No, I also don't think the buyer will have a big problem here because of the development, etc. But from the seller's perspective, it does seem a bit strange to subdivide one's property like that. I would assume someone who thinks like that has a "difficult" character and would also think long and hard about whether I want to have them as a neighbor. Legally, I see no concerns here, everything is manageable.
But from the seller's perspective, it does seem a bit strange to subdivide his property like that.
Where do you see a subdivision, ?
above all, it is a settlement on the mountain.
It is an outer area, so not everything that land could offer is permitted under building law. Let's assume… No, I did ask for a Google snippet, everything else here is pure speculation, which Maps could clarify a bit.
I assumed that the area to the right of the red-bordered part is to remain in the seller's possession, but he also has land on the left side (not fully visible in the excerpt). So if he lives on the right side in the existing property at the front, but the red-bordered part is to be sold, then I would consider that a subdivision of his total property. If everything is really designated as outdoor area, then I would also become legally suspicious and doubt whether the red-bordered part can simply be built on like that.