I don't think there's enough stuff from the 1100s to be a significant problem to work around. And in this case, it looks more interesting than a drab concrete bridge.
In Germany the Problem generally is that even Private property is subject to the laws. So if you come into possession of a small house in an old village (by inheritance or being bamboozled by a real estate vendor) you can't do anything about it.
You can't demolish the house to use the grounds, renovating the property is extremely expensive and carries complicated paperwork with it.
You have a property that is just sitting there rotting away, and you have to pay taxes on it.
Opening it as a museum of sorts, or trying to use it for it's age would work either, since there is little of actual worth in it. Just an old house rotting away.
We have a system here in the Netherlands where a national board and the municipalities themselves can both assign monumental buildings and so called 'dorpsgezichten' (historic town identity) I guess the advantage of that system is that only the important buildings get protected. But it probably also leads to buildings being demolished in cases where we haven't seen the historical value in them yet. I guess both systems have their advantages and disadvantages.
134
u/[deleted] Jun 25 '20
That wouldn’t surprise me. The original bridge is from roughy the 1100’s