Leaders of the fractured bid to bring the 2012 Olympics to New York City are re-examining earlier options for a stadium in Queens, three people familiar with the discussions said yesterday.
Two options involve a partnership with the Mets, one to refit Shea Stadium for the Olympic Games and the other to build a new stadium in the Willets Point area nearby, they said.
NYC2012 officials, who have admitted that more delays would cripple their chance of taking a credible Olympic bid to the final International Olympic Committee vote in Singapore on July 6, will work through the weekend on the plan, planning to have it ready for submission to the I.O.C. on Monday, according to a person familiar with the bid committee's meetings.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who has been closely involved in the bid, is busy today with the wedding of one of his daughters, but would have to approve any final plan.
The people familiar with the discussions did not want to be identified because NYC2012 organizers have insisted on keeping their options private until they choose one. Deputy Mayor Daniel L. Doctoroff, the bid's founder, did not respond to requests for comment.
Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' chief operating officer, and Dave Howard, the Mets' executive vice president, also declined comment. Fred Wilpon, the chairman and principal owner of the team, did not return a telephone call.
Olympic organizers scoffed at a Queens stadium site until the rejection of the West Side stadium proposal Monday. Since then, they have been scrambling to produce a viable alternative that they can take to Singapore, where the I.O.C. members will choose a site for the 2012 Games from among New York, Paris, London, Madrid and Moscow.
There is no way to know what impact the new stadium proposal will have on the final vote, which is carried out by secret ballot. New York had been considered a strong contender, although an evaluation issued Monday by an I.O.C. committee rated its bid slightly below those of Paris and London.
At this early stage, it is not clear how a stadium would be financed with or without the Mets. The 2012 committee would presumably have at its disposal $142 million that had been earmarked to make enhancements specifically for the Olympic Games to the West Side stadium.
Clearly, whatever plan bid organizers emerge with, it cannot be a fully developed stadium plan, particularly if they are trying to join with the Mets. It would take far longer than a few days to design a stadium to meet the Mets' needs as well as those for the Olympics.
The Mets have wanted a new stadium for many years. In the late 1990's, they unveiled a plan for a ballpark that would evoke Ebbets Field, the home of the Brooklyn Dodgers until they left for Los Angeles after the 1957 season.
The idea of a temporary structure for the Olympics is one of many possibilities that have been raised this week, said three people with knowledge of the discussions. The structure could occupy a site at Willets Point, a 13-block area between Shea Stadium and the Flushing River filled mostly with auto salvage yards, repair garages and automotive shops. It would then be cleared for a new Mets stadium.
Large-scale temporary structures are rare, but they could be attractive to the I.O.C., which has been trying to keep its host cities from building facilities with limited permanent use.
The idea of refitting Shea Stadium to serve as an Olympic stadium has been explored previously. When required by the United States Olympic Committee to offer a backup plan while it was vying to be the United States' 2012 bid city, NYC2012 offered a blueprint of Shea Stadium altered to accommodate the Olympic track and field competition, as well as the opening and closing ceremonies.
The Willets Point site was included in an environmental impact study by the Department of City Planning that identified it as an alternative to the West Side plan, which included a stadium financed primarily by the Jets. The study concluded that construction there would be nearly as costly as building in Manhattan and offered no alternative use as convention space, as was planned for the West Side facility. Olympic organizers always stressed the multiuse capabilities in Manhattan as a major reason for choosing that plan.
Queens has long been offered as an alternative by those who opposed the Manhattan stadium. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who blocked the West Side stadium with his one-third control of the Public Authorities Control Board this week, has said he would go along with a stadium in Queens.
But the decision to consider Queens would seem to contradict Mr. Bloomberg's longtime insistence that an Olympic stadium in the borough was not an option, because the city was bound to the West Side proposal. He and other city officials regularly emphasized that the I.O.C., after so many years of scandals, was against any changes in the city's proposed plan. The mayor has also said the committee would not be interested in a stadium set anywhere but amid Manhattan's glamour.
"You should get on a plane and go to see the places where the Olympics have taken place," Mr. Bloomberg said in February. "You will realize that Shea Stadium is not of the same order of magnitude or grandeur that the I.O.C. wants for the Olympics. Nor is it of the same order of magnitude or grandeur that the other cities have promised to either build or already have."
The mayor's critics and political opponents have said all along that Queens was the best site for the stadium, because of the borough's lower density, easier access, and proximity to other Olympic sites. But the Jets, who would have paid most of the construction costs for the West Side stadium, were not interested in moving to Queens, and the Bloomberg administration chose not to acknowledge any alternatives to avoid giving opponents ammunition against the West Side plan.
Councilman John Liu, whose district includes Flushing Meadows, said that an Olympic plan would have a serious impact on his district.
"It would be a good thing to have the Olympics in New York, and we shouldn't just abandon that hope," he said yesterday, adding that he contacted Mr. Doctoroff's office twice this week to discuss a Queens site, but did not hear much in response.
"They're going to keep their cards close to their vest, but I don't think they will just give up the Olympic dream," he said. "They have had this vision for over a decade. The administration has to think outside the box and consider other locations, and Willets Point would be an excellent location, with its proximity to mass transit and highways and Flushing Meadow Park and commercial areas. It would be a shame to throw up our hands and forget about it."
Councilman Hiram Monserrate, whose district includes Shea Stadium and the Willets Point area, said, "I haven't heard anything official other than certain politicians posturing.
"Some politicians are talking about being supportive, and that's very nice, but I have serious concerns about holding the Olympics in the Willets Point area, and they would have to be addressed."
Traffic is one potential issue. Councilman Tony Avella, whose district lies to the west of the Shea Stadium site, said that he opposed building an Olympic stadium at the Shea site because that area could not handle large volumes of traffic.
"It would be such a traffic nightmare," said Mr. Avella, who predicted that an Olympic proposal would fall victim to opposition and exhaustive environmental approvals in Queens.
"They'd have a big fight," he said. "We don't have the traffic infrastructure here. Look how bad traffic is when the Mets play, or the U.S. Open tennis is on."