Scott Gerlica | New Jersey State Historic Preservation Office

This summer, I worked as a project review assistant for the New jersey State Historic Preservation Office. I primarily reviewed projects subject to Section 106, the New Jersey Register of Historic Places Act, and New Jersey land use regulation. Day-to-day, SHPO staff would assign me a new project or new step for an existing project, and I generally had 30 days (as mandated by regulation) to review and draft a response to the agency undertaking the project. These tasks ranged from technical assistance before a project is subject to regulatory review to review of documents submitted to meet conditions outlined in Memorandum of Agreements. A few significant projects I reviewed include the construction of ADA parking at an eighteenth-century farmstead-turned-community center, a proposed artificial turf baseball field in a Olmsted Brothers-designed park, and a bridge replacement over the Delaware and Raritan Canal, for which I drafted three SHPO Opinions of Eligibility - one for the bridge and two for houses within the area of potential effects.  Additionally, I was able to get out of my cubicle and participate in community outreach through the Department of Environmental Protection to teach youths about historic preservation at Liberty State Park.

I unquestionably drew on knowledge and experiences from courses I had taken during the first year of the program. Digital Media allowed me to quickly understand and navigate the SHPO project Access database and cultural resource GIS, LUCY - named after Lucy, the Elephant, of course. Both semesters of Documentation, Research, and Recording gave me the essential understanding of architectural plans, HABS/HAER, survey data, and nominations needed to review projects. When there was space for my own interpretation on a project, which was often, I was able to center my decisions from concepts learned in Theories of Historic Preservation (WWRMD?). Finally, the foundational knowledge of federal and state preservation law and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards from Preservation Through Public Policy and Preservation Law allowed me start reviewing projects from day one.

My biggest take away from my summer at the SHPO is that this work is a skill. There is a reason that this is a professional degree, and I was expected to do professional work. David Hollenberg repeatedly told our class that navigating policy is a skill, and I finally understand what he meant after working in the trenches. It takes experience to know what to look for while reviewing a project and how to communicate and negotiate with parties that have differing interests. I learned about the nuances of different preservation law and how they affect our authority. For example, Section 106 includes resources eligible for listing on the National Register, and New Jersey review does not, which greatly impacts how reviews are initiated and carried out.

I also learned how significantly connected archeology is to our field. Criterion D for listing on the National Register is huge, and the “below ground” reviewers had as much work as the “above ground” reviewers. The New Jersey State Historic Preservation Officer is even an archeologist by training.

I worked with staff in every department of the SHPO as well as preservation consultants in the private sector. I now understand what daily work is like within the field of preservation. It was a lot of work, and the NJ SHPO, along with every other SHPO, is spread extremely thin, but I feel very fortunate for this experience.