While students are grappling with administrators’ plans to fill in part of the Lagoon, Northwestern faculty and staff members have been forming their own opinions.

Calling the Lagoon one of the university’s most aesthetically pleasing features, some professors and staff members questioned the administration’s plan even though their own departments may benefit from new buildings.

Mavis Sotnick, a department assistant in the Kellogg Graduate School of Management, said she realizes the Lagoon’s value for impressing visitors to the university. When Sotnick gives tours of the Allen Center, she said she always shows off the building’s prime view of the Lagoon.

“When people come to look at our program they are very impressed, and when we go to the best view in Allen Center, people think it’s very beautiful,” Sotnick said.

Justin Conroy, who works in the Office of Financial Aid, also expressed concern that the administration did not think about the construction’s long-term effects. Describing the project as “another example of the administration’s short-sightedness,” Conroy compared the plan to the construction of Kemper and Slivka Halls, which has angered some fraternity members.

Library Assistant Allen Streicker agreed that the Lagoon’s beauty is worth preserving.

“For aesthetic reasons this is really bad taste,” Streicker said. “I have lived in Evanston for 31 years and I would hate to see it go.”

Sotnick, who also lives in Evanston and said he walks along the Lagoon every Sunday, echoed Streicker’s concern that the plan would negatively affect the community.

“The Lagoon is very much a part of Evanston as well as NU,” she said, recalling family outings to feed the fish by the bridge and enjoy the surroundings. “People often plan their activities around the Lagoon.”

Sotnick said administrators should be held accountable for filling part of the Lagoon and should compensate the Evanston community for its recreational loss.

“(Northwestern) should start paying taxes because they are taking away part of the beauty around here,” Sotnick said, though she has previously opposed the city’s attempts to collect taxes from NU.

Others supported the view of students who complained administrators didn’t involve them in the decision.

Economics Prof. Mark Witte said planning the project without any contribution from students may have cost administrators valuable input in brainstorming alternative construction sites.

“I like to think we have some pretty bright people on this campus who could have contributed some good ideas for the project,” Witte said.

Financial concerns also are making some staff members question the plan. Streicker said if the university can raise money so easily, administrators should spend it on improving student life.

“(Such a move) proves the administration can finance something when they really want to – sadly Norris is not such a priority,” he wrote on an online petition against the construction.

But not all faculty and staff members are against the project.

Witte, although upset by the lack of student input, said the construction will organize the campus around a more central location and create a major walkway in addition to Sheridan Road.

Hoping they may receive one of the future buildings on the site, School of Music faculty members said they also are in favor of the plan.

“It’s no new news that we need a new Music school building,” said Linda Garton, interim director for undergraduate studies. “Obviously we’d take any land over there that we can get.”

Music Prof. Robert Harris said the construction would be justified if it would yield a new facility for the school.

“I would be pro putting a building anywhere on campus,” Harris said. “Although I love open space, I would sacrifice that space for an adequate facility.”