Replacing existing human spaces with robot-optimized spaces would make robots significantly more expensive than basically any other approach.
My biggest problem is that if that world comes out of the current one, it's going to be one heavily mediated by capitalism (just like everything on my iPhone). So, yes, the robot could scrub the dishes. But once I've accepted that relationship with my robot, version 2 comes out and it has a feature where it doesn't need to spend 8 hours doing dishes because it includes a free trail of the $20/month dish subscription and just throws them out and signs for the shipment of new ones that comes while I'm away at work.
Whatever the exact scenario, the environmental cost will be huge. The COST cost will be huge. And probably the robot will be reporting the details of what I ate and what stayed on my plate back to the company to sell on to the ad sales branch of the company
Life insurance companies and your employer.
But once you begin describing that, it's clear how absurd it would be to install it all for use a few times a week.
Home mobile manipulation will never be a thing until it can use the existing HMIs.
Houses built over the past 50 or so years are designed to disintegrate over 50 or so years and be rebuilt anyway. Although demand for new construction is reduced by the way that neighborhoods tend to go from high income to low income as the buildings physically disintegrate, there is a lower limit somewhere, and redevelopment will happen everywhere eventually.
This may happen in places, but in any case building larger (to accommodate robots) spaces is not a way to make the robots more cost-effective or drive adoption.