This Synagogue was constructed in 1903 at a cost of $9,000, and was one of only 4 synagogues built in Utah during the 19th and early 20th centuries. It was designed by prominent Utah architect Carl Neuhausen. The building’s exotic style results from an eclectic mix of architectural elements, including Byzantine columns at the entry, Moorish arches in the towers, onion-shaped domes, and round-arched windows throughout. The Congregation Montefiore was established in 1895 by a conservative group within Salt Lake City’s Jewish community. This Synagogue served as its home for over 70 years. The building was purchased in the fall of 1987 by Metro-Fellowship, a Christian Church affiliated with Assemblies of God, and renovated by volunteers under the direction of Pastors James Schaedler and Jack Perry.
The Synagogue is located at 355 South 300 East in Salt Lake City, Utah and was added to the National Register of Historic Places (#85001395) on June 27, 1985.
Text below is from the national register’s nomination form:
The synagogue of the Congregation Montefiore is significant for its association with Utah’s conservative Jewish population. The third Jewish house of worship to be constructed in two decades, the 1903 Moorish Revival synagogue is testimony to the diversity in religious practices within Utah’s Jewish community. The conservative or ‘Modern Orthodoxy,’ as it was then known, grew in numbers as a direct result of Utah’s development from territory to statehood. As Utah became part of the nation, national trends in emigration acted towards augmenting Utah’s Jewry, particularly in the conservative fold.
Since 1884 when Issidore Morris left the congregation B’nai Israel in disagreement over the adoption of the Reform practices, tradition oriented Utah Jews have met to celebrate festivals and holidays. Usually they met in members’ homes because their numbers were too few to support a synagogue. An 1892 estimate placed the entire Utah Jewish population at 1,050, over half of which were conservatives. The conservatives appealed to the Board of B’nai Israel to use their new synagogue for traditional services to no avail. Yet, the financial situation at B’nai Israel was so desperate by 1895 – they had gone through three rabbis in three years and were then without one—that a motion to dissolve the congregation was raised. The incident is indicative of the animosity, real or imagined, which existed between the two groups. With their numbers growing as a direct result of the influx of Russian and eastern European immigrants, who were more likely than not to be traditional, the conservative population met in 1895 to incorporate as the Congregation Montefiore.
Named after the 19th Century British Jewish philanthropist, trouble shooter and financial adviser to the queen, Moses Montefiore, the congregation planned to raise another synagogue in Utah. They were given a parcel of land by their fellow congregant, Morris Levy, located on Third East between Third and Fourth South in Salt Lake City. With the cornerstone laid in August, 1903, in the presence of L.D.S. Church President Joseph F. Smith, it was largely the completed by the end of the year. The building was designed by local Salt Lake architect Carl Neuhausen and cost $9,000. The benign respect extended by Mormon authorities towards particularly Montefiore’s members was a way of thanking the Jews for Issidore Morris’ key role in securing the release from the federal penitentiary of Mormon polygamous Bishop William Smith. The congregation was financially aided by the Mormon church which gave $2,000 toward the construction of this building. Built without central heat, the basement was also unfinished. The congregation joined the United Synagogues of America National Union in 1966. Finally in 1972 the congregation voted for merger with B’nai Israel. An addition housing religious school activities was added to the rear after World War II.
The synagogue is a long rectangular building, the primary portion of which is defined by brick gabled walls facing east and west. The north and south walls, also of brick which appear to have been painted from the start are divided into nine bays – each containing a tall round arched window – by projecting pilasters. It is not known whether the pilasters serve to brace load bearing walls or whether they conceal steel columns which in turn might be attached to steel roof trusses. At both ends of the west facade are square towers with onion shaped domes atop broad bracketed cornices below which are arcades of Assyrian arches on columns. The tower shafts are brick; their bases and the entire original building base is of rusticated Ashlar stone, to the water table. In the center of the east gable wall is a metal plaque with a raised Hebrew inscription. Below the plaque is a round window with a six-pointed star pattern. Below this is a projecting entry vestibule with a flat roof and parapet walls. The west wall of the vestibule has an elaborate entrance composed of double doors surmounted by a transom and flanked by Byzantine columns which support a projecting semi-circular pediment. The Tympanum is glass, with diagonal and horizontal divisions. The rear addition is of masonry construction, probably with a steel frame. There is a flat roof on steel bar joists. The brick is the same color as the painted brick on the original building. The brick vestibule on the facade is an early, well-matched addition.
Saints Peter and Paul Orthodox Church
Saints Peter and Paul Orthodox Church
For other Historic Churches in Salt Lake City visit this page.
The Mountair Acres Subdivision Historic District (hereafter referred to as Mountair Acres) is one of Millcreek’s earliest subdivisions, composed of approximately 75 acres along Highland Drive, a major commercial corridor between Salt Lake City and Millcreek. While the neighborhood started as a rural area, it was acquired and mined for its high natural clay content by the Salt Lake Pressed Brick Co. The subdivision was first platted in 1939 with construction starting in 1940. Several model homes were available for viewing, including a collaboration with Montgomery Ward. Over the next nine years, the subdivision was platted and construction completed in 1952 with all lots built and sold. Design of Mountair Acres added the flair of a curved street, Crescent Drive, as a key focal and circulation point that set it apart from traditional grid subdivisions. Use within Mountair Acres is completely single-family residential. Character-defining features of the district include uniform setbacks, landscaping with mature trees in the park strip, grass lawns, rear garages, and one story buildings. There are a total of 709 resources in the Mountair Acres Subdivision Historic District with three architectural styles within the period of significance (1940-1959). Contributing buildings number 523 (74%), while there are 186 (26%) non-contributing resources, including one (<1%) non-contributing site. The 709 resources break down to 374 (53%) primary resources and 334 (47%) secondary resources. Within the category of primary buildings, the integrity numbers remain strong with 307 (82%) contributing and 67 (18%) non-contributing. Despite limited square footage and location near Salt Lake City, the neighborhood has not been a target for teardowns for larger houses to the present date which has led to a high degree of retained integrity in all seven areas.
The text on this page is from the nomination form for the national historic register.
The Mountair Acres Subdivision Historic District is located in the city of Millcreek, Salt Lake County, Utah. Millcreek is a suburb located immediately south of Salt Lake City. Topographically, Millcreek consistently rises in elevation west to east, from the valley floor, to the east bench, and into the foothills. The city is named for the Mill Creek, which runs east-west and is located south of Mountair Acres approximately one-half mile.
Following the general topography of the community, the original topography of the Mountair Acres subdivision site was slightly sloped rising west to east. It’s ownership and use by the Salt Lake Pressed Brick Company excavated several feet of natural clay deposits from the site, lowering the overall topography and creating a man-made shelf on the eastern boundary of the neighborhood. However, the 75 acres that comprise Mountair Acres today is flat in topography.
