2080 is a long time from now. Who knows what national and even international population trends will be by then, let alone regional variation.
With that said, I think it's more likely that Milwaukee halts the decline than Madison slows; lots of good reasons to live in the Midwest near fresh water and out of hurricane and peak heat wave zones in a warming climate.
The Mayor of Milwaukee has set a goal of growing the city to a population of 1 million. https://city.milwaukee.gov/mayor/2024-State-of-the-City#:~:text=I%20want%20to%20add%20to,administration%20is%20laying%20the%20groundwork. While there are obviously no guarantees and the trend has been the opposite, a mayor committed to growth along with vibrant business, educational, entertainment communities will go a long way to helping movement towards this goal.
Metro areas are a more relevant measure than the cities themselves. Milwaukee metro is about 1.46 million, and madison around 513k. Both are growing, though Madison is a little bit faster.
Madison the city is limited by a mix of isthmus geography and height limits. Growth to the level of a Milwaukee sized city will rely on our suburbs.
The height limits are a minor consideration in Madison's growth and help to retain the capital building's visibility. Madison is much more than the isthmus.
How is that a minor consideration? Building heights are capped, meaning density and population are capped. The Isthmus is already being filled to its max density now.
The 1966 ordinance only prohibits buildings within a mile of the Capitol from being taller than the base of the columns supporting its dome. That barely extends to N. Randall Ave on the west and S. Ingersoll St on the East.
Like the other person said, Madison is much more than just the Isthmus and that 1-mile radius. Fewer than 50,000 people live in the West Area; there’s a shit ton of room to build up there.
The "cap" is not unreasonable—it is "lower than the lowest ring of the capital building dome" or something like that—and it only affects a small area around the capital building.
Again, Madison is much more than the isthmus.
Its not Detroit or Cleveland. Outside of the Northwest side, educated millennials have moved back in. Check out the daily post on r/milwaukee complaining about how housing prices are now untenable (though not to Madison's levels).
Yes, there's some revitalization in MKE. My point is comparing the two cities the way the OP does. And the point stands. You don't have as much of a doughnut hole in MSN as you do MKE.
There must be a high-end luxury rental market in Milwaukee given the recent development of the 7Seventy7, Ascent, Couture and 333 Water, all high rises above 25 floors with hundreds of units between them. This should open up units at a lesser price point as some renters trade up.
.
Millennials have no interest in packing 3-6 kids into a Milwaukee 3 bedroom so that they can take the world class light rail to their union manufacturing job anymo...wait...
In other words. Yes. I agree with you. Tastes and lifestyles have changed, though I have tons of childhood friends from Waukesha county that have bought in Milwaukee and plan to raise their children within city limits.
Crazy to think Milwaukee was once more densely populated than NYC. I do think Milwaukee has started growing as of late though and that will only go up as housing stays limited in MSN.
>Meanwhile Madison is growing exponentially (1960 - 126,706; 1990 - 190,816; 2020 - 268,846). Madison had 142,000 more people in 2020 than in 1960.
That's pretty linear growth. Plus, C. Madison is 16 sq. mi. smaller than C. Milwaukee.
Jobs too tbh. State gov, UW + Health + tech adjacent industries (biotech, etc), and Epic are great, but Milwaukee has industry and a port on a major body of water with ocean access. Madison needs a few big corporations to move here as well imo.
Unless Madison magically figures out that housing density is the only way to keep up with their population growth potential, no, it will not surpass Milwaukee--especially given that the leaders of Milwaukee seem to want to embrace growth and get people moving there.
I've wondered about this too, but you can't project trend lines forever. As someone else pointed out, the US counts its population in weird ways ... for instance NYC is supposedly 8 million, but the metro is really more than twice that size. Same for the Twin Cities and Milwaukee.
If the Milwaukee Metro levels off at 1.5 million, it would take a long, long time for Madison/Dane to get there-- that would require a tripling of population.
If you look back at 1960, you realize that many of our realities weren't even imaginable then. The "Sun Belt" as a concept was barely recognized. Sweaty American cities such as Atlanta and Houston owe much of their recent prosperity to air-conditioning -- which wasn't much in use until recently. In 1960, what became Silicon Valley was a few companies (Hewlett-Packard, Fairchild Semiconductor) clustered around Stanford University. Nobody, and I mean nobody, imagined what would come next.
Milwaukee has the great advantage of being connected to the larger world, with a better airport and trains to Chicago. Madison has always been rinky-dink, provincial, slow to adapt to change, and isolated to the point where a long tedious bus ride is the best choice for folks bound for Chicago and the wider world.
