Memorial controversy continues.

Equal parts watchdog and mediator, the Committee on Lower Manhattan Redevelopment, convened last week to examine the latest round of controversy over various aspects of the World Trade Center memorial's design, including the safety concerns that have erupted over the memorial's number of entry and exit ways.

The memorial, as conceived by designer Michael Arad, was originally supposed to have two entrances and two exits. Those numbers were halved to one apiece by the LMDC, which is developing the memorial in conjunction with the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation.

Giving testimony in front of the Committee, LMDC president Stefan Pryor made the somewhat counterintuitive point that the reduction in access ways would expedite passage from the memorial because it would be less confusing than having multiple points of egress. The amount of emergency exits has not been altered.

A New York Times article, published on the same day the Committee met, postulated that, in the event of an emergency such as a terrorist attack, flaws in the memorial's design could create dangerous bottlenecks during a panicked mass exodus on the structure's vast subterranean floors.

Pryor indicated that the WTC's interaction with the surrounding infrastructure and pedestrian flow were chief among the reasons for the reduction in entrances and exits. Some observers have speculated however that the change in design is an effort to rope in the memorial's massive price tag. LMDC officials have stated that the project will cost $500 million to build, but written reports have revealed that the project could in fact balloon to as much as $1 billion. The LMDC has set aside $200 million for the memorial out of funds made available by Congress for rebuilding Lower Manhattan and another $130 million has been raised by the WTC Memorial Foundation. But in the wake of the Katrina and Tsunami disasters, and perhaps also due to the general discord at the WTC site between developer Larry Silverstein, the Port Authority and the city, fundraising efforts in recent months have been hindered.

If the LMDC does in fact have multiple motives it wouldn't be the only one. Many of the most vocal critics of the memorial are various factions of victims' families who don't take issue with just the number of entrances and exits, but with the memorial's design altogether. One such group, Take Back the Memorial, an alliance of 9/11 family organizations and their supporters, has argued that the memorial should be above ground, not below as is currently planned.

Other points of contention have been the order in which the names of 9/11 victims are carved into the walls surrounding the two reflecting pools in the footprints of the Twin Towers and also over historic preservation issues.

On March 13, 2006, the Coalition of 9/11 Families filed suit against the LMDC to fight its plans to pour a concrete slab, on which the memorial will be built, over the remnants of the Trade Center footprints.