Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I feel like downtown Cleveland might be just a bit more vibrant than downtown Milwaukee, but I really do like both cities. The benefit for Milwaukee though is it's closer to Chicago, so there's much more to do just to the south, whereas Cleveland is kind of by itself in the region when it comes to big cities. Can't go wrong with either.... for standalone cities, I'd say Cleveland maybe has a slight edge, but considering Milwaukee's location, Milwaukee wins there for sure.
Milwaukee is the better city IMO and you are close to Chicago too.
I actually didn't like Cleveland. While it had some great urban bones, I found it to be too dirty and gritty for my tastes. Their lakefront isn't as nice and the city to me doesn't feel like it has too much potential, or at least it won't be realized. Milwaukee I think has more potential, and that has to do where it sits geographically.
Milwaukee might get colder and snowier, but isn't Cleveland a lot more gray in the winter?
Good points... Yes I think Lake Michigan is more accessible and beach-ier than Lake Erie, esp near downtown. And we don't have to talk about how historically bad Cleveland has been toward making its lake in-around downtown more attractive residentially a la a Milwaukee and (esp) Chicago. ... but Cleveland's Edgewater Park, about 2-3 miles west of downtown (plus little Whisky Island, which is just off downtown) are improving rapidly. But Cleveland is improving in this area, slowly but surely, and while the City doesn't have a river-walk comparable to Milwaukee's, but my perception is that the Flats, along the Cuyahoga River, though much smaller, is a bit livelier esp on weekends. Both Lake Erie and the Cuyahoga River, despite their infamous industrial pasts of several decades ago, have been cleaned up significantly so to the extent that they have been granted awards by national fresh water organizations and are now attractive for swimming (at Edgewater and the few other city beaches), sailing and water sports. There are even jet ski, paddle boat and canoe rentals right downtown.
But no question having a great old mid-to-high rise neighborhood like the Lower East Side really gives Milwaukee a strong umph. Ohio City is kinda-sorta similar and is growing a lot, but it's different. Each have their own strengths but it's hard to compare them. Overall it seems CLE may have a few more walkable mixed-use retail districts than Milwaukee but both cities have similarities in this area.
Cleveland's Lakewood and Milwaukee's Shorewood are very similar old, middle/upper middle class, close-in lakeshore suburbs. Lakewood is probably a bit more diverse, income-wise, as there are a few more marginal areas along its lower eastern border.
Overall though, I find them to be very similar Midwestern cities.
I live in Shorewood and my mom is from Euclid. I've spent a lot of time in downtown CLE and a few of it's suburbs (mostly Strongsville and Shaker) but haven't spent significant time in Lakewood so I'll take your word for it. Lakewood is quite a bit bigger than Shorewood though.
ETA: I was just looking at their respective pages on CD and they don't look all that similar. Shorewood is wealthier than the average Wisconsinite and our homes are significantly more valuable. Lakewood is average for Ohio or just under.
Demographics are similar with Shorewood having more Asians, Lakewood more Blacks and Hispanics. Ancestries are more similar than not but not exactly mirrored. We have a lot of Russians here. Lakewood is more dense but Shorewood is significantly more educated.
Political leanings are EXACTLY the same. Neither area is particularly religious but Lakewood just slightly more. Making up the numbers mostly with catholics.
Are they similar simply based on architecture and proximity to downtown? Or is this data from CD just misleading? Maybe like you said there are just more areas of Lakewood that skew the average considering it's population is 4x Shorewood's. (Honest questions here, not trolling).
But like I said earlier, I don't think you could go wrong in either city.
ETA: I was just looking at their respective pages on CD and they don't look all that similar. Shorewood is wealthier than the average Wisconsinite and our homes are significantly more valuable. Lakewood is average for Ohio or just under.
Not surprised. Lakewood has a some low/moderate income tracts to its southeast. But along the lake (at the Gold Coast mid-to-high rises) on the east shore, and the mansions on the west shore, are upper middle class to wealthy districts, esp in/near its Clifton Park neighborhood... Much of the rest is solid middle class which, overall, would likely make Lakewood middle income as opposed to Shorewood which sounds more upper middle class overall... Lakewood is a lot larger than Shorewood population-wise and has a significant downtown area along Detroit in/around Warren Road, which I don't see in Shorewood.
Not surprised. Lakewood has a some low/moderate income tracts to its southeast. But along the lake (at the Gold Coast mid-to-high rises) on the east shore, and the mansions on the west shore, are upper middle class to wealthy districts, esp in/near its Clifton Park neighborhood... Much of the rest is solid middle class which, overall, would likely make Lakewood middle income as opposed to Shorewood which sounds more upper middle class overall... Lakewood is a lot larger than Shorewood population-wise and has a significant downtown area along Detroit in/around Warren Road, which I don't see in Shorewood.
You're right that we don't have a significant downtown area. Our commercial strips are Oakland Ave and Capital Ave. Lakewood's overall walk score is 68 where Shorewood scores 86. I guess density doesn't county for everything if it's mostly residential? Or perhaps it's just that the density is consolidated? Is there a website that shows what % of a city is residential/commercial? Of course this is also skewed by Lakewood's size 5.6 sq mi compared to Shorewood a nice compact 1.6 sq mi. We can walk to everything in town.
It's interesting to look at the lakefront houses on Googlemaps. They're more private in Lakewood where as ours are on a main thruway. They look newer in Lakewood like several of the original homes have been torn down to make way for new mansions?
