ShareThis Page
Scottish pub possible for 1792 Hazelwood house |

Scottish pub possible for 1792 Hazelwood house

Bob Bauder
| Thursday, September 14, 2017 6:12 p.m
Heidi Murrin
The John Woods House in Hazelwood

A Scottish restaurant and pub could be coming to one of Pittsburgh’s last remaining 18th century buildings.

The Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment Authority board of directors Thursday agreed to conduct exclusive negotiations with Oak Moss Associates, an East Liberty real estate and project management company, for the sale of the John Woods House in Hazelwood.

Built in 1792 by surveyor John Woods, who laid out Pittsburgh, the stone house at Monongahela and Tullymet streets is on the National Register of Historic Places and has been abandoned for years. URA Executive Director Robert Rubenstein said the URA acquired it in 2001 to ensure its preservation.

Oak Moss proposed a $725,000 renovation, including 61 seats inside, 26 in an outdoor dining area, a front porch and addition to the rear of the building for restrooms, kitchen and mechanical areas, Rubenstein said.

The restaurant would be operated by chef David Gancy, who previously owned the Red Oak Café on Forbes Avenue in Oakland.

Woods House is one of only five structures still standing from 1816, when Pittsburgh incorporated as a city

Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-765-2312 or via Twitter @bobbauder.

Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff reporter. You can contact Bob at 412-765-2312, or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.