A pair of autonomous delivery robots made headlines in Chicago after each collided with a transit bus shelter, shattering glass panels in two separate incidents that unfolded within the same week.
The first crash was captured on video on Sunday, showing a Serve Robotics unit — identified as “Nasir” — rolling along Racine Avenue in the West Town neighbourhood before striking the glass panel of a Chicago Transit Authority bus stop. The impact sent shards of glass cascading onto the robot, which then came to a halt. Serve Robotics confirmed that nobody was injured and that crews moved quickly to clear the scene.
“We have been in contact with local stakeholders and are committed to addressing any concerns directly,” Serve Robotics said in a statement. “We take this matter very seriously.”
A second incident followed just days later, on Tuesday, at a bus shelter near North Avenue and Larrabee Street in the Old Town area. Video footage shared on social media showed a Coco Robotics unit having broken through another glass panel at the site.
Coco Robotics said the collision was entirely out of the ordinary, noting that its units travel at a maximum speed of around five miles per hour and that safety is a central design and operational priority. The company confirmed it had launched an internal investigation into the incident.
“We’re grateful no one was hurt. We’ve reached out to the company that owns the shelter and are taking full responsibility for the cost of repair,” Coco said, describing the crash as a rare, isolated event and pledging to prevent similar occurrences going forward.
Coco began operating in Chicago in late 2024, while Serve Robotics launched its delivery robots in the city in September as part of a municipal pilot programme intended to evaluate performance and gather data on real-world operations.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson acknowledged the incidents on Wednesday, stating that the pilot programme exists precisely to assess how these technologies perform and to identify areas where improvements are needed.
Neither company had provided further comment at the time of publication.