Sorry, Lakewood, but your lakeside park will never compare to ours .
I'm sort of surprised at how many people are saying they are so similar. It does make sense since they are geographically so close, I just thought there would be some more differences discussed.
Both cities were attractive to me due to being sleeper cities that have a rep for being affordable and having decent economies. Cleveland is also sort of close to Toronto, and to New England, but it would still be quite a drive for either of those. Also, Cleveland is known for having great medical facilities. I was leaning more toward Milwaukee due to proximity to Chicago, Madison, and the UP.
I've lived in FL my whole life, and I am quickly learning that Fl has the best overall tax situation in the country. Are there any weird taxes or fees to know about (other than the state income tax)? I just learned a couple weeks ago that personal property tax is a thing in some states. Neither OH or WI have that, but I'm curious if there is anything else I'm not aware of.
Is Milwaukee known for having great medical facilities? Specifically in the area of orthopedics, if known?
Cleveland is going to be far better for medical facilities as we have the #1 hospital in the country in the Cleveland Clinic, and University Hospitals ranks highly as well.
Cost of Living is probably going to be similar and $1000/month will get you a decent place in many good areas.
Cleveland is going to have better restaurants...groceries are going to be similar but not sure if Milwaukee has a place like our Westside Market.
Can't go wrong in either place.
I’m under the impression that Milwaukee was affected less by urban blight due to suburbanization. From streetviews, it does seem like Milwaukee has fewer expanses of surface parking lots in its downtown and its census drop from its peak was less severe than Cleveland’s.
Overall, these are both great cities with fairly low costs of living and large enough to have sizable neighborhoods that are overall doing pretty well.
I’m under the impression that Milwaukee was affected less by urban blight due to suburbanization. From streetviews, it does seem like Milwaukee has fewer expanses of surface parking lots in its downtown and its census drop from its peak was less severe than Cleveland’s.
I agree these are advantages for Milwaukee, in addition to having a better lakefront downtown and a more-accessible river, though as I noted above, Cleveland's Flats/Cuyahoga river area is doing quite well and is expanding.
Milwaukee does have an advantage over Cleveland in having its popular, high-quality urban neighborhood, the Lower East Side, which is adjacent to downtown whereas Cleveland's Ohio City is across the large Cuyahoga River valley (the Flats) and University Circle is 5 miles to the East...
My list of Cleveland advantages over Milwaukee are:
- More abundant and diverse natural areas
- stronger downtown in terms of activities, restaurants and living (yes I know the total number of downtown residents can be skewed depending on who is doing the counting)
- better professional sports scene; more teams and better facilities all downtown (leading to Cleveland's more lively downtown in general)
- much better public transit
- and while Milwaukee may have a better Walk Score (whatever that entails), Cleveland
- Much stronger medical facilities & research
- stronger higher education -- Case Western U is higher ranked than Marquette and Milwaukee has no nearby liberal arts college on Oberlin's level.
- much stronger and more diverse culture and arts
- better and more diverse housing in the city (even with Cleveland's greater amount of blighted areas)
- better and more diverse suburbs
- better foodie scene (in addition to, as ohioaninsc noted, the fact that Milwaukee has no equivalent to Cleveland's West Side Market or even its nearby Urban Farming initiative)
I definitely am far more familiar with Milwaukee than I am in Cleveland (I've been in Cleveland, but as a Chicagoan....well, you know, Milwaukee is definitely in the neighborhood).
I've made the comparison I will make here a number of times. Regarding the 4 major US cities directly on the Great Lakes. You can pair them like this:
• Chicago/Milwaukee: extensively and pervasively designed lakefronts. In both cities, long stretches of the lakefront is public park, beach and the like. Chicago has a bit of an edge here insofar as in Chicago, the coverage is pretty much North Side, Downtown and South Side (only a few areas both north and south don't qualify on this). In Milwaukee, it is far more North Side (which is actually East Town) and Downtown that are lined with park and/or beach. South Side, not so much
• Cleveland/Buffalo: more of a mix of the public green and private property. In neither city does the lakefront make a truly strong statement.
So why did I include the above?
Milwaukee, of course, is so similar to Chicago in numerous ways. Like Chicago to a smaller extent, Milwaukee's downtown and its lakefront are responsible for a string of trendy, inviting neighborhoods going north from the core. As such, I think, Milwaukee creates a highly desirable urban strip of land that Cleveland cannot.
Using "North Side" here for East Town and other lakefront neighborhoods, partially because it correlates to Chicago: Milw's North Side is pretty much prime property from downtown to city limits. In this respect, it exceeds Chicago. In Milwaukee, mansions line the lakefront at the very north end of town, the section north of UWM. Prime Chicago real estate peters out before reaching city limits. Rogers Park on the far north side lakefront is a far cry from the elegance of Milwaukee's far north lakefront. And in Milwaukee, the prime property continues past city limits to the northern lakefront suburbs like Shorewood and Whitefish Bay. These suburbs are quite similar to Chicago's North Shore. In Chicago, as noted, the far north side lakefront isn't really prime, so there is a gap between the string between Downtown/prime north lakefront areas to the North Shore, starting in Evanston. In Milwaukee: no gap.
Bottom line: both cities are on a Great Lakes lakefront. Milwaukee got the better end of the deal and certainly the better lake. Lakefront culture is much bigger in Milwaukee than Cleveland.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
