Plans of Management and Safety: Bridging the Gap Between Design and Daily Use

In CPTED, we often talk about the strong link between design and management. The way a building or public space is designed directly affects how easy or difficult it is to manage. These design decisions carry long-term consequences, shaping the daily life of the space and leaving a legacy for future owners, operators, and communities.

A Plan of Management (POM) is one of the most practical tools for bridging the gap between design and management. It outlines who is responsible for each space, how often maintenance is performed, who is in charge of securing the spaces, and whether any special considerations need to be understood before any work begins. Without clarity, responsibility becomes blurred and difficult to unravel later.

In our last blog, I discussed the Three Ds and how they can become out of alignment, creating risk and reducing the functionality of a place. A POM is a tool to help bring the building or open space into alignment.

A Plan of Management sits between the design process and daily operations.

“From design to daily use, Plans of Management turn intent into safe practice.”

The stakes are high. At a national level, the Australian Retailers Association reported over 800,000 retail crime incidents in 2025, with 16% involving threats or violence and a 30% increase in serious or violent events (ARA/NRA, July 2025).

In Victoria, the Crime Statistics Agency (CSA) reported a 46.2% rise in retail theft from stores in the year to March 2025, with 19,822 offences recorded (CSA Victoria, June 2025). Media reports reinforce this trend, with over 82,000 retail crime incidents in Victoria last year and significant rises in serious and threatening events (Herald Sun, June 2025).

In NSW, the increase has been more moderate. Retail theft rose by 4.3% over the two years to March 2025 (BOCSAR, June 2025). Even smaller rises emphasise the need for early planning: embedding management into design can help prevent small problems becoming entrenched risks.

These are not just financial losses: they directly impact staff safety and community wellbeing. The same applies to public open spaces. Without clear Plans of Management, parks can quickly show signs of neglect — unmown areas, vandalism, or unsafe facilities — which reduces community safety and use.

Embedding management planning into design from day one is one of the most effective ways to mitigate these risks.

Park Maintenance is defined through a Plan of Management (Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich)

Why Plans of Management Should Start Early

Too often, a POM is written after the design is finished. By then, the design team has locked in key decisions - such as access points, circulation, and service areas - without fully considering how they’ll be managed in practice.

If POMs are developed alongside design, they force designers to confront real-world management issues early. Using a retail development as a guide, key considerations include:

1. Hours of Operation

   • Which parts of the development close early, and which may run late or remain open for 24 hours?

   • How will lighting, cleaning, and security patrols adapt to these different operating times?

   • If only part of a site remains open late, can circulation be restricted so the rest of the building isn’t left exposed?

     
     

     Management pitfall: If hours of operation aren’t clear from the outset, buildings often end up with unsecured or “half-open” areas that attract antisocial behaviour, malicious damage, or create unsafe staff exit routes.

     
     

2. Parking

   • Are staff and customers provided with safe, direct routes to parking, particularly at night? Are these signposted?

   • Can sections of the carpark be closed after hours while still maintaining safe access to the main entries?

   • Is there natural surveillance in parking areas by providing active uses and limiting posters and signage that blocks viewlines?

   • How is parking managed if spaces are stacked or tandem? These arrangements often lead to conflicts, waiting times, and unsafe behaviours (such as staff waiting alone in isolated spots).

     
     

     Management pitfall: Poorly planned parking can leave staff vulnerable to theft or assault, while customer frustration over conflicts in stacked/tandem systems can escalate into aggression.

     
     

3. Back-of-House and Loading Areas

   • How will kegs, crates, and rubbish be handled so these areas don’t appear neglected?

   • Does the layout support supervision, or will it create unmanaged and vulnerable areas?

   • If these areas are to be secured, who is responsible and at what time are they locked down?

   • Are storage, delivery, and loading zones well organised in the design?

     
     

     Management pitfall: Disorganised back-of-house spaces signal neglect, attract opportunistic crime, and make it harder for staff to safely move goods in and out.

     
     

4. Waste Removal

   • How will bins and waste be removed without compromising building security?

   • If trucks require access after hours, does this force parts of the building to remain open?

   • Are there dedicated, secured waste paths that avoid exposing back-of-house areas to risks?Management pitfall: Poorly planned waste systems can force unsecured openings, create concealment spots, and leave entire sections of a building vulnerable during collections.

     
     

5. Security and Safety Risks

   • Have blind spots, poorly lit corridors, and dead-end spaces been designed out? And if not, how are mirrors, lighting and CCTV designed to mitigate that risk?

   • Is electronic surveillance built into key locations? Who is watching the video?

   • Could organised crime groups exploit weak points, such as unsecured entrances or hidden service areas?

     
     

   • Management pitfall: Spaces without oversight quickly become hotspots for crime, vandalism, or loitering, and fixing these issues later is costly and often ineffective.

