How similar is Milwaukee to Chicago?....its very close and kind of cool looking place.

How similar is Milwaukee to Chicago?....its very close and kind of cool looking place.

It would probably be a vast overstate to refer to Milwaukee as a miniature Chicago. However, similiarities exist. No Great Lakes city outside of Chicago has maintained its lakefront to the degree that Milwaukee has. Milw grew with the same kind of industrialization/immigration forces that fueled Chgo's growth.

Milw's location 90 miles from Chgo has been a critical factor in the city's development. IMHO there were times when the location hampered its growth and development. Today I would see it differently. I preceive the two growing into one large metro area. With in that area, Chgo and Milw compliment each other: big city, small city. Chicago is the mecca, the heartbeat. Milwaukee? great place with terrific German restaurants, wonderful attractions (the domes, art musuem, etc.) in a less hectic, far more user friendly setting than Chicago offers. Milwaukeeans always partook of the pleasures of Chicago. More and more Chicagoans are doing the same with Milwaukee.

They are so different. And yet they are related. Cousins, probably, definitely not brothers.

Chicago is bigger, dirtier, more glorious, more mundane, more hectic, more congested, more fun, more hassle, more everything.

Milwaukee is a sleepy little town, comparatively. It is superior to Chicago in only the following ways:

1. Milwaukee is cleaner and prettier than Chicago.
2. Milwaukee has better bars per capita than Chicago.
3. Milwaukee has more accesible and more interesting parkland than Chicago.

In every other category, Chicago wins. Handily, I might add.

edsg25 is correct when he says that similar industrial and immigration forces created the two cities, the difference is that chicago just never stopped growing at its torrid pace, which is why there is such a drastic difference in size of these two metros. both were founded upon relatively narrow rivers that served as busy commercial harbors for the great lakes shipping industry, but when the railroad came to chicago, milwaukee was left in its dust, so to speak.

the two cities, while appearing similar on the surface, do have different qualties that i think compliment eachother, chicago is the big giant chaotic mess of a city, while milwaukee offers a less hectic pace yet still retains an urban vibe. milwaukee also seems to have a far lower percentage in the yuppie douche bag department compared to chicago. at the neighborhood level, milwaukee seems to have a much higher percentage of wood frame buildings than chicago, but that probably has more to do with chicago's stringent building codes after the great fire in 1871.

milwaukee is a great city, and it's certainly not just a little chicago. it has it's own deal going on up there. i guess that milwaukee does live in the chicago shadow a bit, but a lot of the milwaukeeans i have met and known, either don't notice it a whole lot or at least pretend not to notice it. they have their own city with their own identity. the two metros may sprawl together in 20 or 30 years, but the two cities will forever remain absolutely distinct in identity. there will never be a day when a milwaukean identifies with living in the larger chicagoland regional metropolitan area.

it really is a blessing to our Gachiwaukerami Region to have both of these wonderful cities.

Is it possible for Milwaukee to turn into a psuedo resort town?

You know lets get away for the weekend and hit Milwaukee(I know that doesnt sound sexy). Or even live in Milwaukee and do business in Chicago.

Clean, alot of parkland, waterfront, walkable, established urban environment and a short commute (train/car) to Chicago. Alot of people(including myself) love the idea of living in a real urban environment(not suburb) within easy/quick access to an international city.

Im guessing it must be really cheap to live there.

Milwaukee is a sleepy little town, comparatively. It is superior to Chicago in only the following ways:

1. Milwaukee is cleaner and prettier than Chicago.
2. Milwaukee has better bars per capita than Chicago.
3. Milwaukee has more accesible and more interesting parkland than Chicago.

With all due respect... you've missed April Fool's day by about six months.

1. Cleaner? Maybe. Prettier? Do you actually have eyes?

2. I don't know the numbers, but, I find this SO hard to believe.

3. Accessible? If a car=accessibility, then maybe. More interesting? Have you ever actually been to Chicago? Grant Park, Millennium Park, Delaware Park, Jackson Park, Washington Park, Lincoln Park... the list goes on and on. These are some of the top urban parks in the nation... how could you possibly say that Milw's are more interesting with a straight face?

They have topography.

They are so different. And yet they are related. Cousins, probably, definitely not brothers.

Chicago is bigger, dirtier, more glorious, more mundane, more hectic, more congested, more fun, more hassle, more everything.

Milwaukee is a sleepy little town, comparatively. It is superior to Chicago in only the following ways:

1. Milwaukee is cleaner and prettier than Chicago.
2. Milwaukee has better bars per capita than Chicago.
3. Milwaukee has more accesible and more interesting parkland than Chicago.

In every other category, Chicago wins. Handily, I might add.

I'm thinking about going to Milwaukee for the first time this weekend. Where are the cool bars, nightlife and such?

I think the historic third world. Bars are down every corner in Milwaukee though, literally. It'll just be a residential neighborhood, then boom, a bar.

3. Accessible? If a car=accessibility, then maybe. More interesting? Have you ever actually been to Chicago? Grant Park, Millennium Park, Delaware Park, Jackson Park, Washington Park, Lincoln Park... the list goes on and on. These are some of the top urban parks in the nation... how could you possibly say that Milw's are more interesting with a straight face?

Not quite sure what you mean by "if a car=accessibility" with regard to Milwaukee's parks. Have you ever actually been to Milwaukee? You don't need a car in order to access our parks. In fact, a good majority of the parks are on at least one bus line, or a very short walk (a couple blocks) from a bus line--that is, if there isn't already a park in your neighborhood, or you want to go to one across town. There are a few only a few exceptions to this with the parks in the far southern sprawlburbs. Not only that, but many Milwaukee County parks are actually interconnected via bike/pedestrian trails, especially along the northern and southern lake shores, as well as through our three river corridors (reminiscant of the "Emerald Necklace" of Boston's park system, and others).