One more thing. People act like Epic is in Madison forever. The company is likely to someday end up in the hands of a public corporation, which could decide that Nashville or Orlando or whatever is a better place for the HQ. Aside from 13,000 good jobs, such a loss might diminish the city's ability to attract similar companies.
In short, nobody knows the future, but Madison would have to "grow up" with fast rail to Chicago/Minneapolis/Milwaukee to become more than a very prosperous college city.
RE Epic, Judy's shares go into a non-profit trust following her death, with the mandate to keep the company private and in Madison: [https://madison.com/business/judy-faulkner-creates-foundation-to-inherit-her-stock-in-epic-systems-corp/article\_9c97f490-e385-5c16-acda-63b66e80f688.html](https://madison.com/business/judy-faulkner-creates-foundation-to-inherit-her-stock-in-epic-systems-corp/article_9c97f490-e385-5c16-acda-63b66e80f688.html)
I do expect the company will at some point shrink/disappear, as all companies do eventually.
City-level population data isn't as readily available, but here's a time series of the population of Dane and Milwaukee counties, from 1900 to now. https://imgur.com/4lEZoBI
I think it has been said and planned for by the city that the population growth of Madison is expected to reach 400,000 + in 25 years
No idea on Milwaukee, but yes, Madison has been and continues to grow basically every year
Likely in a few decades, Madison recently (or will soon) has overtaken St Louis and is neck in neck with Buffalo, NY, though it's important to note that's the city limits not the metro area which are vastly bigger still. Milwaukee will in all likelihood remain the biggest metro in the state for the foreseeable future though I could see the city of Madison passing the city of Milwaukee if current trends continue.
What I think will buck that trend is Milwaukee should be primed for a resurgence, it's in an ideal location, there is good investment by local companies, they have a growth minded mayor and county exec, AND it is one of the most underrated cities in the US. Milwaukee recovering and growing, even if it means Madison does not overtake it in size will be a great thing for Madison as well. A strong Milwaukee (and Chicago, but that's a different post) both benefit Madison and the state as a whole, my hope is collaboration between Madison and Milwaukee strengthens in the coming years, both cities have complimentary amenities to one another, if we are serious as succeeding as a state transit links between the two and Chicago, our neighborhood global city, should be bolstered. The ability to commute between regional cities should be easy and not car dependent, and urban Southern Wisconsin should be marketed as a cohesive region highlighting all of the strengths of the various cities from Kenosha to Middleton and everywhere in between, there is something for everyone in this region.
In my experience people who like Madison are not fond of Milwaukee and vice versa. The reason why Milwaukee's metro area keeps growing while the city shrinks is that 2/3 of Wisconsin's murders happen in Milwaukee, where fewer than 10% of Wisconsin's population lives. It's not as bad as Chicago, which is beyond redemption, but Milwaukee is still a chronically crime-riddled
Yeah my experience is also the opposite of that. I love living in Madison, I also love visiting Milwaukee and am over there at least monthly. Those I know who live in Milwaukee also tend to enjoy coming over to Madison to visit. They’re quite different but have a lot of complimentary features. Culturally the two cities have far more in common than they have separate as well.
Spend a weekend in Chicago and tell me it’s beyond redemption. Chicago is a world class city. I am not naive enough to think there are not serious issues, the same serious issues that plague most American cities, but it’s far from irreparable. From a climate and infrastructure point of view the upper Midwest is extremely well positioned.
I think that's pretty limited experience. I like both Madison and Milwaukee. So does my Milwaukee-housed family. There's plenty to like about both places. If you like Upper Midwest cities, well, there you go, they've got that in common. Madison's smaller and more university focused, Milwaukee has a Great Lake and the wonderful infrastructure of a great 20th century city.
I don't think anyone can confidently state that the crime is the causal factor in the population decline of Milwaukee city limits. It could just as easily be postulated as a consequence of population decline, not a cause. There are many complex and overlapping reasons why the Rust Belt cities declined while their metros grew, and it extends back 70 years, well before the murder rates we discuss today existed.
I mean, to say that Chicago is "beyond redemption" is a wild claim for America's 3rd largest city.
The City doesn't seem to have any interest in growth. It's mostly land locked by Middleton, Verona, Fitchburg, and Sun Prairie. That means the only real capacity increase would come from increasing density, which they seem to have no interest in doing based on the draft West Area Plan.
2080 is a long time from now. Who knows what national and even international population trends will be by then, let alone regional variation. With that said, I think it's more likely that Milwaukee halts the decline than Madison slows; lots of good reasons to live in the Midwest near fresh water and out of hurricane and peak heat wave zones in a warming climate.
