Archaeological finds adjacent to property: Costs, experiences?

Hello,

we have run into a surprising situation shortly before submitting our simplified building application for a single-family house in Lower Saxony. Any tip would be helpful!

Situation:

[*
Residential area with development plan from 2002. Our plot was purchased in 2020, almost simultaneously with other future neighbors. 4 existing buildings constructed around 2005-2010.
[*]During the processing of the building application of a future neighbor, it came up:
[LIST]
[*]"The plans are located immediately adjacent to the archaeological site XYZ. This is a settlement site from the Roman imperial period. Further found sites in the vicinity underscore the importance of the area for the concerns of monument preservation. Therefore, archaeological structures in the soil are to be expected. From a monument conservation perspective, it is therefore necessary to precede earthworks with excavations by which the archaeological remains are documented, excavated and recovered."


[*]Context: The regional archaeologist responsible was recently changed. What was absolutely no problem for the predecessor and the construction of the 4 existing buildings (and therefore was not mentioned by the municipality during the sale!) is now apparently relevant.

Now the question: How should we assess this? Do we have to pay for all of this? Should parts be borne by the municipality – after all, this was not mentioned in the purchase contract, although archaeological finds are documented? Is it somehow possible to limit this?

I have no intention of sinking thousands of euros into unforeseeable expenses. As an absolute emergency plan, I would rather withdraw from the purchase.

Grateful for any experience/assessment/tips on how to proceed!

Best regards - P

Your risk, in my opinion, is only the standstill during the earthworks. This can be problematic if you already have the financing running at that time. Do not withhold this clause from the contractor under any circumstances. If the information was withheld by the city, you can of course contest the contract.

Do we have to pay for all of this?

What are you supposed to pay?

In my opinion, your only risk is the standstill during the earthworks.

That's what I heard too: if something is found during earthworks, a construction standstill threatens.
Whose expense then (your delay), I don't know.

They say the worst thing that can happen is finding some shard in the ground. A bomb is nothing compared to that, it happens fast ... delays of more than 12 months are the result. I would suggest talking to a local architect or contacting the archaeologist to find out what this specifically means for you.

This is regulated differently depending on the federal state or district. It is common for the builder to pay the costs for the archaeological investigation. However, there can also be a sharing of costs or subsidies. Just inquire with the responsible [Landesamt für Denkmalpflege]. Many [Denkmalämter] also have relevant information on their websites.

Just as feedback again. I am surprised at the knowledge vacuum one encounters on this topic at construction and property offices, on the internet, and in communities. Especially since the pain for the individual affected is quite high when the financial and delay risks cannot be estimated.

But now the good news at least for Lower Saxony: In a conversation with the friendly responsible archaeologist, it was *casually* mentioned that there is a reasonableness limit for incurred costs. This is 5% of the estimated costs of the construction project for natural persons. That is still a lot of money, but the risk becomes calculable and the specter of financial ruin is off the table.

The kicker now is the source of this statement: justification for the government draft of the legislative proposal for the Lower Saxony Monument Protection Act in 2011. p. 13. Seriously? Can't something like this be presented a bit more transparently for builders? Like an FAQ at the building authority maybe?

If I have misunderstood anything: always happy for clarification. I am not a lawyer.

In summary, all good: nothing stands in the way of the building application anymore.