Moving beyond the hype: A pragmatic approach to urban robotics

Author: Bern Grush

Date Published: July 26, 2025

As municipal planners, you’ve likely encountered the growing buzz around mobile robots in urban environments. Headlines trumpet cities deploying autonomous delivery bots, robotic security patrols, and smart maintenance systems. The promise is alluring: increased efficiency, cost savings, and the coveted title of “smart city leader.” But beneath the marketing materials and pilot project press releases lies a more complex reality that requires careful consideration and strategic planning.

The question isn’t whether public-area mobile robots (PMRs), will play a role in municipal operations and urban mobility systems—they almost certainly will. The question is how your city can approach this technology thoughtfully, avoiding common pitfalls while positioning yourself for meaningful, scalable implementation.

The current landscape: Learning from early adopters

Cities across the world have experimented with various robotic applications. Some have deployed sidewalk delivery robots for food and package delivery. Others have tested autonomous vehicles for security patrols in public spaces. Still others have explored robotic solutions for maintenance tasks like street sweeping, snow removal, or park maintenance. While these pilots generate headlines and conference presentations, the results have been mixed.

The reality is that most early implementations face significant challenges: regulatory uncertainty, public acceptance issues, technical limitations, and questions about long-term viability. However, these early adopters have generated valuable lessons that can inform your approach.

Start with problems, not solutions

One of the most common mistakes municipalities make is beginning with the technology rather than the problem. A vendor approaches with an impressive demonstration of their delivery robot or maintenance bot, and suddenly the city is planning a pilot without clearly defining what problem they’re solving.

Instead, begin with your operational challenges. Are you struggling with lawn maintenance costs in your extensive park system? Do you have staffing shortages for routine inspections of municipal assets? Are there safety concerns for workers performing certain tasks? Once you’ve identified specific problems, you can evaluate whether robotic solutions offer meaningful improvements over existing approaches.

For example, if maintaining grass in city parks is consuming significant resources, robotic mowers present a compelling case. They operate quietly, reduce emissions compared to gas-powered equipment, can work during off-hours, and free up staff for more complex tasks. This represents a clear value proposition beyond simply “having robots.”

The scalability question

Perhaps the most critical consideration is scalability. A pilot with two robots might work beautifully, but what happens when you’re managing twenty, or two hundred? This isn’t just about procurement costs—though those matter. You need to consider the infrastructure requirements, maintenance protocols, staff training, insurance implications, and regulatory frameworks necessary to support larger deployments.

Before launching any pilot, ask yourself: if this technology proves successful, are we prepared to scale it? Do we have the departmental capacity to manage a fleet of robots? Have we considered the policy implications of widespread deployment? If the answer is no, you may be setting yourself up for a successful pilot that leads nowhere—an expensive proof of concept with no path forward.

Balancing delivery robots with municipal service applications

Much of the current attention focuses on delivery robots, which address consumer convenience but may not align with municipal priorities. While these systems can reduce vehicle trips and provide services to mobility-limited residents, they also introduce new traffic management challenges and may not serve all community members equitably.

Consider balancing consumer-focused applications with robots that directly support municipal operations. Robotic systems for sidewalk maintenance, asset inspection, environmental monitoring, or emergency response support may offer more direct municipal value. These applications can improve service delivery while building internal expertise with robotic systems.

Collaborative learning and risk distribution

Rather than going it alone, consider coordinating with neighboring municipalities. Identify three or four potential robotic applications and distribute them among partner cities. One might pilot robotic snow clearing, another autonomous park maintenance, a third robotic infrastructure inspection, and a fourth delivery services. Share findings, challenges, and lessons learned.

This approach offers several advantages: it reduces individual risk, accelerates learning across the region, allows for comparative analysis of different applications, and builds a network of expertise that can inform future decisions. It also strengthens your position when negotiating with vendors, as you are part of a larger potential market.

Building internal capacity

As robotic systems move from pilots to operational deployment, you will experience a growing need for dedicated expertise. Robotics cuts across traditional departmental boundaries—involving IT, public works, transportation, legal, and procurement teams. Rather than duplicating knowledge across departments, consider establishing centralized robotics as an emerging technology function.

This doesn’t necessarily mean hiring robotics engineers immediately—or at all. It might start with designating existing staff members to develop enough expertise and coordinate robotics initiatives across departments. Over time, as deployments scale, you can build more specialized capacity.

Regulatory and policy considerations

Before launching any pilot, investigate existing regulations at state or provincial and national or federal levels that might affect your project. Many jurisdictions have not yet begun developing frameworks for autonomous systems in public spaces. Understanding existing frameworks and identifying gaps before you dive in can save significant effort and disappointment later.

Additionally, consider what local policies you might need to develop. This includes operational protocols, privacy protections, liability frameworks, and public engagement processes. While you don’t need comprehensive policies before piloting, you should understand what will be required for full deployment so that you are ready as your pilots meet with success.