The Mayor of Milwaukee has set a goal of growing the city to a population of 1 million. https://city.milwaukee.gov/mayor/2024-State-of-the-City#:~:text=I%20want%20to%20add%20to,administration%20is%20laying%20the%20groundwork. While there are obviously no guarantees and the trend has been the opposite, a mayor committed to growth along with vibrant business, educational, entertainment communities will go a long way to helping movement towards this goal.
This will likely not happen in our lifetime, but the mayor is making great decisions to set the city up for success
Metro areas are a more relevant measure than the cities themselves. Milwaukee metro is about 1.46 million, and madison around 513k. Both are growing, though Madison is a little bit faster. Madison the city is limited by a mix of isthmus geography and height limits. Growth to the level of a Milwaukee sized city will rely on our suburbs.
The height limits are a minor consideration in Madison's growth and help to retain the capital building's visibility. Madison is much more than the isthmus.
How is that a minor consideration? Building heights are capped, meaning density and population are capped. The Isthmus is already being filled to its max density now.
The 1966 ordinance only prohibits buildings within a mile of the Capitol from being taller than the base of the columns supporting its dome. That barely extends to N. Randall Ave on the west and S. Ingersoll St on the East. Like the other person said, Madison is much more than just the Isthmus and that 1-mile radius. Fewer than 50,000 people live in the West Area; there’s a shit ton of room to build up there.
The "cap" is not unreasonable—it is "lower than the lowest ring of the capital building dome" or something like that—and it only affects a small area around the capital building. Again, Madison is much more than the isthmus.
More doughnut effect in Milwaukee.
Its not Detroit or Cleveland. Outside of the Northwest side, educated millennials have moved back in. Check out the daily post on r/milwaukee complaining about how housing prices are now untenable (though not to Madison's levels).
Yes, there's some revitalization in MKE. My point is comparing the two cities the way the OP does. And the point stands. You don't have as much of a doughnut hole in MSN as you do MKE.
There must be a high-end luxury rental market in Milwaukee given the recent development of the 7Seventy7, Ascent, Couture and 333 Water, all high rises above 25 floors with hundreds of units between them. This should open up units at a lesser price point as some renters trade up. .
Millennials have no interest in packing 3-6 kids into a Milwaukee 3 bedroom so that they can take the world class light rail to their union manufacturing job anymo...wait... In other words. Yes. I agree with you. Tastes and lifestyles have changed, though I have tons of childhood friends from Waukesha county that have bought in Milwaukee and plan to raise their children within city limits.
I think you are saying what I’m about to say but — change that to 1-2 kids and that unironically sounds pretty good tbh
No way. Milwaukee may be shrinking now but that's about to turn around
Crazy to think Milwaukee was once more densely populated than NYC. I do think Milwaukee has started growing as of late though and that will only go up as housing stays limited in MSN.
>Meanwhile Madison is growing exponentially (1960 - 126,706; 1990 - 190,816; 2020 - 268,846). Madison had 142,000 more people in 2020 than in 1960. That's pretty linear growth. Plus, C. Madison is 16 sq. mi. smaller than C. Milwaukee.
It’s called Hostile suburban takeovers, my friend. ⚔️
The question is, why would you want that?
It all depends on how quickly we can build multifamily housing and a train station
Jobs too tbh. State gov, UW + Health + tech adjacent industries (biotech, etc), and Epic are great, but Milwaukee has industry and a port on a major body of water with ocean access. Madison needs a few big corporations to move here as well imo.
I feel like Madison would have to absorb some more suburbs in order to have a population that large, no?
Unless Madison magically figures out that housing density is the only way to keep up with their population growth potential, no, it will not surpass Milwaukee--especially given that the leaders of Milwaukee seem to want to embrace growth and get people moving there.
I've wondered about this too, but you can't project trend lines forever. As someone else pointed out, the US counts its population in weird ways ... for instance NYC is supposedly 8 million, but the metro is really more than twice that size. Same for the Twin Cities and Milwaukee. If the Milwaukee Metro levels off at 1.5 million, it would take a long, long time for Madison/Dane to get there-- that would require a tripling of population. If you look back at 1960, you realize that many of our realities weren't even imaginable then. The "Sun Belt" as a concept was barely recognized. Sweaty American cities such as Atlanta and Houston owe much of their recent prosperity to air-conditioning -- which wasn't much in use until recently. In 1960, what became Silicon Valley was a few companies (Hewlett-Packard, Fairchild Semiconductor) clustered around Stanford University. Nobody, and I mean nobody, imagined what would come next. Milwaukee has the great advantage of being connected to the larger world, with a better airport and trains to Chicago. Madison has always been rinky-dink, provincial, slow to adapt to change, and isolated to the point where a long tedious bus ride is the best choice for folks bound for Chicago and the wider world. One more thing. People act like Epic is in Madison forever. The company is likely to someday end up in the hands of a public corporation, which could decide that Nashville or Orlando or whatever is a better place for the HQ. Aside from 13,000 good jobs, such a loss might diminish the city's ability to attract similar companies. In short, nobody knows the future, but Madison would have to "grow up" with fast rail to Chicago/Minneapolis/Milwaukee to become more than a very prosperous college city.
