Hans asked: Normally at intersections drivers of vehicles should give the right-of-way to crossing pedestrians, even if there are no marked pedestrian crossings. In the case of T-intersections, the situation is less clear. Are there three implied crossings or just one?
This is the statutory definition of “crosswalk.”
s. 316.003 – Definitions
(6) – Crosswalk
(a) That part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway, measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway.
(b) Any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.
It would appear that there is only one unless the other crossings are marked.
I’m not sure. There are connections between the lateral lines of a sidewalk on the ending street and the opposite sidewalk on the continuing street. They’re no less real than at a 4-way intersection.
It may be less obvious where to draw the lines, but note 316.130(12): “No pedestrian shall, except in a marked crosswalk, cross a roadway at any other place than by a route at right angles to the curb or by the shortest route to the opposite curb.” This means that (at a 4-way intersection) where the sidewalk on the other side is offset, you cannot cross directly from one sidewalk to the other, but must cross at right angles to the curb and then use the perpendicular sidewalk to reach the offset continuation.
“See also Ellis v. Glenn (Ky.) 269 S.W. 2d 234, where the Court held a pedestrian was within an unmarked crosswalk when crossing the through street of a T intersection within what would be an extension of the sidewalk lines of the street forming the stem of the T.”
(Kentucky has the same definition of crosswalk.)
But, on the other hand: http://az.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19830913_0040177.AZ.htm/qx
“. . . Since the ‘T’ intersection here did not have a sidewalk on the ‘opposite side’ of the highway, there are no lateral lines to ‘connect’ to each other in order to form an unmarked crosswalk. . . .”
A law had to be passed to amend the defintiion to say “within the prolongations or connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks”.
So the answer seems to be ‘depends on the judge’.