The one who is getting involved in making of the entire process of tax depreciation schedule is only held liable for bringing out the various types of changes for the people. As are the needs of the people same are the strategies planned for the people things keep on changing as per the need and requirements of the people always. We have reservation, however, about the validity of the rural urban fringe as a planning concept. The consultation document implies that there is a high degree of similarity in the nature and circumstances of areas lying at the interface of town and country and that they pose similar challenges and opportunities in most locations.

We agree that serious land use issues often, but not invariably, arise at the interface of town and country due to such factors as the frequent juxtaposition of very different types of activity such as farming or horticulture and large residential estates, urban development pressures and rising land values and the makeshift and transient nature of some economic activity around urban areas.

We agree therefore that such areas need active and comprehensive planning. But we do not think that all areas lying between town and country form a distinct or reasonably homogenous land category or zone or that it is helpful to treat such areas separately from adjoining urban and rural areas in the planning process. In our view the urban rural fringe varies greatly in different places.

People www.tdsnationwide.com.au are served with the very best outcomes and requirements always as per the need and requirements of the people. Giving the very best outcome to the people is the only motto of the depreciator who is held responsible for carrying out the process of TDS.

Leave a Reply