The cheapest and easiest outcome from the point of view of cricket and costs to ratepayers would have been to demolish the building.
Cricket could have the extended boundaries required for premier test cricket as well as room for a decent embankment at the northern end of the University Oval, while the council would have saved much of the $5 million its planned redevelopment of the building will cost.
Meanwhile, the ideal for the New Zealand Historic Places Trust and others supporting the remnant of the phenomenon that was the 1925 New Zealand and South Seas International Exhibition would have been to retain the full remaining structure.
Now, if all proceeds satisfactorily, the short cricket boundaries will be 6m longer and the council will place a binding covenant on the building's title to ensure what is left is fully protected.
The entrance and the Sargood Wing, both later additions, will be demolished and the entrance returned to the original portico style. This, plus work inside, should make the place attractive, useful and interesting.
The building as it now stands lacks particular appeal to most members of the general public, whatever its historic significance.
It was likely, therefore, that demolition - while hotly opposed in some quarters - would not have been greeted with general grief.
Against that background, the Historic Places Trust should be reasonably happy with the combination of covenants and restoration work.
Sensibly, as part of the compromise, the trust will support the council's resource consent application to knock down three bays.
The city, for its part, and whatever the public sympathy, would have had a struggle on its hands to tear down a category 1 historic building.
Even more significant would have been the legal hurdles to remove a structure protected in the council's district plan.
Vehement opposition could easily have prevented the demolition of all or part of the former art gallery.
Because the need and pressure to extend the cricket boundaries has been going on for years, the obvious question is to ask why a compromise like this was not reached much sooner.
No doubt entrenched positions and individual egos played their part, as they do in such situations.
On the principle of better late than never, however, the fact that all parties are now playing ball is welcomed.
Let us hope as a result that leading cricket tests can be brought regularly to the University Oval with its picturesque setting, its lovely grandstand ... and its adjacent historic building.