The neighborhood was platted with a layout of streets that broke from the earlier typical cardinal grid pattern of Salt Lake City, known as the Plat of the City of Zion. The west boundary of the subdivision aligns with Highland Drive, one of the few early diagonal roads in the valley.1 A linear park that runs parallel to Highland Drive separates the subdivision from the road traffic. Originally, a row of bushes was planted within the park area and grew over 10 feet high, serving as a landscape buffer. Mountair Drive runs parallel to Highland Drive and the park. Behind Mountair Drive is Crescent Drive which is aptly named as it curves north to south. Each of the five east-west streets intersects with Crescent Drive as it serves as the connecting point for the subdivision on the west. On the east, 1640 East is the connecting point with all east-west streets intersecting. In the center of the subdivision, 1500 East serves as a circulation street that runs north-south to break up the east-west blocks. No alleys exist with driveway access coming directly from the street to the side of each house. There are three entry/exit points to the subdivision: Gregson Avenue on the east leading to Imperial Avenue (1700 East), and 3010 South and Crescent Drive on the west leading to Highland Drive.
Development of the Mountair Acres Subdivision was spread out over 12 years and seven separate plats with the majority of construction occurring in 1948 when 126 houses were built. One additional house – 3004 S. Imperial Street – was constructed in 1959 but is located at the edge of the subdivision and is the only resource on Imperial Street. While the first year of subdivision development resulted in 13 houses constructed, there were seven subsequent years when at least 20 houses were built within a year.
Architectural Styles, Building Types, and Materials In Mountair Acres, the subdivision’s consistent appearance and visual character stems not only from the mature trees that line its streets, but also the use of similar architectural style. Many of the buildings exhibit characteristics of Ranch style buildings, but were not designed as Ranch or Early Ranch buildings; therefore, being categorized as Minimal Traditional in style. A single resource, categorized as Other, is a park.
Minimal Traditional The Minimal Traditional-style residences, as the name suggests, exhibit an overall simplicity of form and architectural detail, lending these characteristically small houses the appearance of maximum size. McAlester details the style’s additional features to include a “Low- or intermediate-pitched roof, more often gabled; small house, generally one-story in height; roof eaves usually have little or no overhang; double-hung windows, typically multi-pane or 1/1; minimal amounts of added architectural detail; rarely has dormers.” There are 66 examples of the Minimal Traditional style with a range of construction dates between 1940-1952. Fifty-three (80%) of the examples are contributing while 13 (20%) are non-contributing. Examples of the Minimal Traditional style include 1602 East 3115 South and 1387 East 3010 South.
Ranch The identifying features of the Ranch style according to McAlester include a “Broad one-story shape; usually built low to ground; low-pitched roof without dormers; commonly with moderateto-wide roof overhang; front entry usually located off-center and sheltered under main roof of house; garage typically attached to main façade (faces front, side, or rear); a large picture window generally present; asymmetrical façade.” In the district, there are 308 examples of the Ranch style, including the Early Ranch. Their dates of construction are between 1940-1959. Contributing resources number 253 (82%) examples of the style and non-contributing examples number 54 (18%). Examples of the Early Ranch style include 1625 East 3150 South, 1626 East 3010 South, 3021 S. Mountair Dr., 1424 East 3115 South, 1495 East 3010 South, 1414 East 3010 South, and 1368 East 3010 South.
The single example of the Ranch style rambler is located at 3004 S. Imperial St. and was constructed in 1959. The term rambler is often used interchangeably with the Ranch style, but can denote a derivation featuring an attached garage and elongated façade.
Materials Much like the architectural styles and building height within Mountair Acres, the construction materials are also overwhelmingly consistent, with brick being the main construction material for 93% (348) of the primary buildings. Veneers compose 21 of the buildings (5%) and there are five wood buildings. (2%).The one Other/Undefined resource is the park.
Common Characteristics and Variations The houses are roughly the same size, 600-800 square feet on the main level, lending to the visual cohesion of the neighborhood. This size was based on the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) “minimum house” standards developed in the mid-1930s as part of the National Housing Act. The standards also made recommendations for floor plans and stylistic elements. Two years later, new recommendations were added to the standards for construction quality and equipment.
The three styles share common features. Because no original floor plans exist, the primary buildings are compared by their exterior appearances. This includes bay windows, circular windows, corner (or meeting) windows, and picture windows. There are many more asymmetrical forms (331; 89%) than symmetrical (43; 11%). Another method to compare variations is through roof types. Roof types vary greatly from side gable examples and side gable variations (225; 60%) and hipped examples and hipped variations (147; 39%), cross gabled forms (2; 1%).
The roof type or form alone do not distinguish the style as common characteristics were blended between all styles and forms. The evidence of these common characteristics demonstrates how the transition of styles led to blending of ideas. In dozens of examples, multiple features such as these were also utilized together. For example, the house at 3009 S 1640 E is an example with a bay window and circular window with a hipped roof. At 1517 East 3045 South is a house the is symmetrical with two corner (meeting) windows and center door on the main façade with a hipped roof. An example with a bay window and picture window under a side gabled roof is located at 1449 East 3010 South. The unique combination of a circular window, picture window, and corner (meeting) window are included on the house at 1517 East 3010 South.
Variations of styles begin with roof forms and symmetry. Using these as a basis of the design, various arrangements of window openings were applied in over a dozen different arrangements. Some of these may have been based on floor plan while others on personal choice and budget. Symmetrical variations include the side gable version at 3079 S. Mountair Dr. and hipped roof version at 1517 East 3045 South. Asymmetrical variations include the side gable version at 3025 S. Crescent Dr. and the hipped roof version at 3023 South 1640 East. There are a few limited variations that have more complex roof forms including the intersecting hipped roof with front gable accents and attached garage at 3046 S. Crescent Dr., the multiple intersecting hipped roofs of the house at 1415 East 3010 South, and the complex roof form at 1495 East 3010 South.
Outbuildings There are a total of 364 secondary buildings (outbuildings) within the historic district boundary. Unattached one bay garages are the most numerous at 196 (59%) followed by unattached two bay garages 117 (32%), there are 20 sheds (5%), and one unattached carport (1%). Examples of sheds include 1524 East 3045 South, 1559 East 3010 South, 3026 S. Crescent Dr., and 1424 East 3045 South. Out of the 334 total outbuildings, 216 are contributing to the historic district: unattached one bay garages number 157, unattached two bay garages number 53, and six contributing sheds. Material variations within the single bay are attached, unattached brick, unattached wood, unattached with shed, and unattached with half story above. Material variations within the double bay are brick, concrete block, and wood. Examples of variations within the single bay category include 1443 East 3010 South (wood;, 1560 East 3010 South (brick; Photo 28), 1631 E. Gregson Ave. (stucco;, 1571 East 3010 South (flat roof;, 1639 East 3010 South (with shed;, and 1566 East 3010 South (with carport;. Examples of variations within the double bay category include 3052 South 1640 East (brick;), 1547 East 3150 South (concrete block; Photo 34), and 1583 East 3045 South (half story above;. The single unattached carport is located at 1489 East 3115 South. Examples of flat-roof carports are found at 1526 E. Gregson Ave. and 1524 S. Gregson Ave. Angled carports are located at 3040 S. Crescent Dr. and 3059 South 1640 East.
