Tim Gillespie and his wife Jan moved to Portland in 1973 from the Bay Area and stayed ever since. In Portland, they raised their sons, Nate and Josh, who attended Sabin, Beaumont, and Grant. Tim taught English for 38 years in various situations, from Parkrose to Lake Oswego high schools, from alternative programs for struggling students to Advanced Placement classes. Tim is also a published author, penning articles for various teacher magazines, poems for literary journals such as Windfall, Timberline Review, and Cloudbank, and writing a book, Doing Literary Criticism (Stenhouse Press). Since retiring, Tim spends most of his time tending to elderly parents, enjoying his children and grandchildren, traveling, volunteering, and, of course, writing. You can occasionally hear him read at Broadway Books and other venues.
How long have you lived in the neighborhood, and what’s your favorite part of living in the neighborhood?
My wife Jan and I moved into our 1925 bungalow below the ridge in 1979. It was the first and only house we’ve owned. What drew us then is what appeals to us still—great neighbors, beautiful old trees and homes, walkability, nearby amenities, and proximity to downtown.
What’s your favorite neighborhood business, and why?
It’s impossible to choose a single favorite. The folks at Beaumont Hardware can help answer any home project question. The staff at Beaumont Market—especially ace beer-monger Justin—are friendly as all-get-out. I do a lot of writing and reading at Jim and Patty’s Coffee. My wife Jan’s tutoring business—Math Place on Fremont—shares the building with Bang Bang and Cha Cha Cha, both fine eateries, and Alex the Jeweler. We’ve been happily dining at Amalfi’s for decades and get the best multi-grain bread at Grand Central. Gustavo Soares is our quality State Farm Insurance agent. What can’t you find on Fremont Street?!
What does being a board member mean to you?
If we value our neighborhood, we need to pitch in to help sustain its livability.
What are the issues you want to help address as a board member?
Growing up just east of east Los Angeles, I know how a metropolis with unfettered sprawl, slapdash planning, and endless freeway construction works. Poorly. Living in Portland for the last 45 years, I’ve been the fortunate beneficiary of Oregon’s environmental and land use planning values. As people move to our city and state at a tremendous rate—since 2010, according to the Census Bureau, we’ve been growing by around 10,000 new residents a year, a trend which appears will continue—pressures rise on housing, housing prices skyrocket, homelessness increases, inequality increases, diversity decreases, all problems that confront Portland’s livability.
To not become another sprawling, income-segregated, smog- and traffic-choked L.A., I’ve generally been supportive of the long-term Portland and Oregon vision of increasing density, sustaining the urban growth boundary process, and encouraging bicycle and public transportation infrastructure. At the same time, I’m also supportive of BWNA’s history of questioning the city’s proposed Residential Infill Project, which seeks to address the current and expected influx of new residents by increasing neighborhood density. That goal seems reasonable to a person like me, and pushing back on that plan, as the BWNA Board has done, has been dismissed by some as privileged Not In My Back Yard protectionism. However, I’ve been impressed by the way the Board has stressed that its first goal is “keeping our neighborhood available to as many diverse people of varied incomes as possible,” particularly to make sure there are dwellings affordable for middle-income first-time homebuyers and for renters.
The BWNA board has expressed what to me are quite reasonable concerns about a number of aspects of the RIP plan. For example, will proposed re-zoning to allow for demolition of existing housing stock in favor of bigger single-family homes or duplex and triplex construction actually lead to less-affordable housing? (Exhibit A is the giant new duplex on NE Klickitat, each of whose units apparently sold for a million dollars). And will the plan’s promotion of ADUs necessarily provide more long-term affordable housing options, or will many of those converted garages and backyard structures just end up as Airbnb rentals?
These are questions worth raising, and the BWNA board has proposed some reasonable alternatives—doing a pilot study to see if the proposed rezoning does indeed improve housing opportunities for lower-income residents, for example, and exploring cottage clusters (such as the existing Cully Grove) as an alternative for “missing middle” housing. I’m interested in supporting the BWNA board as it continues to come up with ideas that might actually sustain and promote affordable housing in our neighborhood.
Thank you for your service, Tim!