     
     

The Stakes Are High : 800,000 retail crime incidents in 2025 — 16% involved threats or violence. Plans of Management help close the gap between design and daily safety.

The Gaps a Plan of Management Reveals

When developing POMs for existing spaces, one of the most common findings is the discovery of gaps in management. Using a park as an example, these gaps are often easy to spot once responsibilities are mapped out:

1. Overlapping Responsibilities

   • Playgrounds, sports fields, toilets, and paths may all sit within one park but be managed by different Council departments.

   • Without clear coordination, groups assume someone else is responsible.
     

     Management pitfall: Critical tasks fall through the cracks, leaving areas neglected or unsafe.

     
     

2. Unmown or Poorly Maintained Areas

   • Sections of turf or landscaping are often missed because maintenance zones are unclear.

   • Crews may avoid “borderline” areas they believe belong to another team.

     
     

     Management pitfall: Neglected landscapes become overgrown, reducing visibility, inviting concealment, and signalling that the space isn’t cared for.

     
     

3. Graffiti and Vandalism

   • Walls, shelters, or amenities may not be allocated to a specific maintenance budget.

   • Lack of a graffiti management policy results in delays in removal or repair, which encourages further damage.

     
     

     Management pitfall: Visible neglect sends the message that no one is watching, reinforcing a cycle of vandalism and antisocial use.

     
     

4. Derelict or Unused Buildings

   • Older amenities or storage sheds often fall outside clear ownership.

   • Without a nominated team, they remain locked up, abandoned, or misused.

     
     

     Management pitfall: Unused buildings attract squatting, concealment, and fire hazards, while draining public perception of safety.

     
     

5. Funding Gaps

   • When no department “owns” an area, no one assigns budget for upkeep.

   • Essential works—like lighting, cleaning, or repairs—remain unfunded.

     
     

     Management pitfall: Spaces continue to deteriorate, exacerbating inequality within the park and discouraging community use.

     
     

Who Writes a Plan of Management?

Plans of Management are often written by the planner involved in the project, as they are usually the ones coordinating statutory requirements and approvals. However, the effectiveness of a POM depends on how well it integrates design, operations, and safety considerations.

This is why the design team - architects, landscape architects, and engineers - must contribute to its development. Their input ensures that operational requirements are aligned with the physical design of the building or open space.

Equally important is the role of the CPTED consultant. At a minimum, the POM should be reviewed by a CPTED specialist to identify potential vulnerabilities and provide recommendations. For example, a CPTED review might highlight:

• Risks created by late-night trading hours

• The importance of controlled access to carparks

• How waste management practices intersect with building security

• Surveillance opportunities for loading docks and back-of-house areas

Without this expertise, Plans of Management risk becoming procedural documents that miss critical safety and crime prevention opportunities.

The Design Partnership prepares Plans of Management for a range of developments and can incorporate a CPTED report to ensure the two are integrated.

Tip: Don’t treat Plans of Management as an afterthought. The best outcomes happen when planners, designers, and CPTED specialists collaborate from day one.

Real-World Consequences

The consequences of missing management plans are not hypothetical. In Victoria, one supermarket chain saw shoplifting losses double to $15 million a year, with stores being raided weekly. The business was forced to lock down entrances and change operations in ways that could have been anticipated with better management planning⁴.

This is why design decisions - such as where entrances are placed, how circulation routes function at night, or which spaces remain open late - must be paired with a clear plan for who manages these spaces, how they are supervised, and how staff and community safety are prioritised.

Design, Management, and the Right to Safety

As an architect and urban designer, I value the beauty and experience of urban spaces. But aesthetics should never come at the expense of safety - whether that is the perception of safety or the physical reality.

Plans of Management help tie together the art of architecture with the functionality of long-term stewardship. They ensure that the people who use, service, and enjoy our spaces can do so safely, while allowing buildings and parks to operate efficiently throughout their lifespan.

At their best, POMs are not just documents - they are roadmaps for safer, better-managed places.

References

• Australian Retailers Association (ARA) / National Retail Association (NRA), “Retail theft in Australia has surged… with over 800,000 annual incidents, 16% involving threats or violence, and a 30% increase in serious or violent events”, July 2025.

• Crime Statistics Agency Victoria (CSA), “Theft continues to drive increases in recorded offending — retail theft up 46.2% to 19,822 offences”, released 19 June 2025.

• Herald Sun, “Retail crime: Melbourne shop owners terrified as attacks surge — over 82,000 incidents in Victoria, with serious and threatening events both rising”, 18 June 2025.

• NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR), “NSW Recorded Crime Statistics Quarterly Update — retail theft (‘steal from retail store’) rose by 4.3% over the two years to March 2025”, published June 2025.