Práctica reflexiva episódica, informal o formal

Within a few years of its original survey, London was a flourishing settlement with activity in the institutional, residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. A report by the Reverend Benjamin Lundy in 1832 estimated the population at 300, with two houses of public worship, three hotels, six general stores; 130 buildings in total, nearly all frame (Armstrong 1986). Settlement of the surrounding townships also continued, spurring demand for goods and services available in London. The town was, however, still far from urbanized. Henry Groves, who settled in 1832, recounts a bear walking down Dundas Street in order to reach the river across which he swam to enter the woods on the western bank (Unknown 1889, 220).

The establishment of a public market was testament to London’s growing position in the region; in turn the market also fuelled more development. The City was granted authority to hold a public market in 1835 by Upper Canada legislators: “The council had sought the creation of a safe, fair trading centre around which an economically strong, vibrant regional centre would grow” (Gouglas 1996, 3). The intended positive outcomes of the market were largely realized, providing a place for the interchange of London with its hinterland. Local farmers supplied much of the meats and produce sold at the market, thereby feeding the city. When farmers brought their goods to market they also purchased goods at the neighbouring firms to bring back to the farm. A similar spill-over would exist when locals went to the market for their food needs, picking up fashions and hardware on the same trip at the nearby shops which lined the market square.

Originally the market was located in a plaza beside the courthouse,

solidifying the area, and the nearby intersection of Ridout and Dundas Streets, as the city’s civic and retail hub. This site proved too small for the burgeoning market, and thus it relocated to a site on King and Talbot streets in 18432_{. In 1845, the} market was moved once more to the eastern extent of the downtown to facilitate the development of newly surveyed lands in that area (Gouglas 1996). This proved unpopular with the downtown merchants, who donated land in the core in order that a permanent market building might be erected at the more central site (Unknown,

2 _{The market remains on the same site today, however, the building itself has gone through}

1889, 282). The two markets operated between 1846 and 1848, however, the one located in the newly established areas east of the core failed to attract sufficient business; the city was unable to support two markets. The more central site at Ridout and King streets continued as the city’s sole market area.

The donation of land for a market in the city centre by the business owners was hardly an act of kindness. Rather it was a shrewd business move to attract more customers and increase sales. These retailers relied on the traffic which the market drew to the area. The market, along with courthouse, were poles drawing people to the intersection of Dundas and Ridout Streets during. When the market was relocated the adjacent business owners feared that their customers would leave this area. They thus donated the land, allowing for a permanent market to be established, providing them with a constant flow of customers.

Records show that the merchants near the market performed better than those located elsewhere in the city (Gouglas 1996). These differences were observed even for stores just blocks away. In his reading of the politics involved in the

market, Gouglas (1996) argues that the city council enacted a series of by-laws which privileged the market over private businesses. Controls were placed on the dealings of farmers with the butchers and produce merchants in the city, favouring those who traded within the public market3_{. The intent of these by-laws largely fell} under the Victorian pretences of product control for the protection and betterment of society; however, they were often instituted more for financial reasons (Gouglas 1996). The city politicians had strong interests in the businesses on or near the market square. Thus, as Gouglas argues, it was in their best interest to promote the market at the detriment of retailers elsewhere in the city.

Whether it was due to the favourable help from the ruling elite, or the simple fact that it provided foodstuffs and other staples to a growing population, the public market was a successful enterprise. It drew many to the downtown core, cementing the area as the centre of retailing in the city. Stores vied to be among the businesses which lined the market square in order to siphon customers from the busy area.

3 _{For example a by-law restricted farmers from selling meat to butchers for resale on the}

The surrounding streets were also impacted, notably Dundas Street, which brought both local and distant buyers and sellers to the booming market area.

The first map to portray the village, including its buildings, was produced for the military in 1839 by William Eyre, a major in the 73Rd _{Regiment who was}

stationed in the barracks on the present-day site of Victoria Park (Figure 3.1). It shows the series of lots and buildings created by the original survey, bounded by the river to the south and west, North Street to the north and Wellington Street to the east. Across this area there was a generally even, although sparse, level of

development, with two to eight structures per block. Surrounding areas outside of the village boundaries were, according to this source, undeveloped; only the roads connecting London to the east and west are represented4_.

Although the map makes no reference to land-use classification, the sparsely settled lands inside the village were likely used predominantly for residential purposes. Few major industries had yet been established and the structures

represented were uniformly small. The extent of the village was evenly developed at low densities except for an area centred at the intersection of Dundas and Ridout Streets (Figure 3.1). Here the map depicts a continuous stretch of buildings along the north and south sides of Dundas Street from Ridout to Talbot Streets. These buildings also wrapped around the corner to continue along the eastern side of Ridout Street. Another continuous frontage, although smaller, was present at the northwest corner of the intersection.

This area of dense development was the early roots of the city’s retail landscape. Even in its primitive stages the retail sector demonstrated defining characteristics that would persist for the next 150 years throughout the era of traditional mainstreet retailing. Its built form was entirely different than other areas of the city, having a continuous streetscape of buildings whereas the rest of the city was sparsely developed. Although individual buildings are not discernable

4 _{The lack of surrounding farms and houses outside of the village limits on this cartographic}

FIGURE 3.1 Map of the early settlement of London in 1839, showing sparse settlement throughout the area except for an already densely developed retail district in the core.

on the map, the blocks of development depicted were actually many individual retail shops abutting each other. The shops were built on narrow and deep lots, with no setbacks from the lot lines; maximizing the number of stores that could locate along a short frontage. Only two breaks were observed along the south side of this continuous retail streetscape, and only one to the north. A dense and varied retail core had established in the two decades since first settlement. Although the rest of the village was rural in character, the retail landscape was already exhibiting a quintessentially urban character.