Public-area Mobile Robots Through a Planner's Lens

Author: Adam Beck

Date Published: December 7, 2025

The successful integration of public-area mobile robots (PMRs) into urban environments depends fundamentally on understanding their relationship with urban planning. While technological capabilities and regulatory frameworks matter, the physical, spatial, and institutional infrastructure of cities ultimately determines PMR operational effectiveness.

From an urban planning perspective, PMR deployment represents a complex intersection of infrastructure capacity, land use policy, and governance coordination. Cities treating PMR integration as merely technology adoption risk repeating the chaotic deployments of ride-hailing services and e-scooters. Those approaching it as a comprehensive urban planning opportunity position themselves to capture benefits while managing risks.

Infrastructure and Spatial Readiness

The physical infrastructure of cities was designed primarily for human pedestrian movement and vehicular traffic. PMR integration demands reassessing how these spaces function and accommodate automated devices and tasks without compromising existing users' experience.

Cornell Tech researchers developed a "robotability score" for New York City streets, finding areas with the highest robotability were 4.3 times more suitable than those with the lowest scores. Six features comprised almost half the robotability score: pedestrian density, crowd dynamics, pedestrian flow, sidewalk quality, street width, and street furniture density.

Most urban sidewalks weren't designed for both pedestrian traffic and automated devices, nor street trees, sidewalk dining or parked food delivery bicycles. Many fail to meet accessibility standards for wheelchair users, let alone provide clearance for robots and pedestrians sharing space. Cities are proactively readying their public realm by conducting comprehensive sidewalk network audits before deciding to permit PMR operations. Irvine, California, and the Sunshine Coast in Queensland Australia, are just some of the cities to deploy sensor-equipped robots to scan for infrastructure barriers, demonstrating proactive gap identification.

Infrastructure requirements extend beyond width to include obstacle reduction, universal accessibility features, curb ramps, and surface quality. Planners must consider clearway width and activation zones where pedestrians interact with building entrances and commercial activities. Commercial districts' vibrant characteristics—sidewalk cafes, retail displays, street vendors—simultaneously make them economically successful yet challenging for PMR operation without careful orchestration.

So, cities who wish to attract innovation in urban mobility, including PMRs, must consider planning new assets that can also facilitate PMR operations, including charging stations, maintenance facilities, dedicated zones, and pickup/drop-off areas. The location, size, and allocation of these assets have significant implications for land use, public space allocation, and economic development opportunities. Minneapolis and Seattle received $14.8 million in federal SMART grants to manage limited curb space challenges. Cities implementing digital curb management systems before PMR deployment reaches scale can avoid zero-sum competition through dynamic allocation, real-time data, and flexible pricing mechanisms.

Land Use and Place Integration

Existing zoning codes rarely address PMRs explicitly, creating regulatory ambiguity that complicates deployment when it arrives. Cities must determine whether PMRs constitute commercial activity, delivery services, or transportation infrastructure. This classification affects where they operate, storage facility locations, and development approval requirements.

Las Vegas established conditional use permits for PMR operations, allowing deployment in specific zones with stipulated operating conditions. However, Councilwoman Olivia Diaz opposed deployment near elementary schools without adequate legal protections. This controversy highlighted tensions between innovation promotion and traditional planning concerns for safety and community character. Cities may therefore consider developing contextual zoning approaches, balancing innovation with community impacts.

Different districts can pose unique PMR integration challenges. Commercial areas, for example, offer high delivery demand but feature congested sidewalks and complex pedestrian flows. Mixed-use districts require careful coordination between PMRs serving residential and commercial customers. Residential neighbourhoods might raise privacy concerns, noise issues, and property value questions. The goal is to ensure PMRs enhance rather than detract from district character while maintaining equitable service access across different neighbourhood types.

Governance, Equity, and Community Engagement

PMR deployment can involve- multiple municipal departments with distinct but overlapping responsibilities: transportation departments manage right-of-way and traffic operations; planning departments oversee zoning and land use compatibility; public works departments handle infrastructure maintenance; economic development offices focus on business climate; and police and fire departments address emergency response and public safety.

Effective PMR governance requires coordinating across traditional silos. Cities creating PMR working groups or task forces facilitate information sharing and consistent policy development. Seattle's approach to micromobility deployment, which involves multiple departments from the outset, provides a model for such coordinated governance.

PMRs could risk creating disparate service access based on the quality of neighbourhood infrastructure if not well planned. Areas with well-maintained sidewalks and digital connectivity may receive robust PMR services, while underserved communities with poor infrastructure remain excluded. This could exacerbate existing inequities in access to goods, service delivery, and economic opportunities. Cities must ensure PMR deployment doesn't discriminate against neighbourhoods based on income, race, or infrastructure quality. This may require targeted infrastructure investments, service requirements for operators, or subsidies for underserved area deployments.

Successful PMR integration requires community awareness through meaningful engagement throughout the planning and deployment phases of PMR roll-out. The Las Vegas controversy demonstrates risks of moving forward without adequate community consultation. Effective engagement goes beyond public meetings to include surveys, focus groups, demonstration projects, and ongoing feedback mechanisms. It si recommended cities consider piloting PMRs in limited areas first to assess the community's response before deploying them more broadly.

The Planning Imperative

PMR deployment success depends more on urban planning preparedness than technological advancement. Cities investing in comprehensive planning approaches—infrastructure assessment, zoning updates, governance structures, equity frameworks, and community engagement—position themselves to harness benefits while avoiding pitfalls.

The planning perspective of PMR readiness demonstrates that successful PMR integration requires technology, regulations, and thoughtful consideration of how systems fit into cities' physical, social, and institutional fabric. Urban planners are essential stakeholders whose expertise ensures PMR deployment serves broad community interests rather than narrow commercial objectives. As PMRs advance from pilots to operational systems, planning considerations become increasingly important for informed technology decisions that will reshape urban logistics, service delivery, and public space use for decades to come.

[END]