So yes, Milwaukee's parks are incredibly accessible, without a car.

Location. Location. Location. The three most important words in real estate.

Did Chicago luck out over Milwaukee. At the southern tip of Lake Michigan, Chicago cashed in on the east coast-west coast connections, rail and road. And the Chicago River does something the Milwaukee River could not do: take us towards the Mississippir River system. Only Chicago, with the IMC, was able to link up the Miss R. system and the Great Lakes and secure the transportation heart of the continent.

Milwaukee, 90 miles away, so near, so far.

Markitekt... yes... I have been to Milwaukee. And I did try taking public around the city without too much luck. The bus service was spotty at best and seemed very underutilized. It just struck me as a car-dominated city. That's all I'm saying.

Milwaukee is a sleepy little town, comparatively. It is superior to Chicago in only the following ways:

1. Milwaukee is cleaner and prettier than Chicago.
2. Milwaukee has better bars per capita than Chicago.
3. Milwaukee has more accesible and more interesting parkland than Chicago.
---------------------
With all due respect... you've missed April Fool's day by about six months.

1. Cleaner? Maybe. Prettier? Do you actually have eyes?

2. I don't know the numbers, but, I find this SO hard to believe.

3. Accessible? If a car=accessibility, then maybe. More interesting? Have you ever actually been to Chicago? Grant Park, Millennium Park, Delaware Park, Jackson Park, Washington Park, Lincoln Park... the list goes on and on. These are some of the top urban parks in the nation... how could you possibly say that Milw's are more interesting with a straight face?


Mystad used to live in Chicago.

Definitely there are similarities. Like most Great Lakes cities, there are societal similarities. I would argue that Toronto, also a Great Lakes city has upheld its lakefront as well as this pair, or at least is in the process of doing so.

Milwaukee is a sleepy little town, comparatively. It is superior to Chicago in only the following ways:

1. Milwaukee is cleaner and prettier than Chicago.
2. Milwaukee has better bars per capita than Chicago.
3. Milwaukee has more accesible and more interesting parkland than Chicago.

With all due respect... you've missed April Fool's day by about six months.

1. Cleaner? Maybe. Prettier? Do you actually have eyes?

2. I don't know the numbers, but, I find this SO hard to believe.

3. Accessible? If a car=accessibility, then maybe. More interesting? Have you ever actually been to Chicago? Grant Park, Millennium Park, Delaware Park, Jackson Park, Washington Park, Lincoln Park... the list goes on and on. These are some of the top urban parks in the nation... how could you possibly say that Milw's are more interesting with a straight face?

Because I have played frisbee in all of the above (except Millennium Park which was finished after I moved)... it may be unpopular to say it but I prefer the wooded seclusion of Milwaukee's Lake Park on the bluffs to the elegant but flat and highway-cut acres of both Grant and Lincoln Parks in Chicago.

To your other points- Milwaukee is cleaner and prettier on the whole than Chicago. I have no scientific instruments to prove this, but five years of living in Milwaukee and 3 years in Chicago are fairly significant time spans to have gathered my own empirical evidence and form an opinion (one shared by many who have also lived in both cities). I'm not just talking about downtowns.

And yes, I did say that Milwaukee has better bars per capita than Chicago. I'm standing by this one, too. Milwaukee is a drinking town that deserves a global reputation. Goonsta is right- there's a bar on every corner. Milwaukee actually doesn't have any churches or gyms or anything- just bars.

Everything else- Chicago. By about as big a margin as last night's debate.

when i think of a park...I think of a place i can toss the frisbee, play soccer, run or bike at anytime of day. This is very important to me.

Do the parks in Chicago or Milwaukee close or are they open continuously?

I'm thinking about going to Milwaukee for the first time this weekend. Where are the cool bars, nightlife and such?

All over the damn place- that's kind of a problem for foreigners but I can reccommend a few places:

Brady Street area:
HiHat and Garage
The Nomad

Bayview:
The Palomino
Bar Lulu
Cactus Club (you like punk or garage rock?)

I really like a bar in Riverwest called the Art Bar, and also there's a really cool place called the Trocadero that has an upstairs bar called the Red Light that is pretty cool. These are less grungy and more "bohemian" but both have a nice feel to them.

Let's see- also in Riverwest is a place called Onopa Brewing Company that's neat. They have lots of good live music, anything from indie rock to electronic music (Mouse on Mars played last weekend).

I would say, best place to start would be Brady Street. Most of the places I mentioned above are spread throughout the city. Brady street is a good mix of everything- and it's always crowded with people.

A couple of other places- Mayfield's in Riverwest is relaxed and they play a lot of jazz records- sometimes the owner sings for you (he's really great).

The thing about Milwaukee is that you can usually sink into a booth at a bar and spend most of the night there- rarely will it ever be so crowded you can't hear or you have to stand.

Oh yeah, there's the Landmark on Farwell and North- a vast underground bowling/arcade/bar thing that is totally grungy but also excellent.

I'm missing about 100 places. Paddy's Irish bar (excellent courtyard), etc... I don't think this is very helpful. :cheers:

MKE bars are my favorite. Somehow the bars up there manage to be welcoming to everyone; factory workers, hipsters, bikers, students, bohemians... everyone. It's a fun vibe. Plus, the beer is good (obviously).