KEY POINTS:
It has been uplifting to read this summer about Auckland successes - makes a nice change from the usual dysfunctional, parochial local government stories.
The question is what needs to happen now so that when the history writers research Auckland circa 2009-2014, they can report popular successes at the waterfront, in Aotea Square and getting there using electric rail.
Successes like sandy city beaches and wild regional parks are popular because every citizen can enjoy them. They may be public amenities - but they are also environmental assets built by nature.
Achieving the same level of popular success in the built urban environment requires a particular mix of landscape, social, engineering, cultural and economic design objectives, which have often been lacking in Auckland.
Wellington is rightly proud of its waterfront development, its popular downtown, and its reputation for the best coffee bars. Having Parliament in the centre adds a particular something, as well as New Zealand's National Museum - Te Papa.
The previous government recognised that Auckland was home for a third of the country and responsible for more than a third of the country's economic output, and spoke of the need for its "economic transformation".
While investing heavily in regional transport networks, that government perceived the need for other infrastructure investment and offered to pay for a billion-dollar waterfront stadium.
For a variety of reasons that project never got off the ground. However, the way Auckland handled it was one of the factors that led to the Government calling a Royal Commission to analyse Auckland local governance, and advise what was needed to achieve - among other things - Auckland's economic transformation.
Great are the expectations of those three wise commissioners.
In the meantime, Auckland City Council and Auckland Regional Council struggle to develop Auckland's waterfront and CBD electric rail system, with minimal support from central government.
This means ARC is heavily reliant on revenues from private sector waterfront developments to fund electric trains, while ACC is equally reliant on developer levies from those same private developments to fund attractive waterfront places, spaces and transport for
public use.
The most likely outcome of this limited strategy is that the trains might be good, but the waterfront will be as much of a public failure as Princes Wharf.
The potential to develop Auckland's waterfront as a cultural, social and economic destination is put at risk because public assets are compromised by private development. This cannot be allowed to happen.
Central government needs to urgently engage with Auckland local and regional government regarding these two key projects, and insist on long-term national-good objectives being prioritised over the present short-term ones.
The other urgent requirement for the region is to constructively engage with the Royal Commission. Its report will present an opportunity for change.
However, an unfortunate planning hiatus has developed since the commission was established. Long-term regional planning has been desultory as the region's separate councils have adopted "steady as she goes" approaches - not wanting to attract attention.
A good example of this is the much vaunted "One Plan" finalised last year, which is widely regarded as nothing more than a comprehensive wish list.
Auckland's planning paralysis has been intensified by the recession. Construction industry decline has already led to unprecedented reductions in council revenues from development levies, and building and resource consent processing fees.
In the coming budget year, councils will face public pressure for nil percentage rates increases, while having to manage reducing building industry-related revenues. Not a good environment for reform.
Or perhaps it is. Whatever, it seems certain that the Royal Commission will recommend structural changes, which will likely require legislation, and take effect after local government elections in 2010. Local government then is likely to be weakened by change and will take time to get organised.
Therefore those reformed council structures will need a good, strong transitional regional plan to get on with implementing. That plan will need to be well supported by central government.
This is the year to build that plan. It must be driven by long-term objectives, and be the result of a strong partnership between central and local government. Auckland's future success stories will depend on it.
* Joel Cayford is a member of the Auckland Regional Council and of the Auckland Regional Land Transport Committee.
