The Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee of Warwickshire County Council upheld a call-in regarding the B4102 Fillongley Road Fillongley Crossroads Junction CRS scheme. The committee recommended that the Cabinet reconsider the decision, proposing an assessment of alternative measures to address safety concerns at the junction.

Call-In for B4102 Fillongley Road Fillongley Crossroads Junction CRS

The committee upheld a call-in concerning the decision to install traffic signals at the B4102 Fillongley Road Fillongley Crossroads Junction CRS. This decision, made by the Portfolio Holder for Transport and Planning, Councillor Jennifer Warren, on 29 April 2026, was called in by councillors on the grounds that alternative measures could be viable and that other road safety measures were still under development.

Following extensive discussion, public speaking, and questioning of officers, the committee recommended that the decision be referred back to Cabinet for reconsideration. The committee proposed that the merits and practicality of a range of alternative measures be assessed. These include:

• Working collaboratively with the Parish Council, residents, local members, and the Portfolio Holder.
• Implementing a traffic regulation order to change the junction from a 'Give Way' to a 'Stop' junction.
• Reviewing the speed limit on the approach to the village from the south-westerly direction on Nuneaton Road, potentially reducing it from 40mph to 30mph.
• Installing larger village signs and white gates at the entrances to Fillongley on Meriden Road and Nuneaton Road.
• Installing additional signage along the route to encourage drivers to slow down.
• Implementing rumble strips and white lines on the approaches to the village on Meriden Road and Nuneaton Road, as well as at the junction itself.
• Installing a box junction or raised table at the junction.
• Investigating the feasibility of a mini-roundabout.
• Investigating the potential use of average speed cameras.

During the meeting, numerous residents and councillors voiced strong concerns about the proposed traffic signals. Key arguments against the scheme included:

• Inadequate Consultation: Several speakers felt the consultation process was insufficient and that residents' views, particularly opposition to traffic signals, had been overlooked.
• Road Width and Vehicle Access: A significant concern was that the proposed traffic signals would not accommodate the width of large vehicles, such as HGVs and agricultural machinery, on narrow sections of Coventry Road and Tamworth Road. This could lead to vehicles mounting pavements, particularly outside the primary school, creating a significant safety hazard.
• Speeding as the Primary Issue: Many argued that excessive speed, particularly on the approach from Nuneaton Road, was the root cause of accidents, and that traffic lights would not address this, potentially even encouraging drivers to speed to beat the lights.
• Displacement of Traffic: Concerns were raised that the traffic signals would increase traffic flow through the village, turning it into a more significant rat-run, particularly on narrow lanes like Church Lane and Ousterne Lane.
• Cost and Proportionality: The £2.9 million cost of the scheme was questioned, with many believing that less expensive and more targeted measures, such as speed cameras or traffic calming, would be more appropriate and effective.
• Impact on Village Character: Residents felt that an urban solution like traffic lights was out of character for the rural village of Fillongley.
• Data Reliability: Questions were raised about the accuracy and completeness of the collision data used to justify the scheme, with some suggesting it did not reflect the true nature of the accidents or the primary causes.

Council officers and the Portfolio Holder, Councillor Warren, defended the proposal by highlighting the consistent high number of collisions at the junction, the failure of previous smaller-scale interventions, and the legal duty to address road safety. They argued that traffic signals were the most effective measure to control the junction and reduce the risk of serious injury or fatal accidents, citing professional engineering advice and the Safe System approach to road safety. They acknowledged that the scheme was not perfect, particularly concerning the pinch point on Coventry Road, but stated that mitigation measures, including yellow box markings, would be implemented. The availability of HS2 funding was also cited as a unique opportunity to implement a significant safety improvement.

Despite the officers' and Portfolio Holder's defence of the scheme, the committee ultimately voted in favour of the call-in, recommending that Cabinet reconsider the decision and explore alternative measures. This decision was influenced by the strong public feeling, the detailed concerns raised by residents and councillors, and the acknowledgement by officers that the proposed scheme was not perfect. The extended timeframe available for the HS2 funding was also noted as providing an opportunity for further consideration.

The decision to uphold the call-in means that the Cabinet will now review the proposed traffic signal scheme for Fillongley Crossroads, taking into account the committee's recommendations and the extensive feedback received.