Why resort communities outperform their size

There were many bright spots for transit across the country in recent years, but one particular example that’s eluded national attention? Resort communities.

Across the country, smaller resort-based transit systems are delivering performance outcomes that far exceed what their population size—or “rural” designation—would suggest. In doing so, they are redefining what effective transit can look like outside major metropolitan areas.

What makes a resort community different?

While there is no formal definition of a “resort community,” these places are typically nonmetropolitan regions whose economies are dominated by tourism and hospitality. They experience extreme seasonal swings in population, employment, and transit demand, while offering high quality of life, scenic beauty, and recreational access. Many have also become magnets for remote workers and retirees, driving population growth rates two to three times the national average since 2020.

That growth figure most likely understates reality. Many resort communities also have large shares of part-time residents who are excluded from official population counts, even as they place significant demands on local infrastructure.

The result of this exploding population growth is predictable strain. Peak-season congestion, long commutes, and acute housing shortages—particularly for service-sector workers—are now defining challenges. Workers are increasingly pushed to outlying areas, far from job centers and transit services. At the same time, many of these transit agencies operate with limited or nonexistent dedicated state funding. Federal rural transit programs such as FTA Section 5311 help, but they fall well short of meeting needs.

Geography is also a crucial factor when planning transit in these communities. Resort communities are frequently hemmed in by mountains, water, or protected land, limiting sprawl and funneling travel into a small number of corridors. Their tourism-driven economies further concentrate trips toward resort bases, beaches, casinos, hotel clusters, or national parks. These conditions strongly favor frequent, high-quality service along a few key routes.

For resort communities, failing to solve transportation challenges has direct economic consequences: difficulty attracting and retaining workers, degraded visitor experiences, and potential long-term impacts on the tourism economy itself. This reality has forced transit agencies, local governments, and business leaders to become unusually creative in how they design service, secure funding, and build regional partnerships in order to deliver effective public transit service.

Designing transit for concentrated demand.

As a result, many resort communities have emerged as leaders in high-performance transit design. Rather than attempting to replicate big-city bus networks, these systems concentrate fixed-line resources where demand is strongest and extend coverage flexibly elsewhere.

This approach—often described as integrated transit—prioritizes fast, frequent, and direct fixed-route service on core corridors, while using on-demand microtransit to provide broader geographic coverage.  In other words, by deploying the right modes in the right places, while supporting seamless, intermodal journeys, these communities are better at connecting workers to jobs and improving the experience for visitors as well. 

Many resort systems also offer zero-fare service and market transit aggressively to both residents and visitors, further boosting ridership and visibility.

High-performing resort transit in practice.

Throughout the US transit agencies serving resort communities are hitting transit performance targets in league with their much better-resourced, big-city counterparts. 

Some examples that caught our attention recently include:

• High-ridership, high-productivity service: Steamboat Springs’ fixed-route service averages more than 35 passengers per revenue-hour. South Lake Tahoe’s Lake Link microtransit service, which launched in 2022, serves more than 1,000 riders per day at a productivity of more than nine passengers per revenue-hour making the service among the most productive on-demand services in North America. High Valley Transit, meanwhile, recognized by APTA, achieved one of the fastest ridership growth rates among small U.S. agencies, now exceeding 1.6 million annual trips.
• Expanded coverage through microtransit: Crested Butte replaced three seasonal circulator routes with an on-demand service that expanded coverage from 70% to 100% of residents. On Long Island’s South Fork, Suffolk Transit replaced underperforming fixed routes with on-demand zones, improving coverage while reducing operating costs.
• Embracing commingling to reduce costs: Agencies such as Sarasota’s Breeze Transit and High Valley Transit have shared fleets, drivers, and technology across paratransit, microtransit, and specialized services improving on-time performance, increasing efficiency, and expanding same-day mobility for riders who previously faced long booking windows.
• Creative funding sources: Resort transit agencies are leaders in nontraditional funding. Parking revenues, transient occupancy taxes, homeowner association fees, and direct business contributions now fund significant portions of service in places like Tahoe and Truckee—reducing congestion while aligning transportation funding with tourism impacts.
• Private vehicle restrictions near tourist destinations: At many National Parks, traffic congestion degrades the natural environment and jeopardizes the visitor experience. To address these challenges, the National Parks Service has implemented private-car bans in sensitive locations such as Zion National Park’s Scenic Drive. Visitors must instead board a shuttle service with a frequency of 5-15 minutes during the peak season. Launched in 2000, that shuttle service has since displaced more than 95 million private-car trips and recently transitioned to an all-electric fleet funded by a $33 million federal grant. 

Lessons for the broader transit community.

Resort communities are showing what becomes possible when transit is treated as essential economic infrastructure instead of a social service of last resort. Their success reflects tight alignment between land use, travel demand, funding incentives, and service design which are conditions that many larger systems struggle to achieve.

As small and mid-sized transit agencies across the country face mounting pressures, resort communities offer a clear lesson: constraint can be a catalyst for innovation, and high performance is achievable even in rural environments. If anything, these systems suggest that the future of high-impact transit may be emerging first in the places in which it was least expected.