Change over Time and Historic Integrity The Mountair Acres Subdivision Historic District retains a high degree of the seven aspects of integrity as detailed by the following:
There were no vacant lots left from the time of the subdivision’s original platting and none exist currently. The block divisions, parcel sizes, and original construction on each lot has remained intact for the majority of properties. Zero intrusions exist as there have not been any teardowns and new construction. Only one house has made an incompatible addition to the top of an original one-story building. Additions, when constructed, have commonly happened behind the house. The majority of garages date to the historic period. New (out of period) garages have typically been placed in the same rear corner lot position as garages have been historically located and remained one story in height. The original park between Mountair Drive and Highland Drive was redesigned and renovated in 2020 with new landscaping and a sidewalk.
Five houses retain one or more original windows. These are located at 1494 East 3045 South, 1505 East 3045 South, 1420 East 3150 South, 1482 East 3150 South, and 1536 East 3150 South.
Location The aspect of location integrity is intact as the neighborhood remains built in its original location and no buildings have been moved in or out of Mountair Acres. The boundary for Mountair Acres follows the boundaries of the seven original subdivision plats between 1939 and 1948. The streets remain in their original design and lot sizes have remained constant with none being combined or subdivided further.
Design The overall design of the Mountair Acres Subdivision’s streets, blocks, lots, and yards hold integrity with very few changes since the original platting and construction. Throughout the entire neighborhood, original sidewalks and front yards remain intact. Garages are located at the rear of each property and accessed by long driveways from the street. Except in a few cases when the garage is located on the street for a corner property. Trees in the front yards on every street have matured for several decades creating a natural canopy for the neighborhood. Modest front yards between the sidewalk and the buildings have been maintained and remain contiguous, typically not separated by fences, giving a consistent look along the streetscape.
The design of individual buildings is a narrow representation of styles that were becoming popular nationally at the outset of World War II.
Despite the Salt Lake City area being a strong real estate market over the last 25 years, the neighborhood has resisted the teardown epidemic that other neighborhoods have had to face. However, alterations to individual residences have been frequent in the last 50 years. The most frequent changes have been exterior alterations such as window, roof, and sheathing replacements. Several buildings exhibit additions. While the majority of additions to historic buildings in the district are located at the rear and thus are compatible with both original construction and the context of the neighborhood as a whole, a few non-contributing examples are notable for their poor design and/or location on the building.
Setting Surrounding Mountair Acres are distinctive neighborhoods of their own. To the west is the Highland Drive commercial district. To the north and south are neighborhoods of later construction dates and varied integrity. To the east is a neighborhood of mixed construction date, between 1920 and 2024, with varied integrity and less distinctive architectural consistency.
Within the physical environment of Mountair Acres, however, is strong integrity of the original buildings as well as the developed setting around the buildings. The original sidewalks remain intact in their original locations and at their original sizes. Trees, front yards, and other vegetation have matured for several decades, creating the garden-like natural environment within the neighborhoods. Few chain link fences are present in front yards.
Materials The dominant building material within Mountair Acres is brick, utilized for both structure and exterior material. This is a dominant characteristic of contributing buildings and thus retain their integrity in this aspect. These materials have deeper significance as they were created by the Salt Lake Pressed Brick Company from some of the same clay on which the subdivision sits. Other construction materials include wood (structural framing and sheathing). If changes have occurred, most often that was in the form of new windows in aluminum or vinyl materials. While many wood buildings retain their original sheathing, many have been covered with aluminum or vinyl siding. Occasionally, a roof was replaced with new materials that were not historic, such as metal (aluma-lock) or rubber shingles replacing asphalt shingles. Dozens of houses have added a small porch over the original stoop, but in most cases do not detract from the historic appearance or create permanent alterations.
Workmanship Mountair Acres is unique in Salt Lake County as an example of a neighborhood built over a relatively short period of time with a narrow array of architectural styles that has retained its overall historic character. The workmanship invested in the craftsmanship of the buildings within Mountair Acres remains evident in the styles, forms, and details, even when some materials may have changed.
Feeling Mountair Acres’ consistent setback and scale, consistency of historic styles, retention of historic outbuildings, and associated landscape elements all contribute to its strong integrity of feeling as an early-to-mid-twentieth century residential neighborhood.
Association Through the retention of its historic layout, scale, architectural features, and materials, Mountair Acres clearly conveys its historic associations with the early mid-twentieth century architectural development within Salt Lake County.
In 1938, Albert H. Walsh hired the Fullmer Bros. Construction Company to build this large, three-story brick apartment building, featuring 18 units. Albert Walsh was the founder of the A.H. Walsh Plumbing Company, and the company’s office building was located on the same block as the apartments. Mr. Walsh resided nearby at 1120 East 2nd Avenue. The apartment building retains its historic and architectural integrity and is a contributing resource within the Avenues Historic District.
Constructed circa 1908, this three-story, brick apartment building was likely constructed by John H. Hilton and in 1916 was sold to Albert H. Walsh. Albert Walsh was the founder of the A.H. Walsh Plumbing Company. Mr. Walsh resided nearby at 1120 East 2nd Avenue and he owned the apartment building through 1950. The building was constructed at a time when an increasing number of multi-family structures were being built in the Avenues, transitioning away from single-family, owner-occupied residences. It features a prominent, centrally located pedimental bay for the front entry and large balconies.
Constructed circa 1913, this three-story, brick apartment building was constructed by Albert H. Walsh and named for his wife, Emma N. Walsh. Albert Walsh was the founder of the A.H. Walsh Plumbing Company. The building was built at a time when an increasing number of multi-family structures were being built in the Avenues, transitioning away from single-family, owner-occupied residences. Character defining features of the building include its centrally located stairs and central hallway, sandstone foundation, and its front porch with massive two-story Doric columns and decorative entablatures.
Completed in 1894 this two-story brick house was constructed for David L. Murdoch. A native of Cronbury, Ayr Scotland, David L. Murdoch joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Scotland and came to Utah in 1878. He and his wife, Elizabeth Pinkerton Thyne, settled first in Heber City then moved to Salt Lake City in 1883. David Lennox Murdoch was the Chief Accountant for Z.C.M.I. and managed the 20th Ward Cooperative Store.
The nomination form for the national historic register mentioned the home here: While they account for less than one percent of all residences, the very large, often architect-designed homes in the Eastlake, Queen Anne and Shingle styles, and later the Prairie and Craftsman styles greatly influence the visual character of the Avenues. Some of the state’s best examples of residential architectural styles were built there, including the William Barton house, 231 B Street, (vernacular/Gothic); the Jeremiah Beattie house, 30 J Street, (Eastlake); the David Murdock house, 73 G Street, (Queen Anne); the E.G. Coffin house, 1037 First Avenue, (Queen Anne); the N.H. Beeman house, 1007 First Avenue, (Shingle style); the Vto. Mclntyre house, 257 Seventh Avenue, (Classical Revival); the James Sharp house, 157 D Street, (Craftsman); and the W.E. Ware house, 1184 First Avenue, (Colonial Revival).
