The guarded optimism about the proposed separated cycleways for Dunedin's one-way streets north of Queens Gardens is encouraging.
Compromises tend to attract little enthusiasm because different parties lose as well as gain.
Such is the situation with the cycleways on Dunedin one-way streets.
Overall, however, positivity has been expressed.
The one-way street system is dangerous for cyclists and a separated lane should make a difference.
Cycling advocates are concerned that, for the sake of parking spaces, the lanes will be too narrow in some sections for passing.
There is enormous variation in the speeds cyclists travel and there is a risk some will stick to the main carriageway in their frustration and desire for swift transit.
Some businesses, partially consoled by the reinstatement of many parks compared with an earlier plan, still maintain concerns about the loss of parking spaces, now put at 278.
That is a hefty number which will place considerable pressure on other areas and inconvenience motorists.
Interest groups are examining the proposal, although after the debate and discussion over the past three years, there will be considerable reluctance to change much or anything of substance.
If construction is to begin late this year or early next, there is little scope for more disagreement.
Detailed design has to proceed soon.
At least, the need to provide for cyclists on State Highway One through town has become more widely acknowledged, although some still believe cyclists could be routed elsewhere.
In contrast, the ambitious South Dunedin network was too much, too soon and too badly implemented.
Although changes have been made, that debacle set the cause of cycleways back.
The strip of Portobello Rd between Portsmouth Dr has been another fiasco, with the initial and expensive 2014 changes prompting an outcry from neighbouring businesses, especially because cycling numbers there are tiny.
Hopefully, this time the design is appropriate.
Mayor Dave Cull said that as a result of the previous Portobello Rd issues, the council had learnt to more thoroughly involve people affected by change when planning cycleway developments.
It seems extraordinary the council could have earlier failed in such basic consultation, and ratepayers have paid the consequences because of the wasted money.
Dunedin is far from the ideal cycling city for commuting.
Its hills and mixed weather do not encourage pedal power, and driving cars is all too easy, especially while petrol prices stay low.
At the same time, though, weekend recreational cycling has been booming over the past 10 years.
It is surprising so little of this has translated into weekday commuting.
The extra width added to the one-way painted cycle lanes on the one-way system made a partial difference to cycle comfort and safety, and the narrower carriageway for traffic did not cause as many problems as feared.
Cycling numbers using the route, nevertheless, remain relatively low.
With changes in attitudes and separated pathways there is potential for growth among commuters, university students and perhaps even secondary school pupils.
It is only a couple of generations ago school bike sheds were packed.
These days - and no doubt parental concerns about safety is a significant reason - few pupils cycle.
Although the original extensive South Dunedin cycle network was far from popular and earlier reaction to State Highway One separated lane proposals decidedly mixed, cycle projects down each side of the harbour receive widespread support.
They appeal to parents of younger children, to keen mountain bikers as well as to walkers.
They take advantage of the beauty of Dunedin's harbour.
The news, therefore, a massive cost blowout has hit the proposed cycle and footpath from St Leonards to Port Chalmers is most disappointing.
Because the present design will not now be funded, it must be hoped ways can be found for a practical and alternative plan at a much lower cost.
New Zealand is spending hundreds of millions on urban cycleways and harbour-side routes need to be high on the priorities.
