Cross relocation at The Cross, Wyke Lane/Cross Street, Oakenshaw

What was proposed

The application sought permission to relocate the Grade II listed cross from storage to a grass verge near its former position.

“The application is seeking planning permission for the retrospective removal of the cross and its re-siting on the grass verge. The cross is a Grade II Listed structure erected in 1702.”

“Additional landscaping improvement works to the grass verge fall outside of the scope of the permission and include enhancements to the verge including a soft landscaping scheme, footpath, street furniture and information board. Development for these works are not subject to an assessment of this application as they are to be implemented under permitted development rights; however, they will be secured via a planning condition.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a residential road junction with a grass verge, electricity sub-station, trees and an interpretation board.

“The application site relates to a traffic junction and grass verge set within a residential area of Oakenshaw. Set within the junction is an area which is marked by concrete barriers where the cross was previously in situ. Wyke Lane is an unclassified road with a speed limit of 30mph.”

“Located to the north-west of the junction is a grass verge of 0.03ha. Included within this is an electricity sub-station, trees and interpretation board.”

Officer report

Why the cross was moved

The cross was removed in 2022 after three vehicle collisions, and the original position was rejected because of further damage risks.

“Following the incident on February 2022 the base stones of the structure had moved, becoming loose and the structure was deemed unsafe. For the purposes of highway safety and damage to a listed structure, the cross was removed from its original position.”

“The original location was dismissed due to the risk of further damage. The Garden of Rest opposite St Andrew’s Church was considered but deemed not close enough to the original location. The grass verge was selected due to its location on Cross Street, and close enough for interpretation to be clearly understood about the original location and setting.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended conditional approval because the relocation would preserve the heritage asset, improve the public realm and address highway safety concerns.

“The designated heritage asset is of high historical and cultural significance, having been erected since 1702, marking a focal point of the village which is identified within the response formed by KC Conservation & Design and Historic England. Public comments illustrate its rich contribution to the social fabric of the area which forms part of its significance.”

“It is considered that, overall, the impact of the proposal would be acceptable, subject to inclusion of the recommended conditions, taking account of the detail submitted, on balance it is concluded that the proposed development would have an acceptable impact upon the designated historic asset whilst providing a scheme to enhance the public realm, ensuring that there would be no harm to heritage assets arising from the development.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, Conservation and Design, Historic England and archaeology consultees supported or did not object subject to conditions addressing safety, heritage and archaeology.

“KC Highways Development Management (KCHDM): Response received 11 th January 2026, within which it was concluded the cross in its original location would result in conditions detrimental to highway and pedestrian safety, and lead to further collisions or vehicle strikes. .”

“KC Conservation & Design: Response provided 08 th January 2026, which identifies that the cross is Grade II Listed, erected in 1702 by local dignitary [name withheld] as a memorial to his wife Sarah and their child who both died in childbirth. The Cross had four sundials (stating ‘Redeem the Time’) and a weathervane at the top of the column, not all of which survive.”

Officer report

What people said

Objectors raised concerns about heritage, archaeology, traffic, safety, the proposed location and the loss of the cross’s original setting.

“- Cars travel up and down Wyke Lane at unsafe speeds and the memorial does act as a traffic calming feature which is much needed. - The monument is protected under national heritage law and this should be respected and replaced to its original site. - The majority of the community want the monument putting back into its rightful place and the actual problem addressed.”

“- The Cross is a re example of a monument dedicated to a woman. - The Cross is likely over 300 years old. - The Cross is a focal point for the village. - The Cross provides the village with a visible history and source of community pride. - The Cross derives part of its significance from its location. Moving the Cross to the grass verge deprives it of that location significance.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Local councillors spoke, followed by four people speaking in objection.

The committee vote

Five councillors voted for refusal and two voted against it.

“A Recorded Vote was taken in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 42 (5) as follows; For: Councillors Bellamy, Davies, Lee-Richards, Scott and Sokhal (5 votes) Against: Councillors Ahmed and Firth (2 votes)”

Minutes

What the committee decided

The committee refused the application because the cross should return to its original location and the archaeological foundations should be maintained.

“RESOLVED – That contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, the application be refused on the grounds that (i) the listed monument should be returned to its original location as the repositioning would impact upon the heritage asset/ the original location is in keeping with the area/the relocation of the structure would impact upon the heritage asset, pride of place and historical significance and (ii) the archaeological foundations need to be maintained.”

Minutes