Formed in 1856 to accommodate rapid growth in the area, the 20th Ward originally met in a meetinghouse on 2nd Avenue between D and E streets. By 1884 the ward had moved to a new building on the same block, where it met until 1924 when the need for a larger facility and the desire of the school board to use the location for a school playground and auditorium prompted the sale of the property.
When the present site was purchased, Lewis Telle Cannon and ward member John Fetzer, partners in one of Salt Lake’s leading architectural firms, were hired to plan the new building. Designed in the Neoclassical style, it also exhibits Renaissance Mannerist influences, particularly in the double gable, discontinuous cornice, and Palladian style entry. The ground was dedicated and the cornerstone was laid on 18 May 1924 by LDS Apostle James E. Talmage, a ward member. The first use commenced 21 September 1924. The building was dedicated by LDS Church President Heber J. Grant on 17 April 1927. Over the years several compatible additions have been made to the basic L-shaped building. In 1941 the largest addition was completed on the southeast corner, creating a new entry and several classrooms. The stained glass windows were added to the chapel in the mid 1970s.
Preservation Utah‘s “Kletting in the Avenues” Historic Homes Tour said: The design of the Twentieth Ward Meetinghouse reflects a significant shift in how the LDS Church built its meetinghouses. During the 19th century, church buildings were designed and built almost entirely by individual wards with each function (chapel, recreation hall, Relief Society building, bishop’s storehouse, tithing office, et al) occupying its own building. But by the 1920s, when this building was constructed, the design of meetinghouses was becoming increasingly standardized, primarily to consolidate those various functions. Although its general layout may have been standardized, the design of the Twentieth Ward Meetinghouse showcases the high level of design available in the early 20th century to middle class wards with extra funds. The meetinghouse was designed by the firm of Cannon and Fetzer, which designed other notable buildings in Salt Lake, including the Park Building at the University of Utah and West High School.
Large two story stucco structure with a two-story double gabled wing with unusual tapered pilasters.
Some of this structure may be part of the adobe and frame dwelling built about 1873 by Levi Richards, although no nineteenth century elements are visible.
Levi Richards (1799-1877) came to Utah in 1853. He had studied medicine and served on the Utah “Board of Examination” for physicians. Richards only son, Levi W. ( -1914) inherited this property upon the former’s death and lived here until his own death.
Levi W. was a real estate and business entrepreneur. In keeping with the religion, of which he was an active practitioner, Richards had more than one wife. He married Louise Lula Greene in 1873 and her niece Persis Louiza Young in 1884. The women remained close “sister” wives until their deaths, living together in this house and other dwellings.
The Gilmer Park Historic District, developed primarily between about 1909 and 1943, is a significant residential neighborhood in Salt Lake City. It is a well-preserved, cohesive neighborhood of 244 buildings, all but two of which are houses and eighty-eight percent of which are contributing structures. The district’s significance is based on three key factors. First, it represents the most intensive period of housing construction in the city’s history, during which virtually all of the farmland on the south edge of the city, where Gilmer Park is located, was transformed into residential subdivisions. Between 1910 and 1930, Salt Lake City’s population increased fifty-one percent with more than 47,000 new residents, and suburban developments accommodated most of that growth. Gilmer Park is one of the most distinct of those subdivisions. Second, a substantial number of Gilmer Park residents were important individuals in the community and state. These included influential businessmen, politicians (including a governor), artists, architects, doctors, attorneys, educators, and religious leaders (including a president of the LDS Church). Third, many of the houses in the district are excellent local examples of important architectural styles and types. The neighborhood was developed between 1909-43, with the majority of building (sixty-two percent) occurring between 1921-8. This period of development, just after World War I, is reflected in the postwar construction boom and the predominant use of Period Revival style architecture in the area. The neighborhood itself, with its curvilinear layout, represents a unique variation in subdivision design in the city. It is one of the first subdivisions in the city to deviate from the rectangular grid and follow the national trend toward more organic layouts.
The Gilmer Park Historic District covers the area east roughly between 1100 East and 1300 East from 900 South to Harvard Avenue and is in the East Central Neighborhood of Salt Lake City, Utah and it was added to the National Register of Historic Places (#96000314) on March 28, 1996. The text on this page is mostly from the nomination form from the national register.
Water, a primary factor in the development of land, and transportation services were in place prior to the development of Gilmer Park Historic District. Water mains were installed on 1100 East in 1892. The area was three miles from downtown Salt Lake City and in response to the need for public transportation because, in 1889 the streetcar system extended to 900 South, and in 1898, the lines were extended to 2100 South on 1100 East. A bus line was in place along 1300 East by 1926.
Roughly bounded by 900 South and Harvard Avenue (1100 South) between 1100 and 1300 East, the district comprises two large properties known historically as the Gilmer estate, from 900 South to Yale Avenue, and the LeGrande Young estate, between Yale and Harvard Avenues. Once this area was primed for development, four sections formed from these estates: Gilmer Park, Gilmer Square, the Young-Howard Estate, and approximately one-fourth of Park View subdivision. Subdivision plats were filed in 1909 for Gilmer Park and 1910 for Gilmer Square. Park View Subdivision was platted in 1889. The Young-Howard Estate was never platted. Construction of the first homes in Gilmer Park Historic District began in 1909 but the majority of the homes were constructed between 1921-8.
Though Gilmer Park Historic District has a cohesive appearance, it was actually created by a number of different owners and developers. The fact that several owners and developers were able to create this visual cohesiveness through the use of curvilinear tree-lined streets, irregular lots, similar house styles, similar scale of houses, and deep set-backs with lawns and landscaping, is evidence of the trend for landscaped subdivisions that began to occur in Utah and across the country. They quickly realized the area’s assets of cleaner air and a unique park-like setting and sloping topography, characteristics that were attractive to home buyers. Capitalizing on the natural features of the district, development was directed at defining a unique, internally-structured, and cohesive neighborhood. Careful and judicious planning extended to the quality of the homes being built.
GILMER ESTATE
The land on which most of the Gilmer Park Historic District was developed originally belonged to the Gilmer family. It was first developed as the Gilmer estate, property that was located between 900 South and Yale Avenue (1080 South) between 1100 East and 1400 East. It was purchased in 1888 by Mary E. and John T. Gilmer from a farmer in the area, Alvin F. Guirvits. John T. Gilmer (1841-92) was a successful mining operator, government mail contractor, and a partner in the Gilmer and Salisbury Overland Stage Company. Mary E. Gilmer (1844-1924) was active in women’s clubs and civic affairs, helping found the Ladies Literary Club and the Sarah Daft Home for the Aged. She was also a local leader in the women’s suffrage movement. In 1889, the Gilmers built a house on the property near the corner of 900 South and 1100 East at the end of a curved driveway which is now part of Gilmer Drive. In 1899, the house and property were leased to the Salt Lake Country Club, Salt Lake’s first and newly organized golf club. The house (originally at 945 South 1100 East) was used as the clubhouse and the surrounding land as the golf course. The Salt Lake Country Club moved to the Forest Dale location in 1907. The Gilmer house was apparently replaced by newer houses built in the 1920s.
