As we reported earlier this week, the revised plans for the Warriors Arena upon Pier 30-32 calls for moving Red’s Java House from its existing location to the south side of the Pier.

And while the building and business would survive, as the renderings and a reader report, Red’s private patio and beer garden would not, replaced by public seating as proposed.


20 thoughts on “Red’s Would Survive The Warriors Move, But Their Patio Would Not”
  1. Would Red’s customers be able to take their beer out to the public seating area? That would be just as good.

  2. As long as people can take their beer outside, if anything, this would be better than the current situation (which is basically a glorified seat in a parking lot).
    That said, realistically, if the arena goes up, it is only a matter of time before Reds becomes a theme-park version of Reds – same building, but charging twice as much for a burger, and telling you the name of the cow it came from. But that’s probably not the worst thing – the reason it is what it is still after all these years is because it’s a restaurant in the middle of a parking lot.
    I’m still waiting for a rendering from the foot of Pier 38, to see how much of the view of the bridge is going to be blocked on the morning jog…

  3. I doubt you’ll be able to take your beer out into the public seating area. It’ll be like the ferry building; you can have your beer/drink at Gotts/Mijita/whatever, but you aren’t technically allowed to take it to the pier.
    This is a shame, but worth it for the arena. I wonder if the NIMBYs will use this as a reason for their objection, haha. I’m sure they’re deeply saddened by any change to Red’s (sarcasm).

  4. @MoD, my opinion based on what I heard at the CAC meeting is that no, you won’t be able to take beer into the public seating area. Snohetta was clear in responding to the question about Red’s beer garden that once built, the open area around the arena and retail on the pier would be focused on being family friendly. Maybe a bit of paranoia on my part, but it sounded like code for no.
    Plus, since this is wide open and accessible from anywhere by anybody, I’m not sure what the city liquor laws state about liquor in general in such an open, unfenced (unregulated?) area.

  5. Javahouse closer to the Giants has public seating and everyone drinks beer there. It’s family friendly.

  6. @sparky*b, valid point. Not sure you were at the meeting, but how the answer to the question was phrased, it was easily interpreted as no. Hopefully I’m wrong.

  7. I wasn’t at the meeting. I would say that it isn’t the job of the Snohetta guy to say whether Reds will or won’t bend the rules. Better for him to clearly state that the space is public therefore it would not be allowed. Let Red’s serve the paper cups.

  8. I think that unless you’re acting like a complete jackass, the cops will probably look the other way if you’re drinking beer in a cup outside in the seating area.

  9. The only reason to go to Reds (in my opinion and I assume everyones) was for the outside seating area. I guess we can’t get drunk and stare at the bridge anymore, which honestly is a bit saddening. I guess I can see the NIMBY’s point that this will obstruct views, though I doubt it was Reds they were talking about.
    Anyways, build the arena.

  10. Yeh, Red’s without the outdoor seating is done. Those burgers are nothing special despite the nostalgia

  11. Fishchum’s guess is probably right since that seems to be the status quo elsewhere in the city. The only time that cops crack down on public drinking is when people become drunken jerks and during crowded events like B2B and Halloween.
    But there’s another potential challenge to enjoying a one that is cold in the public seating area. I’ve noticed that anywhere there are lucrative beer concessions at a venue that they’re motivated to crack down on allowing people to bring in their own beer which would dent potential profits. If people can take their glass from Red’s to the public area then they can also bring a sixpack from the supermarket too. So private security around the arena may be motivated by their employers to discourage any beers in the public seating, regardless of whether Red’s served it or the corner liquor store did.

  12. I’m appalled that the broad interests of the city would be put ahead of my desire to drink cheap beer behind a greasy burger shack in the middle of a parking lot.
    Where is the justice? Who will fight for my right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and ice buckets of booze served in the middle of a run down parking lot?

  13. No one goes to Red’s for the food, drink or even the atmosphere. They go there for the chance to eat and drink on a patio outdoors…having to go through Red’s is an inconvenience, frankly. Red’s, Java House, Java Hut….a dime a dozen greasy spoons from a era long gone.

  14. I always found the view from Red’s a bit disappointing, since Pier 28 is right there. So I’m starting a petition to remove Pier 28. It obstructs my view of the bridge and the bay!

  15. sfresident – What is the conflict between having a beer outdoors and the “broad interests of the city”? I see none. I can however see how this might conflict with the narrow interests of a private party wishing to acquire a monopoly on quaffing a cold one on this pier.

  16. I hate when people try to equate no booze with being “family friendly”. Booze is the only thing that allows my family to act friendly.

  17. It looks to me like there’s plenty of room for a “Red’s Beer Garden” in the triangle of land in which Red’s sits. It’s just a matter of designating it as such and, possibly, screening it off from the “families” for which the rest of the pier is so “friendly”. Of course, in the “land of Snohetta” and just about the rest of Europe, beer and wine are considered more family friendly than perhaps, burgers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *