[IanO]

 

[MacLac]

Hmmmm….. thought all this time those were the numbers for YEG only?

 

[IanO]

https://www.udiedmonton.com/wp-content/uploads/UDI-February-2024-Market-Watch.pdf

 

[EdmTrekker]

The 2022 numbers state Edmonton CMA received only 1/6 (30,000) of all Alberta immigrants (200,000).
I find that hard to believe.

 

[Kosy123]

The 2022 numbers state Edmonton CMA received only 1/6 (30,000) of all Alberta immigrants (200,000).
I find that hard to believe.

Conference Board of Canada numbers for that year are much more than that for 2022, so could be a case of StatsCan being conservative in their estimates.

 

[David A]

The 2022 numbers state Edmonton CMA received only 1/6 (30,000) of all Alberta immigrants (200,000).
I find that hard to believe.

Likewise. I also notice the different wording - net migration vs. net population growth, so I feel the charts may not be measuring exactly the same thing.

 

[Gronk!]

EMRB plans for one million more people by 2050

The Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board is reviewing its plan for how the region grows in the future, and how it can accommodate a lot more people and jobs, but also retain agricultural land.

edmonton.taproot.news

 

[Glenco]

One million more people in 25 years would take a 2% annual growth in that time frame. A reasonable assumption

 

[occidentalcapital]

One million more people in 25 years would take a 2% annual growth in that time frame. A reasonable assumption

If anything, 2% seems low?

 

[Glenco]

2% is sustainable anything more over time would cause issues.

 

[IanO]

^bingo.

2% is generally regarded as ideal for growth across a variety of metrics.

 

[occidentalcapital]

^bingo.

2% is generally regarded as ideal for growth across a variety of metrics.

Isn't the point of the planning exercise to plan for actual growth, not what the ideal would be?

 

[David A]

As the saying goes, predictions are hard, especially about the future. So I feel planners sometimes just predict what they want to have happen.

Also in reality that two percent long term average could include both years well above that and years below that.

 

[ChazYEG]

As the saying goes, predictions are hard, especially about the future. So I feel planners sometimes just predict what they want to have happen.

Also in reality that two percent long term average could include both years well above that and years below that.

Looking at Canada's projection for 2050 and the last 25 years of trend for Edmonton, I wouldn't be shocked if we were at a 2.5% growth rate over the next 25 years, or even 3%. I would rather the region was preparing for adding 1.5-2M people within this span, and be over prepared than falling short because they were too timid with their projections.

 

[IanO]

Isn't the point of the planning exercise to plan for actual growth, not what the ideal would be?

2% permits infrastructure and services to generally keep up and not stress the community, budgets and integration of new projects into a city.