Milwaukee vs. Minneapolis (Madison, Green Bay, Kenosha: best cities, lofts, condos)

[Northstar17]

For a while now I've been debating which of these two cities is a better pick for me. I like how Milwaukee is on the lake and its proximity to Chicago (I have family there.) I currently live outside the Twin Cities and I am curious if Milwaukee would be a better pick for me. Any information on housing, schools, and an overall atmosphere of the city would be helpful.

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by Northstar17

For a while now I've been debating which of these two cities is a better pick for me. I like how Milwaukee is on the lake and its proximity to Chicago (I have family there.) I currently live outside the Twin Cities and I am curious if Milwaukee would be a better pick for me. Any information on housing, schools, and an overall atmosphere of the city would be helpful.

Here goes:

-Minneapolis is part of a bigger metro area (with St. Paul, etc.) population-wise than Milwaukee is. I believe Milwaukee's metro is 1.5+ million, while the Twin Cities are 3+ million. However, with Milwaukee being so close to goliath 9+ million Chicago, it is probably a bit of a wash.

-Milwaukee is cooler in general than Minneapolis in the summer but warmer in general than Minneapolis in the winter. Winters are a little more cloudy/gray in Milwaukee rather than Minneapolis, but the warmer temps (one of the few times you'd use the word "warmer" when describing Milwaukee's winters in comparison to somewhere else) probably more than make up for it.

-Milwaukee metro is an area proud of its history of blue collar/manufacturing jobs - eg: part of the rust belt, brewing history, etc. However, it would surprise you in its vast changes towards modern, contemporary, hip areas. Minneapolis has always had more of that high-tech, "white collar", newness rep versus Milwaukee's rep of being older, blue collar, etc., but I think you'd be surprised at what Milwaukee metro offers. I for one actually enjoy how Milwaukee metro mixes that old past with the new and creates something very unique versus Minneapolis.

-Minneapolis cost of housing is a bit higher than Milwaukee's, although their taxes are a bit lower. Cost of living a little bit lower in Milwaukee metro.

-I would describe the overall atmosphere of Milwaukee metro to be a little more festive, celebration-oriented, down-to-earth, traditional. I would describe Minneapolis to be a little more fast-paced, concerned about modernism, bigger, and trying harder to cater to the culture of hipness that you'd find in L.A., Chicago, etc.

Personally, I find the lakefront to be a huge advantage to Milwaukee metro.

Furthermore, I personally would "vote" for Milwaukee, however, I am admittedly biased to the area. To me, it just feels more "comfortable" and "homey" and relaxed and authentic to Minneapolis...but Minneapolis has its strong sides of course too. I think the slightly better weather in Milwaukee, combined with the lakefront, the lower cost of living, and the proximity to Chicago would in your case maybe tilt you towards Milwaukee, too. I think both are great cities / areas in their own ways.

[Northstar17]

Hey thanks, I have heard quite a bit about a few of Milwaukee's music festivels, and I mean hey, come on, Wisconsin is the land of brats and beer...what's not to love about that? That's the one thing that bothers me about Minneapolis, they are most certainly trying to become a more modern downtown, and through that, it loses some of its charm (another reason I am more partial to St. Paul, it's more of older city, more of a laid-back feeling to it.)

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by Northstar17

Hey thanks, I have heard quite a bit about a few of Milwaukee's music festivels, and I mean hey, come on, Wisconsin is the land of brats and beer...what's not to love about that? That's the one thing that bothers me about Minneapolis, they are most certainly trying to become a more modern downtown, and through that, it loses some of its charm (another reason I am more partial to St. Paul, it's more of older city, more of a laid-back feeling to it.)

Yeah, I actually couldn't agree more with you. If I lived in the Twin Cities area, I would easily opt for St. Paul, just because it seems more genuine, older, "authentic", etc. Don't get me wrong...a huge advantage of living in St. Paul would be being able to visit Minneapolis and use some of the ammenities that they have, but as for living, a place in my opinion like St. Paul or Milwaukee is just more pleasant.

When you say that through Minneapolis' admittedly highly modern downtown continues to be updated, it loses some of its charm, you probably said it better than I tried to. To me, Downtown Milwaukee is just bulging with charm...it is unique, fun, and different.

But yeah, Wisconsinites embrace the whole beer and brat thing, and those things can be great. But Milwaukee also is becoming very hip, modern, etc., so you can celebrate or have fun in many different ways. Regardless of how you like to celebrate though...especially in the summers...Milwaukeeans know how to enjoy themselves as a community.

[43north87west]

I'll cast a vote for Milwaukee based on the location. Between Lake Michigan and as someone else said, the close proximity to Chicagoland, it is great.

