AV & Smart Road Pilot Projects in Michigan: Navigating Liability in a Connected Future
Michigan has long been known as the nation’s automotive hub. Now, it is stepping forward as one of the leading test beds for autonomous vehicles (AVs) and smart road technology. From sensor-lined express lanes to autonomous shuttles in Detroit, the Great Lakes State is investing heavily in the future of mobility. But with innovation comes risk. When vehicles and roads share intelligence, accidents raise new legal questions: who is liable when the infrastructure itself “fails”?
Michigan’s Smart Road and AV Pilots
The I-94 CAV Corridor
One of the most ambitious projects is along I-94 between Ann Arbor and Detroit, where the state is developing a Connected and Automated Vehicle (CAV) corridor. Poles equipped with sensors, cameras, and wireless radios line the route, transmitting data that supports both human and automated drivers. Initially, the lane is open to all traffic, but off-peak periods allow AV testing. The vision is that as AV usage grows, the corridor could evolve into a dedicated autonomous lane.
Detroit’s Autonomous Shuttle Pilot
In Detroit, the Connect shuttle program is testing wheelchair-accessible, electric autonomous shuttles along a nearly 11-mile route. A human operator is onboard for safety, but the long-term goal is a self-sustaining AV shuttle system that provides affordable, accessible transit across city neighborhoods.
Campus and Low-Speed Pilots
Universities and hospitals are also experimenting with AV pilots, often in low-speed, controlled environments such as campuses and medical districts. These projects test whether shuttles can navigate pedestrians, cyclists, and traffic with minimal human intervention, while gathering real-world safety data.
Together, these initiatives reflect Michigan’s vision to not only attract mobility innovation but also integrate it into everyday life. Yet as roads, vehicles, and cities become increasingly “smart,” liability becomes more complex.
Liability Fault Lines in Smart Infrastructure
Infrastructure vs. Vehicle Liability
Traditional accidents pit one driver’s negligence against another’s. In smart road projects, a third party enters the equation: the road itself. If an AV crashes because a roadside sensor failed to transmit accurate lane geometry, is the manufacturer responsible — or the state agency that deployed the infrastructure?
Mixed Use Risks
Because projects like the I-94 corridor currently allow both human-driven and autonomous vehicles, mixed traffic creates added uncertainty. If a human driver cuts off an AV relying on roadside signals, the AV may respond too late or too aggressively. Sorting out comparative fault in these situations could be far more complicated than in a conventional crash.
Data Transparency and Access
Work zones, lane markings, and system malfunctions can all create disputes over who is at fault. The evidence lies in vehicle logs, roadside sensor data, and communication records. Yet manufacturers and state agencies may argue that releasing data jeopardizes trade secrets or security. Victims may face significant barriers to obtaining the very information needed to prove liability.
Government Immunity Hurdles
Michigan law grants broad immunity to state and local governments, including road agencies. While exceptions exist — such as the “highway exception,” which requires roads to be kept in reasonable repair — it remains uncertain whether courts will interpret poorly performing smart infrastructure as falling under that standard. Victims may find their claims dismissed unless negligence can be pinned on a private contractor.
Policy Recommendations
As AV and smart infrastructure pilots expand, policymakers should act now to reduce uncertainty and protect the public:
- Define liability in contracts. Agreements between the state and private vendors must specify who pays when systems fail.
- Mandate data retention. Vehicle and roadside logs should be preserved with clear chain-of-custody rules to aid investigations.
- Create insurance pools. States may need to develop dedicated insurance structures that account for infrastructure-based liability.
- Standardize safety benchmarks. Roadside sensors and AV systems must meet national certification standards for detecting vehicles, motorcycles, and pedestrians.
- Expand public disclosure. Transparency around failure rates, outage reports, and crash investigations is critical to building trust.
The Road Ahead
Michigan’s smart road and AV pilots are more than futuristic experiments — they are a glimpse into the coming reality of shared mobility. But innovation cannot come at the expense of accountability. Victims of crashes deserve clarity on who is responsible, whether it’s a distracted driver, a faulty vehicle, or the very infrastructure designed to prevent accidents.
As Michigan paves the way for connected and autonomous transportation, the legal framework must evolve just as quickly. Without clear rules for liability, these high-tech roads could leave drivers, riders, and pedestrians stranded not just on the highway, but in the courtroom as well.
Disclaimer: The information provided here is general in nature and not legal advice. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident involving autonomous vehicles or roadway infrastructure, contact 877 Power Law to discuss your case directly with an experienced attorney.