Gilmer Realty Company
In 1909, Mary Gilmer and her son, Jay T. Gilmer, organized the Gilmer Realty Company and filed subdivision plats for a portion of Gilmer Park. Gilmer Realty Company was responsible for the initial platting and promotion of Gilmer Park and Gilmer Square, land they owned together with other investors. Their involvement in the development of the Gilmer Park Historic District is significant in initiating the building of a unique neighborhood. Advertisements in Goodwill’s Weekly Magazine show that Gilmer Realty and J.T. Gilmer were involved in developing this area through at least 1914. For whatever reasons, the Gilmers’ role in developing the property diminished and by about 1920 they no longer appear to have been active in the venture. Gilmer Realty Company may have actually built only about thirty homes in the area.
Kimball & Richards Company
It appears that much of the development in Gilmer Park was done by Kimball and Richards Company. Weekly newspaper ads that appear in the 1919 Salt Lake Tribune support their involvement in this area. These ads extolled the virtues of living in Gilmer Park for its location, natural beauty, improvements such as sidewalks, trees, city water and sewer, its regulations that protected it from undesirable surroundings, the individuality of each homesite made possible with the services of an expert landscape architect, and the reasonable price of the lots. Kimball & Richards developed numerous lots throughout the district with the exception of the Gilmer Square.
The company was first listed in the Polk Directory as an insurance and rental company in 1908. By 1910, they had expanded into real estate and development, calling themselves “land merchants.” The firm of Kimball & Richards consisted of three corporations: Kimball & Richards “land merchants,” which marketed subdivisions; Kimball & Richards Building Company, which custom built many of the homes for buyers on lots promoted by the “land merchants”; and Kimball & Richards Securities Company, which provided financing. Taylor Woolley and Clifford Evans, architects that lived in Gilmer Park, designed homes for Kimball & Richards. Kimball & Richards Company was known for its innovative promotion methods and was aware of national trends. In 1910, D. C. Kimball visited Los Angeles and Southern California to study the California market and the promotional methods used there. Both Don Carlos Kimball and Claude Richards were Utah natives and members of the LDS Church. It was one of the most active companies in the early decades of the twentieth century. They developed individual houses and large subdivisions such as Chesterfield, Homefield Acres, and Highland Park. They left their mark indelibly in the growing subdivisions of Salt Lake City. Unfortunately the firm was forced out of business by the mid-1920s because of internal and external economic problems.
Ashton-Jenkins Company
It appears that Ashton-Jenkins Company also had a great deal of influence in the Gilmer Park Historic District. As early as 1909 they owned property in the area between 900-1000 South and 1100-1300 East and in 1913 they were buying land throughout Gilmer Park Historic District.
The Ashton-Jenkins Company was responsible for hundreds of buildings in the Salt Lake Valley between 1890-1945. Edward T. Ashton was a successful builder and architect as well as a talented businessman and developer. He purchased, planned, and developed the Franklin Subdivision, drew plans for and constructed the State Normal School at Cedar City, and erected electrical plants for Telluride Power. In 1881, Edward T. Ashton began a general contracting business and was later joined by his brother Charles S. to form the Ashton Brothers Company. Edward E. Jenkins joined them to form the Ashton-Jenkins Company which became one of the largest real estate companies in Salt Lake City.
Ed D. Smith & Sons
Ed D. Smith & Sons were involved in the Gilmer Park Historic District in about 1916 having purchased property from Clifford P. Evans. Their influence was apparently throughout the district. Newspaper articles show they were developing lots between 900 South and Yale and 1100 East and 1400 East, with several hundred homes planned for construction. In 1916, plans were formalizing for street improvement work with plans to grade part of Gilmer Drive. This company also brought influences from outside Utah. For example, in 1916 a news article about Gilmer Park and Ed D. Smith & Sons reported that a “prominent California landscape gardener was brought here from California to plan the park, and it promises to be a delightful spot, with the broad, curved driveways, parkways, tennis courts, shrubbery and groves.” Gilmer Park was also described as a place that could be easily accessed by motorists, offered great views, and was apart from the grime of the city.
Other Developers
Vincent-Peterson Construction, owned by J. G. Vincent, who lived in the area (1220 Yale Ave.), was involved in building five homes on Gilmer Drive in addition to many others in the area. Waddoups Company (1922-5) and Morrison-Merrill Company (1925-7) were also developers in the area.
GILMER PARK SUBDIVISION (1914-43)
The subdivision known as Gilmer Park extended south to Yale Avenue and east to 1400 East, excluding Michigan and Herbert Avenues (the Gilmer Square Subdivision). The owners of the subdivision included Gilmer Realty Company, Taylor and Dorrit Evans Woolley, Evelyn J. Burton, J. G. and Winnie B. Vincent, and George E. and Lillian C. Merrill.
What was originally the Gilmer Park Subdivision is the largest portion of the Gilmer Park Historic District. Its primary period of development was between 1914-43, with the majority (approximately eighty-five percent) of the building occurring between 1921-30, although a few homes were built prior to 1920. Restrictions placed on the buildings were made to “insure beauty and permanence that should enhance the value of the property.” The minimum construction cost was set at $3,000 with the majority of the homes starting at $3,500 to $4,000. The landscape plan for a portion of Gilmer Park, primarily around Alpine Place, was designed by Taylor Woolley.
GILMER SQUARE SUBDIVISION (1910-26)
The Gilmer Square Subdivision, platted on April 4, 1910, was owned by Gilmer Realty and LeGrande Young. It included the lots along Herbert Avenue, the south side of Michigan Avenue, and the north side of Yale Avenue between 1100 East and 1200 East. The majority of the building in this subdivision occurred between 1914-26. In a Salt Lake Tribune advertisement, Gilmer Realty stated that some of the features of the subdivision were: a $4,000 minimum building cost restriction; extensive public improvements including sidewalks, city water, graded streets, perfect drainage, and a street car line; and it was considered “the last close-in residence division of the better class.
One of the earliest houses in the subdivision was built in 1910 for Jay T. Gilmer (1038 South 1200 East) at a cost of $6,000. It was designed by two prominent Utah architects, Frederick A. Hale and Charles S. McDonald. Drawings of Jay T. Gilmer’s home were used to promote the Gilmer Square development in newspapers and magazines. The majority of development in the subdivision began in 1915.
