 90 

• 91 - 120 

• 121 - 150 

• 151 days or more 

• Only just bought/not sure yet. 

[For respondents that built or purchased] How did you find the property to purchase as a 2nd home? 

• Through an estate agent 

• Via the internet 

• Driving around the area 

• Through a relative/friend 


[All respondents that own a second home] How do you mainly travel to your 2nd home? 

• Car/Van 

• Train 

• Bus/minibus or coach (public or private) 

• Motorcycle, scooter or moped 



111

September 2008 

www.nihe.gov.uk 

CS/335/07/08

Second Homes in Northern Ireland - Growth, Impact & Policy ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?