Archaeology excavation dig

R

Roro999

Registered User
Messages
399
As part of our planning permission for an extension we have to have an archaeologist attend the foundations dig. The house is very close to an archaeology site.

Is there insurance that we can take out should the dig uncover artifacts or something bigger that would require further investigations as we understand we bare the cost of any additional archaeology investigations.
 
Roro999 said:
Is there insurance that we can take out should the dig uncover artifacts or something bigger that would require further investigations as we understand we bare the cost of any additional archaeology investigations.
Click to expand...
So if something was found during the dig, do you get to keep it?
Considering it's on your land or if it was a national treasure would you need to hand it over to authorities for safe keeping?
 
Archaeological digs are mainly conducted to learn stuff, not to recover valuable items. In so far as items are recovered, however much historical interest they have most of them have negligible commercial value; nobody will pay anything for the contents of a Viking kitchen midden, and even a medieval belt-buckle won't fetch more than a few euros at an antiquarian fair.

If an archaelogical object is found it belongs to the State. The finder is supposed to report the find to the National Museum. In this case the finder will be the archaeologist, not the property owner, and being a professional archaeologist they will of course report it. The Minister has a discretion to pay a finder's reward, depending on the historical signficance, rarity, condition, research value, etc of the object found and the circumstances of the find. A reward would not usually be paid to a professional archaeologist working on a licensed dig. But even if a reward were paid it would go to the finder, not the landowner.

Having said that, as landowner you can control the terms on which the dig happens. (You can't complete the extension without the dig going ahead, but you always have the right not to carry on with the extension, in which case you don't have to permit a dig.) So, when arrangements for the dig are being made, you can try to negotiate a term which provides that, if any finder's reward is paid in relation to an object found during the dig, the finder will pay a percentage of that reward to you.

But I wouldn't bother. The chances of a reward being paid at all are extremely small and, where rewards are paid, they are typically in the range of hundreds of euros, or low thousands of euros for a really exceptional find.
 
The fact that this has come up would be enough to put me off going ahead with the extension.
 
MrEarl said:
The fact that this has come up would be enough to put me off going ahead with the extension.
Click to expand...
But you would have thought the land was clear enough due to the fact the house itself is already built on the land?
As in the general area would have been checked, unless the extension is very big and going to further than the main building?
 
MrEarl said:
The fact that this has come up would be enough to put me off going ahead with the extension.
Click to expand...
Depends on how badly you need the extra room, doesn't it?

The initial commitment is only to have an archaeologist attend the foundation dig. You'll have to pay for the archaeologist, so that adds to the cost of the project, but you can factor that in to your overall cost-benefit analysis. The cost shouldn't be huge, because the excavation for the foundations shouldn't take very long.

All going well, nothing is turned up except a few rusting bottle tops and the bones of a much-loved family pet buried by previous owners of the house.

At worst — and this is a very small chance — something is turned up which causes the archaeologist to determine that a full archaeological excavation is required before the development can proceed. It's only at this point that you need to take a decision as to whether to proceed with the development, given the addtional cost (and delay) occasioned by the dig, or just abandon the project, fill in the hole dug for the foundations, and write off the money already spent.

So, the initial decision you need to make is whether to risk spending the cost of digging the hole and paying for the archaeologist, given that there is a small (but non-zero) chance that what is found in the hole might mean the project becomes uneconomic and so does not proceed.

Be aware that there's always a risk that, when you start a construction project, something turns up that means the project costs more, or takes longer, than initially projected — you hit bedrock at a place where you weren't expecting to*, or you discover a limestone cave where your foundations were going to be**, or you find human remains***, or whatever. These are small, but non-zero, risks.

[* That one happened to me — small project, but the cost went up by about 20% as a result.]

[** Happened to a friend — cost him a fortune to have the cavity filled with concrete before construction could proceed. He didn't have a choice because the cavity was imperilling the existing structure.]

[*** Not so far, DG.]
 
TomEdison said:
Be aware that there's always a risk that, when you start a construction project, something turns up that means the project costs more, or takes longer, than initially projected
Click to expand...
I'm aware of a large-ish project where a small underground river was discovered to be running through the foundations....after the foundations were poured and thought to be set and ready to start the works proper. It must have been a dry period when the foundations were first poured, but it added maybe 10% to 15% and millions of euro to the cost of the project.

You can design and plan as much as you like but there's no knowing what you'll find when the shovel goes into the ground.
 
Roro999 said:
As part of our planning permission for an extension we have to have an archaeologist attend the foundations dig. The house is very close to an archaeology site.
Click to expand...
Relatively easy to assess the "risk" by understanding the archaeology site you are close to. Is it of exceptional importance and would similar sites have shown spread out elements that were considered important?

Do some research into the archaeology site close by, see if there are any reports, maybe find out who the lead archaeologist was and make contact with him/her for an opinion.

It suggests the council doesn't think there's anything there as it just says that they want the archaeologist in attendance rather than any full survey.

Maybe pick a 2 meter spot and do some manual digging to the depth of the foundations and see if you find anything yourself.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top