LEGRAND YOUNG ESTATE
The LeGrande Young estate, between Yale and Harvard Avenues, was obtained in 1887 by LeGrande Young (nephew of Brigham Young) from his uncle, Lorenzo Young. LeGrande built a home c.1890 on the site now occupied by the Garden Park Ward and began planting a wide variety of trees including oak, plum, apple, pear, cherry, Boston elm, silver leaf poplar, and horse chestnut. His efforts resulted in beautiful groves and gardens for which the area became well known and which later attracted people to this area. The gazebo, pond, brick wall, and carriage house which are still located on the property were part of this estate.
YOUNG-HOWARD ESTATE (1918-39)
In 1914, Young sold the entire estate to John C. Howard, a prominent Salt Lake businessman and community leader who served, among other positions, as president of Utah Oil Refining and president and director of the American Mining Congress. Howard sold some of the parcels of land, but retained the two-and-one-half acres that now constitute the Garden Park grounds. The area immediately surrounding the Howard estate was developed primarily during the early 1920s, without being officially platted as a subdivision.
Howard and his wife, Gertrude Musser, lived in the home built by LeGrande Young with their four daughters until their deaths in 1929 and 1919, respectively. After Mr. Howard’s death, three of his daughters lived in the house until 1938. Apparently they had planned to add on to the house before it was deeded to the LDS Church. In that same year, a chapel designed by architects Taylor Woolley and Clifford Evans, both ward members, was built on the foundation of LeGrande Young’s home and the foundation of what was to have been a new house for the Howards. At first the building was called the Gilmer Park Ward, but was later changed to Garden Park Ward.
PARK VIEW SUBDIVISION (1909-27)
The portion of the Park View Subdivision in the Gilmer Park Historic District is the south side of Harvard Avenue between 1100 East and Douglas Street. LeGrande Young was the owner and developer of the subdivision, which is located directly south of the Young-Howard Estate. LeGrande Young purchased the property from William G. Timmons on March 3, 1889, for a reported $12,000, and a plat for the Park View Subdivision was filed on October 23, 1889. This portion of the subdivision was apparently undeveloped until about 1909.
In 1914, LeGrande Young moved from his estate located between Yale and Harvard Avenues to his newly built home across the street from Park View at 1121 Harvard Avenue. His children also built homes in the subdivision primarily on the south side of Harvard Avenue: Grace Young and Kenneth Kerr (1172 Harvard Avenue, 1909); Lucille Young and William Reid (1150 Harvard Avenue, 1905); and LeGrande Young, Jr. (1218 Harvard Avenue, 1910).
The only portion of Park View included in the Gilmer Park Historic District are the lots on the south side of Harvard Avenue west of Douglas Street. Houses were built on lots along this part of Harvard by 1920. The lots on the east side were developed a few years later. This section of the Park View Subdivision is included within the boundaries of the Gilmer Park Historic District because of the connections with LeGrande Young’s family throughout this district and because of the visual cohesiveness and similar scale of houses.
CONTEMPORARY SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT
The earliest suburbs were thought of in a different light than they have been perceived in the 1950s through today. Early suburbs were sub-urban, or not fully urban. By the late 1890s, suburbs were occupied mostly by upper class families because they could afford a retreat from the city heat and filth. The residential developments outside the urban setting were considered a retreat from the grime and grit of the city and afforded the middle and upper classes a chance to have the American dream of a single family home that accommodated private space inside and outside. By 1910 things changed and the middle- and working-class citizens were moving out to the suburbs by the thousands, facilitated by public transportation. People moving in from the farm and out from the city combined to create an altered architectural pattern. With this came the creation of a significant architectural type — the suburban house form. 33 It wasn’t until the advent of the post-WWII housing development that the pastoral qualities of the suburb of the late 19th and early 20th century began to vanish.
The urban space, divided into plain rectangular strips without concern for topography or aesthetics and whose gridiron plan produced straight streets intersecting at right angles, appealed to the city residents’ preference for rational solutions and scientific methods. It was a practical approach for ordering space and simplified surveying and facilitated speculation. Early suburbs followed this plan because the rectangular layout of the streets extended beyond the city to make easier the sale and resale of lots possible in advance of settlement; it also stimulated promotion of undeveloped areas. “The price that the grid exacted in ugliness appeared small in a strange world where monotony also suggested familiarity.”
Just after the turn of the century the suburban form began to change. The increased cost of real estate in the city led land speculators and real estate developers to survey fields and meadows, imprinting streets and creating a landscape, neither rural nor urban, where people could enjoy both city and country lives. Profits were abundant for developers of the early twentieth century. Some learned that greater profits could be realized from “new arrangements of streets and structures, from new building materials, and from integrated beauty.” People in search of rural settings and something “unique would force private developers to reach new levels of residential design and new levels of profit.”
Large-scale suburbs on curvilinear street systems, like Vandergrift, Pennsylvania, were planned as early as 1895 by Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. Olmsted (landscape architect of the nineteenth century) had outlined the requirements of city planning. His plan stated that first, main thoroughfares “should be direct, ample, and convenient no matter how they cut the land.” Second, other roads must be “quiet, attractive” residential streets, not “fantastically rooked,” but laid out “so as to discourage their use as thoroughfares.” Third, was the necessity of park land and public open spaces. Although Olmsted was successful in influencing planning patterns throughout the country, his work, along with that of Grosvenor Atterbury, an architect of equal reputation, and the Sage Foundation in their c.1911 development of “Forest Hills Gardens produced almost no progeny.” This lack of influence is believed to have been caused primarily by the village or company town appearance which overshadowed the efforts of backers and designers. Other planned subdivisions such as Shaker Heights, developed beginning in 1911 by the Van Sweringen brothers outside of Cleveland, did influence many residential developments. These developers controlled the building in this area by reviewing the plans of a number of different architects and landscape architects. “Forest Hills Gardens and Shaker Heights reflect something of the range of the early twentieth-century planned residential development.” Some suburban developments were not successful while others continue to be known.
Some subdivisions were developed to follow the natural topography. Roads followed the trails established when lands were first settled; bridges were built where ferries had terminated; old hedgerows and trees were surprisingly often preserved as “salable features.” Post-Victorian suburbs were individualistic, egalitarian, and comfortable. The idea was to live in a location far enough from the city to have rural qualities that included an open field nearby, a garden behind, and a front lawn, while living close enough to commute to the city to earn a living. This was a new era for housing development. The suburbs were practical because land was less expensive and afforded an individual home on a lot. They provided psychological advantages because they were “images of sturdy independence in their apartness from their neighbors.” And, they were traditional as an American idea and historical experience in contrast to European. The American house-designer conceived of houses as individual units set in landscapes rather than one among many similar buildings.
By the mid-1920s Salt Lake City mirrored the national trends of contemporary planning. Growth in the city during this period was occurring primarily to the east and south of the city center and between 1906-30, 439 new residential subdivisions were recorded with the county recorder’s office. Land subdivision was relatively stable during this period and was marked by the desire to make the city a good place to live.
