Advanced Air Mobility is a Land Use Question for OEMs, Planners, and Community Members

There is a familiar story about early boxed cake mixes. Sales improved only after manufacturers required bakers to add a fresh egg. The recipe barely changed, but people were more willing to embrace a product they helped create.

That lesson may have relevance as Advanced Air Mobility (“AAM”), or next-generation aircraft transport like air taxis and delivery drones, moves from concept toward deployment. As aircraft approach certification, operators plan networks, and utilities evaluate future charging demands, states, municipalities, airports, and private developers are beginning to consider how they can help shape this emerging technology to fit into existing transportation and development frameworks.

Yet many of AAM’s most significant implementation challenges are not really about the aircraft.

Eventually, every AAM operation must answer a series of familiar questions. Where will it be located? Is electrical infrastructure available? How will passengers and cargo access the facility? How will the use fit within surrounding development? Those are not aviation questions: They are land use questions.

Defining and Distinguishing “Vertiports”

Arizona recently addressed AAM by statute, defining both Advanced Air Mobility systems and vertiports. A.R.S. § 28-8601. Under that framework, a vertiport is ultimately a place—whether land, water, or a structure—used for the takeoff and landing of powered-lift aircraft. Like any significant land use, it must fit within a community’s infrastructure, transportation network, and long-term planning objectives.

That creates a challenge for local governments. Most zoning ordinances were drafted long before policymakers contemplated electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft. Few jurisdictions have a zoning district or use category called “vertiport.” Instead, local governments are likely to rely initially on existing tools such as conditional use permits, special permits, airport approvals, or similar discretionary review processes.

Those mechanisms may work well during the early stages of deployment. Over time, however, communities may need more durable standards that distinguish among different types of AAM facilities. Not every vertiport will have the same operational characteristics. A simple landing location may present different planning considerations than a passenger hub, cargo facility, training center, or airport-based operation. As deployment expands, jurisdictions will inevitably begin developing regulations tailored to different levels of intensity and activity.

The Importance of Public Airports for AAM Activity

Public airports provide a logical place to begin. Many already possess transportation access, utility infrastructure, available space, and planning processes capable of accommodating new aviation uses. Airport sponsors also have well-established tools—including master plans, Airport Layout Plans, leases, and operating agreements—that can help evaluate future AAM activity. In Arizona, the City of Phoenix has already identified potential opportunities for AAM-related operations at several airport facilities.

Even so, AAM planning is unlikely to remain solely an airport issue. Passenger access, traffic circulation, utility demand, noise considerations, and compatibility with neighboring uses inevitably extend beyond airport boundaries. As a result, local governments will increasingly encounter land use questions that traditional aviation planning alone may not answer.

How AAM Stands Out from Other Technologies

This is where AAM differs from many other emerging technologies. Aviation professionals, manufacturers, and operators possess expertise regarding aircraft performance, charging requirements, flight operations, and system capabilities. Planners and local governments bring expertise in infrastructure planning, community development, public engagement, and regulatory implementation. Community members contribute a perspective that is equally important in land use decision-making: how new facilities interact with existing neighborhoods and daily life.

For most land uses, local governments can rely on decades of experience when drafting regulations. AAM offers fewer precedents. Jurisdictions evaluating future vertiport standards may benefit from early engagement with manufacturers, operators, airport sponsors, utilities, planners, and community stakeholders. Standards developed without meaningful participation from those groups may not fully account for either operational realities or local concerns.

How Arizona is Handling AAM Preparation

In addition to A.R.S. § 28-8601 defining “vertiports,” Arizona recently enacted legislation directing the Arizona Department of Transportation to prepare a statewide AAM plan and identify resources for local jurisdictions. A.R.S. § 28-8602. The legislation does not displace local land use authority. Instead, it highlights a broader reality likely to face communities across the country: decisions regarding where and how AAM operates will often be made at the local level.

The aerospace industry has devoted enormous effort to developing the aircraft. The next challenge may be ensuring that the people responsible for planning, regulating, operating, and living alongside these facilities have a meaningful role in shaping the framework that governs them. Like the baker who added the egg, communities are often more willing to embrace a future they helped create.

Author’s Note: The boxed cake mix analogy was inspired by Kaydon A. Stanzione, “Did Betty Crocker Inspire UAM?,” Vertiflite (Vertical Flight Society), July/August 2026, which draws a similar parallel between the decision to have bakers add a fresh egg and the challenge of building community ownership in Urban Air Mobility.

This publication is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a solicitation to provide legal services. The information in this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional legal counsel. The views and opinions expressed herein represent those of the individual author only and are not necessarily the views of Clark Hill PLC. Although we attempt to ensure that postings on our website are complete, accurate, and up to date, we assume no responsibility for their completeness, accuracy, or timeliness.