Traffic isn't bad (locals don't think this is a true statement but it is).

The once blue collar town is really turning around. You can have a great time in this city. Plus Lake Michigan is there. There are great places to live both in and out of the city, but my favorite is the East Side (Upper or Lower) and Riverwest.

Last year I flew some 50 or so times on Midwest Airlines, HQ in Milwaukee, WI. I can tell you, there's nothing like the ease of Mitchell Int'l airport. MSP is nice but this is so easy (and has a lot more flights than people think). Inexpensive too. Not O'Hare inexpensive, but often very little more. And so accessible. For me that is a huge factor, just because I have to fly so often and hate having to fight traffic in and out of airports (car AND air traffic) in places like Dulles and Reagan, O'Hare, and the other huge hub airports.

I just visited for the first time in 6 months. I was amazed at the huge number of restored condos and lofts available since last time. It is experiencing a regeneration of the urban areas, and overall, is a very nice city. I am not happy that I left, but work kind of forced me to move. A year later, I don't even have the same job, and I'm thinking of going back.

What I always tell people is, if Milwaukee had better weather, it would be one of the best cities anywhere.

And in terms of weather, Minneapolis isn't any better so it is a toss up for me on the weather factor. Of course, there are real plusses to Minneapolis as well, and it has more people. But more traffic, etc. I don't know if this really helped.

[Fishtacos]

I'll jump in....familiar with both, no bias.

As a city, Twin Cities. Bigger, more opportunities etc...much more progressive than Milwaukee. Don't like how Twin cities are so spread out from each other however etc...

Cleanliness, and aesthetics, Twin cities. Much cleaner city. I know people who moved from Milwaukee to Minny area because of this ...different groups of people because of this factor...size and attractiveness overall. And I am speaking city and all metro area as well.

The areas where Milwaukee has the Twin cities....proximity to another major metro. You can drive to Chicago in 1.5 hrs....St. Louis is 5.5 hr drive....Indianpolis is not far either, less of a drive than STL. I've driven to ND football games in South Bend which is very close to Chicago...etc...as you are catching my drift. Madison is also a good weekend spot at U of Wisconsin.

Also, less spread out downtown area where people can hang out and go out, especially in summer. Very easy to walk or drive side streets in and out of the city.

If you don't mind that Milwaukee will not be as pretty overall or near as big, ....and are concerned more with proximity etc...and other things, you can do fine. Milwaukee is still the gray cement rust belt city in some regards.

If you are comparing suburbs to suburbs, I'd take Twin Cities. I believe Milwaukee is best expereinced by living in the city or very near it. Milwaukee will have less suburbs to choose from as well.

Milwaukee is definitely a bar/steakhouse....meat and potatoes town....however, big strides...downtown have been made in past 5-8 yrs to diversify this, slowly coming along. Needs more and better variety of original as well as more creative, ecclectic places. Progress is being made. The feel of Milwaukee's Third Ward area, Brewer's Hill, and lower East side are much different from many other parts of town.

Milwaukee has very little traffic. There is a big highway construction project going on for a few years....but only Milwaukee natives and locals will tell you there is much traffic compared to other bigger cities. Spend time in Chicago and come back and those people would say wow, Milwaukee has little traffic. And that of course is an advantage of being able to get in and out of downtown easily via car, and be able to drive downtown, something you can't do in Chicago or some other towns. Anyone who tells you about Milwaukee traffic doesn't get out of Milwaukee much, there is very little. And yes, some locals actually call it a lot of traffic when they have no idea what actual traffic is....

Amenities...this also would go to Twin Cities...I know this is a strange example, but it is top of head, and you are from that area but there is one Target in North side suburbs and one in West suburbs, and one South suburbs, and that is about it. Just not plentiful choices sometimes for things, that you take for granted in other bigger places.

If you asked me this question 5 years ago(or any time prior) I would have said hands down Twin Cities, or just go for it and move to Chicago. Now it is much more of a discussion.

Again, what is your lifestyle? Married? Kids? etc...you said you lived outside of Twin Cities...so I am assuming at the least suburban lifestyle....

Driving to Chicago is about 1.5 hrs. 90 minutes also by train downtown to downtown. Easier and less stressful to take train. Then cab to your destination. During weekends, rush hr etc...time goes up....this would be all summer weekends and anytime not between 10-2 during week. 5-6 am isn't bad. Drive to O'Hare in burbs is about 1hr.

There are tons of festivals in the summer, nearly every weekend, some are better than others.