Unlike many other developments in Salt Lake City during the early twentieth century, Gilmer Park Historic District “distinguishes itself through unusual skill and sensitivity applied to the layout and design of both the area as a whole and the individual structures.” Gilmer Park Historic District is believed to be the one of the first subdivisions in Salt Lake City developed using curvilinear streets, a layout that was considered a more progressive design. According to architectural historian, Gwendolyn Wright, the “increasing reliance on the car had many effects on residential planning to make driving more pleasurable, some developers abandoned the familiar rectilinear grid street and laid out wide, curving streets and cul-de-sacs.”
Federal Heights, roughly bounded by Virginia Street, University Street, First South, the University of Utah, and the foothills of the Wasatch mountains, is the only other known similarly planned subdivision that occurred as early as Gilmer Park Historic District. Telluride Real Estate Company began developing the area in 1909 and named it Federal Heights in reference to the government’s previous ownership of the property and its neighbor, Fort Douglas. The street patterns were designed to take advantage of the sloping topography and to create greenspaces within the neighborhood. Federal Heights, like Gilmer Park, has maintained its historic integrity and widespread identity. Slight differences occur in the scale of the homes from those in Gilmer Park as the number of large-scale residences in Federal Heights are greater. Also a number of the roads in Federal Heights are wider. Overall, however, the similarities between these two neighborhoods are strong and both reflect the a particularly successful pattern of subdivision development during the early 1900s in Salt Lake City.
Other suburban developments in Salt Lake City of about the same time did not follow the planned landscaped community as completely as did Gilmer Park. Westmoreland Place, with entrance gates at 1500 East and 1300 South, was platted in 1913 just a few years later than Gilmer Park and developed by Earl and Clark Dunshee. Amenities similar to those found in Gilmer Park included the landscaped green spaces and the idea of using parks, but it maintained the rectilinear street grid.
Highland Park was developed by the firm Kimball & Richards Company. Boundaries for this subdivision are roughly between Elizabeth Street (1140 East) and 1500 East, from Parkway Avenue (2400 South) to 2700 South. Highland Park was built primarily during the period between c. 1910-25 in a rectilinear plan. Kimball & Richards generally followed the typical pattern of subdivision layout, promotion, and development that had been established during the 1890s. They did include the planting of shade trees and terraced yards.
Many areas were developed not as a single subdivision but by speculative developers purchasing a few lots within an area. For example, the University Neighborhood Historic District, roughly bounded by South Temple and 500 South between University and 1100 East, was not a ‘subdivision’ and in addition to its single-family residences there are numerous apartments, and commercial buildings.
Gilmer Park’s planning and development by the individuals who owned and developed the area was intended to define an internally-structured and cohesive neighborhood. The visual quality of the district is created by a combination of several factors: the sloping terrain, curving streets, sloped or terraced yards, uniform setbacks and spacing, landscaping, and the architectural quality of many of the homes. While all subdivisions in Salt Lake City were named when they were developed, few remain easily identifiable today. Gilmer Park has withstood the test of time and most people recognize the name with the area that is being designated for nomination.
Gilmer Park influenced the development of other subdivisions in the area. Later subdivisions to the east of Park View were the site of many middle- and upper-middle-class residences located on tree-lined, lamp-lit, serpentine streets. This area is known as the Harvard/Yale area having been given ivy league street names as a result of the city engineer’s attempt to provide a standardized system of naming streets in the various residential developments. Harvard/Yale, like Gilmer Park, is one of the few most recognized residential neighborhoods in Salt Lake City.
Gilmer Park Historic District is also important because it contains numerous buildings that are both significant and modest examples of the work of prominent Utah architects. Since several architects participated in the subdivision’s development, their awareness of current trends in suburban planning no doubt influenced its plan. Layout of much of the Gilmer Park area is attributed to Taylor Woolley, a prominent Utah architect. He apprenticed with Frank Lloyd Wright in the early 1900s and apparently brought that influence to his work in his layout and landscaping of lots along Gilmer Drive. His plan for a section of the district shows several homes located on spacious lots on Alpine Place. Although those particular houses were never built, the layout has remained intact with curvilinear streets and deep setbacks, including a private alley that leads to a group of garages. It is unknown whether Woolley designed other curved streets in the subdivision, but his influence is obvious. The architectural firm he formed in 1917, Miller, Woolley, and Evans, was one of the first to include a landscape architecture department. They did not limit their designs to buildings but included the planning of the State Capitol grounds and Memory Grove. Woolley’s firm also influenced the architecture in the area. He and his brother-in-law, Clifford Evans, designed the Garden Park Ward Chapel located at 1150 Yale Avenue. Other houses in the district that may have been designed by Woolley include 1016 Douglas Street and 910 South 1200 East. He also designed several notable Prairie School style homes just east of 1300 East on Yale Avenue.
Other architects who influenced the area included Frederick A. Hale and Charles S. McDonald, who are known to have designed J.T. Gillmer’s residence (1038 S. 1200 E., 1910). Hale designed more than one hundred buildings in Salt Lake City including the Alta Club, the First Methodist Church, the Keith-Brown mansion, and numerous residences. Charles S. McDonald, of the firm McDonald and Cooper, worked with Hale on the addition to the Alta Club, designed the Keith O’Brien building, and worked with Eames and Young on the Walker Bank building.
Gilmer Park Historic District contains large number of excellent examples of the styles popular in Salt Lake City and Utah during the period of significance, 1909-43. The houses display the craftsmanship of design and construction materials associated with the era of the significant period. Attention was paid to the quality of design and cohesiveness in the neighborhood. The residential building styles are predominantly Period Revival Cottages and Bungalows and portray the sequence of its development and its association with the growth of the city during a progressive era.
The majority of buildings constructed in the district were bungalows and period revival cottages. Nearly twenty-nine percent of the homes are bungalows, either Arts and Crafts or Prairie School. These styles were popular in Utah from 1905-25 and incorporated many similar stylistic features such as low, hipped roofs and wide, overhanging eaves. The wide porches help to create an impression of informal living and unite the houses to their sites. The bungalow plan is open, informal, and economical and became the basic middle-class house, replacing the late-nineteenth century Victorian cottage. Like the Victorian style, the bungalow’s popularity can be attributed to the widespread use of architectural pattern books and a corresponding period of economic prosperity when many families were purchasing their first homes.
Approximately sixty-four percent of the homes in the district are Period Revival English Cottages, English Tudor, and Colonial Revival homes. Period Revival styles were popular in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah primarily between 1920-40. Most of the Period Revival homes in Gilmer Park Historic District were constructed in the 1920s. A possible reason for the rise in popularity of the Period Revival style may have resulted from national pride following World War I which led to its increased use. English Tudor, Spanish Revival, and French Norman styles were most likely imported by soldiers returning from the war in Europe. These designs were based primarily on external decorative features rather than the historical building and planning traditions and “were simplistically massed, suggesting the informality that various architectural writers of the period stated was appropriate to the American way of life.”
