Austin | Oracle Campus Updates & News - Page 4

The ATX · #61 Posted **Jan 7, 2021, 2:53 PM**

Oracle is putting their Downtown San Jose office building up for sale, and it happens to be the biggest office building in Downtown San Jose per this Silicon Valley Business Journal article from yesterday. The article is behind the Business Journal paywall, but everyone should now how to jump over the wall by now.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...-a-office.html

freerover · #62 Posted **Jan 7, 2021, 3:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

Oracle is putting their Downtown San Jose office building up for sale, and it happens to be the biggest office building in Downtown San Jose per this Silicon Valley Business Journal article from yesterday. The article is behind the Business Journal paywall, but everyone should now how to jump over the wall by now.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...-a-office.html

Or pay for good journalism you cheapskates.

StoOgE · #63 Posted **Jan 7, 2021, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freerover

Or pay for good journalism you cheapskates.

Wants good local coverage, wants to use ad blockers to get it for free

ATX2030 · #64 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 2:53 PM**

Oracle could buy 9 acres next to its Austin headquarters, report says

https://www.kvue.com/article/money/e...1-b7eb3397bb51

AUSTIN, Texas — Oracle could end up buying nine acres of City-owned parkland next to its headquarters campus as part of a land swap with the City of Austin, according to a report from KVUE's media partners at the Austin American-Statesman.

The Statesman reports that Austin voters will be asked in November to consider the deal, which could result in the City getting 48 acres farther down the Colorado River. That private land is currently home to a racetrack the City has been eyeing for years, according to the Statesman.

lonewolf · #65 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 3:50 PM**

I hope the athletic fields are left alone

sadly the ending here is fairly predictable

We vs us · #66 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:01 PM**

The land they want to swap for -- Driveway Austin Motorsports -- is on the eastern side of 183, just behind the NXP complex. It's right on the Dog's Head, which is, long term, targeted for development. Not sure what the city's plan is for this, but it might make sense for both.

ATX2030 · #67 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lonewolf

I hope the athletic fields are left alone

sadly the ending here is fairly predictable

Is Oracle trying to purchase the athletic fields?

drummer · #68 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:18 PM**

The article mentions 2525 S. Lakeshore Drive, which is currently a maintenance facility and is just next door to the current Oracle campus.

The other property down the river (Driveway Austin Motorsports) is 8400 Delwau Ln.

I don't think this impacts the athletic fields in any way.

Echostatic · #69 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:20 PM**

No. Oracle is trying to purchase the plot of land outlined here.

The ATX · #70 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:26 PM**

Calling that "parkland" is a stretch, and calling it that on the ballot would sway voters to vote no.

The ATX · #71 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:29 PM**

The Statesman had a decent article about it 4 days ago that I missed:

https://www.statesman.com/story/news...rs/5994115001/

freerover · #72 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:37 PM**

Please everyone fot for prop B. No one is going to miss that piece of shit land and it would make a huge difference for the east side which has a shit ton of river with no real public access.

drummer · #73 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 4:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

Calling that "parkland" is a stretch, and calling it that on the ballot would sway voters to vote no.

Very true. Who decided that ballot language?

freerover · #74 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 5:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

Very true. Who decided that ballot language?

Well, it's technically zoned as parkland so I think it's a legal matter.

drummer · #75 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 6:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by freerover

Well, it's technically zoned as parkland so I think it's a legal matter.

That was going to be my next question. Thanks.

myBrain · #76 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 7:21 PM**

Insane that we're not developing the south shore denser and more mixed-use. Need to ditch those height limits. I mean, it's great that Oracle is doing something here, but we should be well past the suburban campus model in this neighborhood.

We vs us · #77 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 7:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by myBrain

Insane that we're not developing the south shore denser and more mixed-use. Need to ditch those height limits. I mean, it's great that Oracle is doing something here, but we should be well past the suburban campus model in this neighborhood.

Were getting that here and there along Riverside . . . . and the Ballpark redevelopment is going to change the game irrevocably. But you're right, we're absolutely behind the curve.

Enghum · #78 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 7:49 PM**

I'll be voting no on the park land sale.

On either side of the proposed purchase land there is the Bolm District park that has no plan and the John Treviño Jr. Metropolitan Park that has a master plan but no funds to build it out. Both of these parks have access to the Colorado river. There is only a single small residential neighborhood within a mile and a half of the land being purchased in any direction.

Parks and Recreation hasn't given any indication where the replacement maintenance facility will go. The proposed purchased land lies completely within the floodplain so it can't go there and there really isn't anything you can build on that land other than recreation. That means we'll be sacrificing some parkland in some other convenient location in the city for a replacement maintenance facility or purchasing land.

One of the benefits if this does go through would be a trail connecting the Walnut Creek Trail all the way up to MLK through John Treviño Jr. Metropolitan Park. There are other areas of privately owned flood plain land that our urban trail passes through. I don't see why we would need to purchase the entire piece of land if that's the case.

The land also hasn't appreciated as much as it could. Once the area finishes its build out in 5 - 10 years the land will only increase in value. Or its value of additional parkland in the middle of a dense urban environment will be recognized.

Novacek · #79 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 8:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enghum

Parks and Recreation hasn't given any indication where the replacement maintenance facility will go. The proposed purchased land lies completely within the floodplain so it can't go there and there really isn't anything you can build on that land other than recreation. That means we'll be sacrificing some parkland in some other convenient location in the city for a replacement maintenance facility or purchasing land.

That's just it, it can go anywhere. It can go in BFE, instead of dedicating a bunch of close in land as basically a parking lot.

Echostatic · #80 Posted **Oct 12, 2021, 10:09 PM**

I thought this forum was all about redeveloping surface parking lots

seems like a no-brainer to me.