Milwaukee is slow, as is all of the Midwest, including Chicago. Again, everything is relative. Some people in Milwaukee or Twin Cities etc...think Chicago is faster pace, but really Chicago is a slow paced Midwestern city unlike the East Coast. And that can be good or bad depending on your view.

Weather is not much different from Twin Cities or Chicago...but Chicago is slightly better than Mil, which is slightly better than Twin Cities.

Milwaukee is not as much of an outdoors feel than Twin Cities...where people thrive outside in cold weather...etc...it's not that type of town. Twin cities is a more active town physically imo. outside, exercise etc...

Milwaukee's lakefront is nice but could be improved.

Segregation exists like most of the Midwest, not much integration. Chicago has the most diversity and integration in race, lifestyle etc...attitude. And there are still many parts of Chicago that aren't.

School systems. Milwaukee Public schools are not strong. Have to be selective when choosing school system.

Airport is easy and small in Milwaukee, not nice like Minneapolis.(Think Hartford) And not as many flights and choices etc....Convenience=Milwaukee....but cost is better in Chicago and options. O'Hare though is poorly run imo. poorly laid out, always delayed. 1 hr ride to O'Hare is easy drive.

Milwaukee is more like Cincy, Indy, KC, Pittsburgh....etc...size wise....slightly smaller than even those. So it is definitely considerably smaller with less amenities especially with suburbs.

Most people I know have moved from Twin Cities to Chicago, or from Chicago or Milwaukee to Twin Cities. Though I do know some that moved to Milwaukee for school or a job and stayed.

Lots of Twin cities people in the Milwaukee area, and Chicago.

Milwaukee is definitely a driving town. If you live in city somewhere, you can cab it to just fine, even to airport for cheap.

The feel of Milwaukee depends on where you spend your time. It's pretty small, a family town, nowhere near as modern as Twin cities which is either good or bad depending on what you want. Milwaukee has finally developed multiple areas for entertainment and living in its city/downtown area and this was not the case even a few years ago. I'd say Milwaukee got a late start, but a lot of progress is being made, and a lot more still needs to be made.

It's a good town, and I would live in Milwaukee over all of those other comparable size cities mentioned above. Tough to compare with Twin Cities, because it is much smaller.

Twin Cities would be more comparable in size to a St. Louis, and also isolation. If Milwaukee were isolated like those cities, it would be way too small for a lot of people. But it's not, so there are plenty of short road trips.

[mel55880]

I have lived near Minneapolis and I have lived in Milwaukee....

I have to say my favorite part about Milwaukee is it's proximity to many other fun and unique cities... really if you get tired of Milwaukee and need something more fast paced, it's an hour or so from Chicago. If you need something more laid back and relaxed an hour or so will take you either to Green Bay or Madison. Even Appleton.. if your craving that redneck country scene is accessible with ease via car within an hour or so.

Minneapolis has it's charm too, but the winters are just way too bitter cold and I find people are a little too modern for my taste, not to mention I always get lost in that city!

[Northstar17]

Hey thanks for all the information, people from Milwaukee are sure helpful. As Fishtacos assumed, I do live in an 3rd ring suburb, though it has more of a small town feel to it. Traffic in the outer suburbs is particularly bad, and it's good to know Milwaukee doesn't have the expansive suburbs and the endless road construction that comes with it. But while we're on the topic of suburbs, how are some of the suburbs closer to the city like West Allis, are they more urbanized or still expanding?

[Fishtacos]

What are you looking for?

West Allis is older, blue collar, smaller homes close to one another, generally speaking. Sort of place that never changes. It's reputation isn't the greatest for "character" and "feel"....more of a redneck area if I may be so frank to tell it like it is....the Milwaukee Mile race track, Wisconsin State Fair Park is there....some may find this founded or unfounded.

West Allis? Affordability, yes. closeness to city? Yes. IMO....Wauwatosa has more character, which is close to that area...but probably a bit more expensive. Close in burb with character, neighborhood feel. Also, parts of Bayview would be close burbs as well, with more character imo.

Just one opinion.

[Northstar17]

Personally, I do find the older, more smaller brick homes more charming then that of the larger homes that seem to sprout up everywhere throughout these last couple of years (one of the reasons I dislike the outer ring suburbs.) One thing I really do miss about Chicago and Duluth are the alleys, it seems that none of the suburbs in the MPLS-STP metro are have alleys, and to me, that's a shame. Now how is Wauwatosa, it seems to be a little outside the immedite metro area, so I imagine that it would feel more like its own town versus a suburb (if that makes any sense to you,) or am I wrong. Also, how is Kenosha, it's a good size town that seems to be between Milwaukee and Chicago, I have heard some bad things about Racine, should I be cautious?