Indoor vs. outdoor applications

Indoor and outdoor robotic applications present fundamentally different challenges. Outdoor robots must navigate weather, varied terrain, pedestrians, vehicles, and complex regulatory environments. Indoor applications in municipal buildings offer more controlled environments and will serve different operational needs—possibly encountering especially vulnerable pedestrians in some municipal buildings.

Both indoor and outdoor devices have their place in municipal operations, but they require different technical approaches, vendor relationships, and operational protocols. Don’t assume expertise in one translates directly to the other. Even a robot for security patrol will have different considerations indoors and outdoors. For example, data privacy requirements might be quite different. Consider also whether robots operating inside buildings may have special obligations regarding your employees working in that building.

Managing expectations and building support

Public acceptance is crucial for successful deployment. This means engaging with those people who might be serviced by or simply bystanders to, robot operations. Advise such people early and transparently about pilots and potential deployments. Be honest about what you’re testing and why.

Be prepared to address concerns about safety, privacy, and job displacement proactively. Similarly, build support within your organization by clearly communicating the problems you’re trying to solve and how success will be measured. Avoid the temptation to oversell the technology or promise transformational changes from initial pilots. Pilots bring learning and appreciation. Transformation comes much later.

This balanced approach to stakeholder engagement reflects a broader philosophy that should guide your entire robotics strategy.

Start now, but go slow: The readiness imperative

This may sound contradictory, but municipalities need to start now while going slow—a balance that’s crucial for navigating the current robotics landscape effectively. The apparent paradox resolves when you understand what “starting now” actually means and why both urgency and caution are simultaneously justified.

Starting now acknowledges that the technology is rapidly maturing across multiple applications. Regulatory frameworks are being developed at higher government levels, often without municipal input. Vendor capabilities and business models—particularly robots-as-a-service contracts—are evolving quickly. Staff training needs are becoming clearer as early adopters share their experiences. Most importantly, the definition of municipal “readiness” is crystallizing, and you need time to achieve it thoughtfully.

Going slow recognizes that the technology isn’t fully mature, and costs remain high—not just for equipment, but for the organizational learning curve. Early implementations may require significant customization and ongoing technical support. Public acceptance varies widely and requires careful cultivation. Perhaps most critically, rushing into deployments without proper preparation can create unrealistic expectations internally and externally, leading to disappointment even when pilots technically succeed.

Readiness will take effort. It’s not about purchasing equipment or launching pilots immediately. True readiness means developing organizational knowledge about what’s available and realistic. It means understanding how robots-as-a-service contracts should be structured and managed—these agreements often involve complex liability, maintenance, and data ownership provisions that require careful review. You may want regulations that guide that. It means identifying which staff members need what type of training, and when. It means establishing relationships with peer municipalities and understanding their experiences. It means having frameworks in place for evaluating proposals objectively rather than reactively or based on technical appeal alone.

Starting your learning process now doesn’t commit you to any particular timeline for deployment. Instead, it positions you to make informed decisions when opportunities arise—whether that’s in six months or three years. The municipalities that will benefit most from robotics are those that understand the technology’s capabilities and limitations before they need to make procurement decisions under pressure.

Build your confidence in robotics applications through knowledge and understanding rather than relying entirely on vendor demonstrations. This means engaging with the broader municipal robotics community, understanding both successes and failures from early adopters, and developing internal expertise gradually. When you eventually move to pilot projects, you’ll do so with realistic expectations and proper preparation rather than hopeful experimentation.

A “start now, go slow” approach protects you from both extremes: being caught unprepared when valuable opportunities arise, and being burned by premature commitments. It acknowledges that the future of municipal robotics is promising while respecting the complexity of implementing these systems successfully.

Moving forward strategically

The robotics industry will continue evolving rapidly, with new capabilities and applications emerging regularly. Your goal isn’t to be first—it’s to be thoughtful, strategic, and ultimately successful. This means focusing on several key principles:

• Starting with clear problem definitions rather than cool technology

• Anticipating the implications of—and possibly planning for—scalability from the outset

• Building internal expertise and collaborative networks

• Understanding regulatory requirements before they become obstacles

• Engaging stakeholders honestly about capabilities and limitations.

The cities that will benefit most from robotic technology are those that approach it as one tool among many for improving municipal services and urban livability, rather than as an end in itself. By focusing on concrete problems, building appropriate capacity, and learning from others’ experiences, you can position your municipality to deploy robotics effectively when and where they add genuine value.

The future of public-area mobile robotics is promising, but it requires careful navigation. Take the time to plan thoughtfully, and you’ll be better positioned to realize the genuine benefits this technology can offer your community.

~~~~~

When you are ready to embark on a project that involves public-area mobile robots in your city, we are here to help you with vendor-independent planning issues. Contact Lee St. James, Managing Director, leestj@urbanroboticsfoundation.org