PROMINENT RESIDENTS OF GILMER PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT
Gilmer Park Historic District is also significant because of its association with prominent residents who contributed to the growth and progress of Salt Lake City and the state. The influx of professionals were an indication of the progress the city was experiencing and greatly influenced the growth and social fabric of the neighborhood and ensured its viability. The neighborhood has been home to many of Salt Lake City’s prominent residents who were influential in business, politics, art, architecture, medicine, law, education, and religion.
A look at the lives of many of the residents in the district reveals that the district was home to many prominent citizens involved in business, politics, architecture, art, law, medicine, education, and LDS Church activities. Those who chose to make Gilmer Park their home came from all walks of life, although residents were generally upper-middle class.
Many Gilmer Park Historic District residents were politically influential. Wilson McCarthy, state senator, governmental appointee, and president of Denver and Rio Grande Railroad, lived at 974 South 1300 East between 1924-32. Elise F. Musser, state senator and governmental appointee, and her husband Burton W. Musser, state senator and attorney, resided at 1133 Harvard Avenue. Elise lived there until her death in 1967 and Burton lived there through the 1980s. Elizabeth P. Hayward, also politically active as a state legislator and with the Democratic National Committee, lived at 1140 Herbert Avenue between 1917-28. Finally, Herbert B. Maw, a former governor of Utah, lived at 1212 Yale Avenue between 1939-80s.
A number of residents were prominent in business. Earl F. Free (1205 Gilmer Drive) was the founder and manager of Carbo-Chemical Group and also Hygeia Ice Company. Harold H. Bennett lived at 1187 Harvard Avenue between 1930 and the 1980s and was the president of Zion Cooperative Mercantile Institution (ZCMI). Samuel H. Sharman (1159 Gilmer Drive, 1925-38) was vice-president and general manager of Sharman Automobile Company and was also a nationally famous trap-shooter. Between 1922-36, Simon Rosenblatt, vice-president of Eimco and founder of Grand Central Stores, lived at 1277 Yale Avenue.
A University of Utah economics professor and governmental appointee, Mark H. Green, lived at 1127 East Alpine Place between 1933-49. Other professionals who lived in the area included Walter M. Stookey (1270 Yale Avenue, 1923-35) and Rush B. Stevens (1236 Yale Avenue, 1924- 37) who were physicians, and Murray P. Rock (1120 Yale Avenue, 1922-27) who was a dentist.
Many residents were also known for their accomplishments in art and architecture. Gilbert P. Riswold (1252 Gilmer Drive, 1924-31) was a sculptor. Three prominent Salt Lake City architects lived on 900 South between 1200 and 1300 East on what has been called “architects row.” Taylor Woolley lived at 1222 East 900 South from 1918 until his death in 1965. His brother-in-law and partner, Clifford P. Evans resided at 1266 East 900 South. Harold W. Burton, of the firm Pope and Burton lived at 1226 East 900 South.
LDS Church leaders also made their home in Gilmer Park Historic District. Richard L. Evans lived at 1032 Douglas Street between 1936-71 and was best known as the radio announcer for the nationally broadcast radio program, “Music and the Spoken Word.” Sterling W. Sill who resided at 1264 Yale Avenue from 1935 through the 1980s was bishop of the Garden Park Ward and a member of the Quorum of the Seventy. Adam S. Bennion was a member of the Council of the Twelve and a United States Senate candidate who lived at 1183 Herbert Avenue between 1918-58. Joseph Fielding Smith (998 Douglas Street, 1926-53) was the tenth LDS Church president.
SUMMARY:
Gilmer Parks’ distinctiveness lies in its break with the street grid pattern that dominated the development of Utah cities. Rich in history and architectural significance, the Gilmer Park Historic District is one of the best-preserved and well-designed twentieth-century suburban neighborhoods in Salt Lake City. The influence of the people who lived in this area is evident through their political and professional affiliations and leadership. The unique qualities of the neighborhood combined with the people who continue to value these qualities remains strong. The original owners resided in their homes in Gilmer Park Historic District for relatively long periods of time. Residents in the neighborhood continue to take great pride in their homes and streets by maintaining their houses and yards. A strong neighborhood association was formed about ten years ago and continues to be very active today.
The Gilmer Park area was part of a tremendous building boom in Salt Lake City. At the turn of the century, Salt Lake City experienced a major shift in demographic patterns. The population of Salt Lake City increased from 20,000 in the 1880s to well over 92,000 in 1910, and the physical structure of the city rapidly expanded upon higher land to the east and south of the original town grid. The accumulation of a smoke haze over the city had also been a problem in the late 1800s, with coal-fired furnaces and smoke-producing industries exacerbating the problem. During the winter the entire valley was frequently engulfed in a black curtain of smoke particles that marred buildings and clothing. Salt Lake City was so plagued with smoke during the early 1920s that it was nicknamed “the Pittsburgh of the West.” As the population grew, people moved away from the center of town. There was a need and a desire for residents of Salt Lake City to move to higher ground for cleaner air and water. After the problems of acquiring a suitable water supply and sewer system for the bench lands were alleviated, suburban development began to increase. From 1906-30, there were 439 new residential subdivisions platted in Salt Lake City. By 1911 the city consisted of compact residential areas and well-established transportation lines, and in 1922 zoning was established in response to the problems of indiscriminate commercial, industrial, and residential development in all parts of the city.
Nationally the Progressive Era was effecting social changes through governmental reform and the related City Beautiful movement encouraged the design of public spaces that would improve urban life. The movements that defined the early twentieth century, the Progressive Era and the City Beautiful Movement, were also aimed at improving urban life and bringing rational order and efficiency to the forces of progress that had begun in the past century. Private citizens and Salt Lake City’s government moved to join the City Beautiful movement. In 1900, they planted trees in local parks and around the City and County Building, and improved walks and drives in Liberty Park, then considered a showplace of Salt Lake City open spaces. In 1908, due greatly to pressures by the Civic Improvement League, the city established a park board to make Salt Lake into a “City Beautiful”. In 1909 a Parks and Playground Association, with members largely from upper-middle class was formed to provide playgrounds for children. Civic improvements throughout the city included the planting of trees and building of sidewalks.
During the Progressive Era, the first two decades of the twentieth century, Salt Lake City underwent industrialization and urbanization like other cities across the nation. It experienced a shift from an agricultural to a commercial and industrial economy. The city was no longer isolated but was politically and economically integrated into the mainstream of the country. In general, Utah experienced the commercialization of agriculture, the emergence of a substantial business sector, and the development of corporate mining and manufacturing. The combination of agriculture, mining, manufacturing, commerce, and transportation produced prosperity for Salt Lake City.
In the early 1920s Salt Lake City and Utah experienced a postwar World War I economic slump. Although construction, retail trade, transportation, and communication contributed to overall growth, the city experienced an economic plateau in the mid 1920s and did not participate in the national prosperity of that decade. Building, however, was very strong during this period, even with the higher building material prices and interest rates. The demand for new construction was great due to the need for private homes, the building of which had been curtailed during the war. Gilmer Park Historic District provides evidence of this period of building.