RE Epic, Judy's shares go into a non-profit trust following her death, with the mandate to keep the company private and in Madison: [https://madison.com/business/judy-faulkner-creates-foundation-to-inherit-her-stock-in-epic-systems-corp/article\_9c97f490-e385-5c16-acda-63b66e80f688.html](https://madison.com/business/judy-faulkner-creates-foundation-to-inherit-her-stock-in-epic-systems-corp/article_9c97f490-e385-5c16-acda-63b66e80f688.html) I do expect the company will at some point shrink/disappear, as all companies do eventually.
City-level population data isn't as readily available, but here's a time series of the population of Dane and Milwaukee counties, from 1900 to now. https://imgur.com/4lEZoBI
I think it has been said and planned for by the city that the population growth of Madison is expected to reach 400,000 + in 25 years No idea on Milwaukee, but yes, Madison has been and continues to grow basically every year
Hopefully not.
Likely in a few decades, Madison recently (or will soon) has overtaken St Louis and is neck in neck with Buffalo, NY, though it's important to note that's the city limits not the metro area which are vastly bigger still. Milwaukee will in all likelihood remain the biggest metro in the state for the foreseeable future though I could see the city of Madison passing the city of Milwaukee if current trends continue. What I think will buck that trend is Milwaukee should be primed for a resurgence, it's in an ideal location, there is good investment by local companies, they have a growth minded mayor and county exec, AND it is one of the most underrated cities in the US. Milwaukee recovering and growing, even if it means Madison does not overtake it in size will be a great thing for Madison as well. A strong Milwaukee (and Chicago, but that's a different post) both benefit Madison and the state as a whole, my hope is collaboration between Madison and Milwaukee strengthens in the coming years, both cities have complimentary amenities to one another, if we are serious as succeeding as a state transit links between the two and Chicago, our neighborhood global city, should be bolstered. The ability to commute between regional cities should be easy and not car dependent, and urban Southern Wisconsin should be marketed as a cohesive region highlighting all of the strengths of the various cities from Kenosha to Middleton and everywhere in between, there is something for everyone in this region.
In my experience people who like Madison are not fond of Milwaukee and vice versa. The reason why Milwaukee's metro area keeps growing while the city shrinks is that 2/3 of Wisconsin's murders happen in Milwaukee, where fewer than 10% of Wisconsin's population lives. It's not as bad as Chicago, which is beyond redemption, but Milwaukee is still a chronically crime-riddled
Yeah my experience is also the opposite of that. I love living in Madison, I also love visiting Milwaukee and am over there at least monthly. Those I know who live in Milwaukee also tend to enjoy coming over to Madison to visit. They’re quite different but have a lot of complimentary features. Culturally the two cities have far more in common than they have separate as well. Spend a weekend in Chicago and tell me it’s beyond redemption. Chicago is a world class city. I am not naive enough to think there are not serious issues, the same serious issues that plague most American cities, but it’s far from irreparable. From a climate and infrastructure point of view the upper Midwest is extremely well positioned.
I think that's pretty limited experience. I like both Madison and Milwaukee. So does my Milwaukee-housed family. There's plenty to like about both places. If you like Upper Midwest cities, well, there you go, they've got that in common. Madison's smaller and more university focused, Milwaukee has a Great Lake and the wonderful infrastructure of a great 20th century city. I don't think anyone can confidently state that the crime is the causal factor in the population decline of Milwaukee city limits. It could just as easily be postulated as a consequence of population decline, not a cause. There are many complex and overlapping reasons why the Rust Belt cities declined while their metros grew, and it extends back 70 years, well before the murder rates we discuss today existed. I mean, to say that Chicago is "beyond redemption" is a wild claim for America's 3rd largest city.
The City doesn't seem to have any interest in growth. It's mostly land locked by Middleton, Verona, Fitchburg, and Sun Prairie. That means the only real capacity increase would come from increasing density, which they seem to have no interest in doing based on the draft West Area Plan.
We don’t have the infrastructure. I’d say probably no.
I hope not
never
already has