Submission made - the prospectus is at https://www.mtug.org.uk/mtug_ccif_2026.pdf and I will be sharing it out to wider channels over the next couple of days. We are aware of both strengths and weakness in the bid, and that CCIF usually gets heavily oversubscribed, but this has been good work to do putting the scheme together and not just a CCIF bid.

 

There is a lot more detail going in at present.  We are looking at operational costs that assume a conservative income and have an optimism factor applied to the expenditure and still we break even.  Cash flow and start up / ramp up elements also considered.   The intent is that elements earmarked for CCIF will be CCIF valid, and so on.  And that we will not be on a "ask for money every year" cycle - a proper business plan.

 
Can CCIF be used to cover operational running costs as per your document?

 
Apologies to mods, but this seems an appropriate thread as relevant (please move if better thread exists)

Today DfT has published : Factors influencing multi-modal public transport use, so I guess this document is relevant to official view and policy on this.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/factors-influencing-multi-modal-public-transport-use

 
Thanks for the voting everyone - 85% "good idea", 15% "don't know" and a confirmation in our small and biased group that it makes sense.  Looking wider, a dozen positive responses from key players with whom I shared the early idea to check my sanity. Some qualified with serious issues raised that need to be taken into consideration / mitigated / answered. One - just one - response is a potential major show stopper. Wiltshire Council, who own the building, now want "first dibs" to be to an unspecified internal service. 

Wiltshire Council bought the building in 2009 for the purpose of supporting rail growth, had it open as a cafe at around the time of covid and it closed in 2023.  It was in the first joint neighbourhood plan, and in 2024 the revised neighbourhood plan was very thoroughly consulted on with [name redacted] and others of Wiltshire Council picking lots of hole and having lots of changes, but notably NOT critical of the station planning.  It went to inspection (again with WC input) in the first part of last year (2025), and the referendum and was made in the second part of the year and now has "legal status" in planning terms and sits alongside the local plan for Wiltshire and the NPPF (national planning framework).

The Wiltshire Council officer team are, correctly, querying our local ability to make this work.  And that's fair and has been answered, I believe. The previous failure of something different makes them nervous, and Wiltshire is a big county so the individuals involved for them may not be familiar with the tiown.  They are also correct in pointing out that we have no absolute "right" to run the thing - and indeed if their secret service was to fulfil the role, it would be welcome to do so.  If their service was to share with us to meet both sets of objectives, that too would be good.  But they told me on 2023 "too soon" and I agree; telling me than in 2026 doesn't really give me positive vibes.

The case is still being made - and it's excellent work that points a way forward.  The issue described here is a pothole on the road towards progress; we have been there before and overcome issues, usually to everyone's mutual gain.

For members - preliminary proposal - v 0.95 - if you want to read further.

 

My thanks also, to members of the Coffee Shop forum who have voted here.

I, too, can see the way the vote is going: please, if you haven't done so already, do cast your vote, with appropriate comments.

 
Many thanks for the responses so far ... which (for guests who cannot yet see the running results) are very much in favour.  That's something of a relief, as the poll is something of a sanity check.    Part of the intent of asking around (and I have been doing so a lot locally too) has been to ensure that this project is fully in line with the vast majority of people, and the other part is to wheedle out objections and concerns so they can be thoroughly assessed at an early stage so that they can be addressed and mitigated.

 

Years ago now ... I last met Peter and Margaret Blackburn there, they were sitting outside enjoying a coffee, on that occasion. My respects to both of them, RIP. CfN. [Image from here is not available to guests]

Looking forward, I could see me enjoying either of:

1. In the summer, a cold drink - the MTUG proposal suggests £1.50 for a can, which I regard as good value, with the option of adding a pack of locally sourced packet snack products;

2. In the winter, a hot drink - again, the MTUG proposal suggests £3.00 for a coffee or £2.00 for a tea (not sure whether they would / could provide mugs, rather than 'bring your own', to avoid having to use recycling cardboard or plastic items).

I commend the concept. [Image from here is not available to guests]

 
Over the years, I have used Melksham station a fair few times, as a visitor [Image from here is not available to guests].  On many such occasions, I found the help of a knowledgeable local volunteer (grahame, in my case [Image from here is not available to guests]) to be very useful, in suggesting options if my intended train was delayed or cancelled, for example.  The information screens do provide some (fairly limited) factual details, but no guidance as to what options could be available.  The help point I found to be of no help whatever, frankly, when I tried to use it.

I saw the cafe and thought that was an excellent facility - but, as grahame says, it was in exactly the right place but unfortunately at exactly the wrong time - during Covid lockdown. As to the possible future reopening of the facility, I think it could really take off: I would certainly use it.

My vote in the above poll has been cast accordingly.  [Image from here is not available to guests]

 
Not being a resident of the town, or wider locality, the value of my opinion is somewhat limited but surely any thought through project such as this should at the very least be progressed further.  Who knows what may grow from it?

 
Now that I have asked the key local players I am re-sharing this post in public.    Most of the elephants in the room have been addressed - they are listed in the supporting documents - with only one remaining a a major concern and we are looking at how to mitigate that one.  It may be just a matter of timing rather than anything else on that one.