I'm sorry, but "there will always be situations where a human performs better than AI" sounds an awful lot like "I won't wear a seat belt because it might trap me in a burning car".
I really don't mean to be a jerk about this, but didn't you actually just utter pretty much those exact words?! -- from earlier in your post:
I'm sure that there will always be a few situations where a skilled human driver will make better decisions, and produce better outcomes, than standard automation.
So, given that you said that and that you were "sure" of that statement, does that mean you also don't wear a seat belt because you're afraid of dying in a car fire? Just wonderin'. :)
My point was this:
There are a few situations where you're worse off wearing a seat belt than not wearing one. There are people who have died because they were wearing a seat belt.
Those situations are immensely rarer than the situations in which a seat belt will save your life, and since "accidents" are inherently unpredictable, you can't tell in advance when you should or shouldn't wear a seat belt.
Given these facts, it's really really stupid not to wear a seat belt, even though there are some situations in which it might harm you.
Similarly, self-driving cars will eventually reach a point where they'll sometimes kill you, but far, far more often save your life. At that point, avoiding them because you're afraid of the rarest scenario will be an equally stupid decision. It's one that people will make, though, because people are demonstrably terrible at this kind of risk evaluation.