Accessibility and communications when choosing a province

Accessibility is often assessed superficially during a property search — buyers glance at the map, work out a rough travel time, and move on to other criteria — when in reality it is one of the factors with the biggest impact on how much a property actually gets used, day to day or occasionally. A beautiful property that is hard to reach may end up being visited far less than planned, and a livestock or arable property with poor access can seriously complicate the logistics of running it, from moving machinery to bringing in harvests.

It is also one of the hardest factors to fix after buying: while other aspects of a property can be improved over time (facilities, utilities, even vegetation), the location and the layout of the main access routes are, in practice, beyond the individual owner's control, apart from occasional improvements to the final stretch if it is privately owned. That is why a careful assessment of accessibility before buying carries disproportionate weight compared with other criteria that can be corrected later.

This guide focuses on how to realistically evaluate the accessibility and communications of a province — and, more importantly, of the specific area within it — distinguishing between theoretical and effective distance, and helping you decide how much proximity your particular project actually needs.

It is worth framing this guide within the broader method described in the guide on how to choose the right province for a property, where accessibility is one of the five main decision criteria. Here it is developed in more depth, because, together with climate, it tends to be the criterion that most determines whether a project is viable in day-to-day practice, beyond how attractive it may look on paper.

A common mistake when assessing accessibility is to focus only on the distance in kilometres between the property and the usual reference point (home, place of work, airport). That figure can be very misleading: a short distance on a winding mountain road can take as long, or longer, than a greater distance on a motorway. What matters for the practical use of the property is the real travel time under normal conditions, not the distance on the map.

It is also worth bearing in mind how much that time varies depending on the time of year and day of the week: a road that flows smoothly during the week can become congested on weekends in high season if the area receives tourist traffic, and a mountain road may take longer or even be affected by adverse weather conditions in winter. Calculating travel time under a reasonable worst-case scenario, not just the best case, gives a more realistic picture of effective accessibility.

A practical way to check this before deciding is to make the actual journey, using standard navigation tools, at different times and, if possible, in person before buying — looking at a map on a screen is not enough. Many buyers discover, after several visits, that the real access time is noticeably different from what they had initially worked out on paper.

It is also worth calculating not just the time for the main leg of the journey (for example, from the city of residence to the motorway exit closest to the property), but also the time for the final stretch, which is often proportionally the slowest despite being the shortest in distance. It is common for most of the journey to be covered quickly on fast roads, with the last few kilometres, on a secondary road or rural track, taking up a disproportionate share of the total time — something worth keeping in mind when calculating overall accessibility.

Standard navigation tools offer a reasonable first estimate, but should be used with some judgement: they tend to calculate travel time under optimal traffic conditions and do not always accurately reflect the particularities of an unpaved rural track or a narrow, winding mountain road. Comparing the digital estimate with real experience, by making the journey in person before deciding, remains the most reliable method, especially for the final stretch of the route, which these tools tend to represent least accurately.

The type of road giving access to the property matters as much as the distance. A property close to a motorway or a well-maintained national road offers very different access from one reached only via a narrow secondary road or, for the final stretch, an unpaved rural track. This last stretch — often the shortest in distance but the most decisive in practice — deserves particular attention: it is worth asking who is responsible for its maintenance (whether it is a public municipal track or a private one shared with other properties) and what condition it is in at different times of the year.

A rural track in good condition in summer can become difficult to use after heavy rain, especially for non off-road vehicles, which can limit access at certain times of year or make it harder for agricultural machinery, delivery trucks or emergency vehicles to get in. This is especially relevant for properties intended for farming or livestock, where regular access for machinery and load-carrying vehicles is a normal part of running the operation.

It is also worth assessing the width and condition of the access roads in relation to the vehicles that will foreseeably need to enter the property: a track wide enough for a car may not be wide enough for a delivery truck, a combine harvester or a vehicle with a livestock trailer. Checking this before buying, especially if the project depends on machinery of a certain size, avoids discovering after the purchase that certain logistical operations are much more complicated than expected, or that the track needs to be widened or reinforced at the owner's own expense.

The real need for proximity varies greatly depending on the project, and it is worth being honest about this before setting accessibility criteria. A farming or livestock project with daily activity normally requires living nearby or, at the very least, being able to travel to the property very frequently, which makes everyday accessibility an almost disqualifying criterion. A leisure project with weekend or holiday visits allows for greater distance, provided the travel time at those specific moments is reasonable. An investment project without active management may allow for even less immediate accessibility, though it should not be neglected entirely, because a property with poor access can also be harder to sell in the future.

Another aspect worth considering is proximity to services that may be needed with some urgency, such as a health centre or a fire station, especially if the project involves permanent residence or activities that carry some risk (livestock, heavy machinery). Distance to these services is not just a matter of convenience but, in certain circumstances, of safety, and it is worth bearing in mind when assessing whether an area's accessibility is sufficient for the intended use.

It is also worth thinking about accessibility from the perspective of third parties who may need to reach the property: suppliers, maintenance technicians, buyers of an eventual harvest, or even future buyers of the property itself if reselling is considered at some point. A property that is hard to access not only complicates life for the person living there, but can also limit third parties' interest in working with it or buying it in the future — a factor worth weighing even if it is not the immediate priority at the time of purchase.

Before settling on a province or a specific area within it, it is worth making the access journey in person, ideally more than once and under different conditions, rather than relying solely on maps or on what the listing says. Asking the seller or local residents directly about the state of the access road in winter, after heavy rain, or during periods of heavier traffic usually provides information that does not appear in any general description.

It is also worth checking who is responsible for maintaining the final stretch of the access route, especially if it is a private or shared track, since its upkeep may depend on an agreement between several owners rather than on the local council. This information, together with the road's actual condition, is often just as relevant to the final decision as the theoretical distance to the nearest city.

Finally, it is worth putting this whole assessment into perspective: no rural property will have the level of accessibility of an urban home, and it is not realistic to expect it. The goal is not to rule out any property that lacks perfect access in all conditions, but to understand precisely each candidate's real level of accessibility and compare it against what the specific project needs, in order to make an informed decision rather than discovering access limitations after buying, when they are much harder to resolve. This same accessibility criterion, applied not to the province but to the municipality and the specific plot, is revisited in more detail in the guide cluster dedicated to what to look at, at municipal level, before buying a property.