Anyone Have a Survival Hybrid from Woodstock Soapstone?

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I will not be removing the wood stove from my shop based on internet advice. I also will not lose sleep fretting that my shop will burn down.
Did you even read what I wrote? I didn't tell you to remove your stove at all. I have a stove in one of my garages. But I do so knowing if I ever had a problem insurance most likely won't pay for it. I am fine with that risk in that case. I provided the applicable codes and it looks like you are probably in violation. What you do with that info is up to you
 
I clearly don't think so but it's not up to me at all. Although I doubt that restaurant has easy access for a vehicle to drive through those doors.
Actually it does. Used to be a car showroom up to about 60 yrs ago. But I haven't seen a car in there in my time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bholler
Actually it does. Used to be a car showroom up to about 60 yrs ago. But I haven't seen a car in there in my time.

Overhead doors do not make a building a garage. I think that’s the good point you’re making and it’s a good one.

Myself, my insurance company, and my approved county permit all interpret this fire code differently than bholler. Those people matter more than some guy on the internet. You bet your buns that codes are interpreted all the time!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: woodnomore
1584897794093.png
1584897826785.png
::-)
 
Overhead doors do not make a building a garage. I think that’s the good point you’re making.

Myself, my insurance company, and my approved county permit all interpret this fire code differently than bholler. Those people matter more than some guy on the internet. You bet your buns that codes are interpreted all the time!
Tell me how you "interpret"it to make your install compliant please.
 
Tell me how you "interpret"it to make your install compliant please.

Respectfully, since you are certainly allowed your opinion.

We believe that a lot of outbuildings are not garages. A garage is primarily used for storing automobiles and is usually attached to the residential structure.

We believe that the prohibition of “gasoline or other flammable vapors” is not gasoline tanks but gasoline vapors. Just as propane/acetylene tanks are allowed in a building with a solid fuel heater. The key is that these vapors are not released into the space.

Like I said, the people that matter have made their interpretation me in my case. Everybody wanting a wood heater in their case should ask the question of their permitting authority and insurance company.

I think we all agree that this section of code is outdated and should be revised to be more clear and perhaps to match Canada that allows wood stoves in residential garages. Of course I have been told that they also prohibit flammable vapors. Not just farts!
 
  • Like
Reactions: valuman and bholler
By reading the approved county permit.
That doesn't make it code compliant. Read the fine print the inspectors are not responsible for any violations missed in the inspection.
 
Overhead doors do not make a building a garage. I think that’s the good point you’re making and it’s a good one.

Myself, my insurance company, and my approved county permit all interpret this fire code differently than bholler. Those people matter more than some guy on the internet. You bet your buns that codes are interpreted all the time!
They have to be interpreted in many cases. Codes can't possibly cover all the variations in construction and design. They are generalized to cover the most known cases. A minor violation of code doesn't necessarily mean a lack of coverage. What's important to know is that insurance adjusters and lawyers may do their best to find a chink in the armor to convince the court and/or jury of an intentional infraction if possible. This is what is being warned about, so just be sure that the coverage has specifics in writing for the exemption or exception. Don't trust verbal assurances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: valuman and bholler
Respectfully, since you are certainly allowed your opinion.

We believe that a lot of outbuildings are not garages. A garage is primarily used for storing automobiles and is usually attached to the residential structure.

We believe that the prohibition of “gasoline or other flammable vapors” is not gasoline tanks but gasoline vapors. Just as propane/acetylene tanks are allowed in a building with a solid fuel heater. The key is that these vapors are not released into the space.

Like I said, the people that matter have made their interpretation me in my case. Everybody wanting a wood heater in their case should ask the question of their permitting authority and insurance company.

I think we all agree that this section of code is outdated and should be revised to be more clear and perhaps to match Canada that allows wood stoves in residential garages. Of course I have been told that they also prohibit flammable vapors. Not just farts!
Good luck convincing an adjuster of that if it ever comes to that (which I sincerely hope it doesn't) And I agree completely about the code being stupid.
 
They have to be interpreted in many cases. Codes can't possibly cover all the variations in construction and design. They are generalized to cover the most known cases. A minor violation of code doesn't necessarily mean a lack of coverage. What's important to know is that insurance adjusters and lawyers may do their best to find a chink in the armor to convince the court and/or jury of an intentional infraction if possible. This is what is being warned about, so just be sure that the coverage has specifics in writing for the exemption or exception. Don't trust verbal assurances.
Well said
 
Thanks guys. One thing, this isn’t an exemption or exception if it is allowed by code as interpreted by the permitting authority, insurance, etc. It is permitted outright.

The county permit documents the wood stove’s presence and the building official’s approval documents their interpretation of the code.

I don’t go seeking a written exemption to have a stove in my home.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bholler
Thanks guys. One thing, this isn’t an exemption or exception if it is allowed by code as interpreted by the permitting authority, insurance, etc. It is permitted outright.

The county permit documents the wood stove’s presence and the building official’s approval documents their interpretation of the code.

I don’t go seeking a written exemption to have a stove in my home.
A stove in your home isn't prohibited by code. A stove is your "shop" which is used to work on and store equipment is regardless of what you call it. If your inspector gave you a written varience allowing it then any liability falls on him. If he just approved it without a specific varience any liability falls on the installer.

Again I don't care if anyone installs a stove in their garage or what ever you want to call it. I just want to let people know what the code actually is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mech e
A stove in your home isn't prohibited by code. A stove is your "shop" which is used to work on and store equipment is regardless of what you call it. If your inspector gave you a written varience allowing it then any liability falls on him. If he just approved it without a specific varience any liability falls on the installer.

Again I don't care if anyone installs a stove in their garage or what ever you want to call it. I just want to let people know what the code actually is.

Again, the code you reference has been interpreted by me, my insurance company, and my permitting authority to allow a wood stove in my shop.

Some guy on the internet is allowed to think whatever he wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoytman
Again, the code you reference has been interpreted by me, my insurance company, and my permitting authority to allow a wood stove in my shop.

Some guy on the internet is allowed to think whatever he wants.
Did you show your insurance company and ahj the code prohibiting installs like yours so they knew what they were agreeing to? Does your policy specifically state that the stove in your "shop" and any consequential damage involved with the stove is covered?

The fact that those involved didn't know the code doesn't mean they agreed to anything. And I am pretty sure that discussion never happened because the first time I mentioned it to you you had no clue such a code existed. After I showed you the code you switched to the current argument that it is a difference of interpretation.
 
Did you show your insurance company and ahj the code prohibiting installs like yours so they knew what they were agreeing to? Does your policy specifically state that the stove in your "shop" and any consequential damage involved with the stove is covered?

The fact that those involved didn't know the code doesn't mean they agreed to anything. And I am pretty sure that discussion never happened because the first time I mentioned it to you you had no clue such a code existed. After I showed you the code you switched to the current argument that it is a difference of interpretation.

You are taking this far too personally and pretty much calling the guy a liar, you don't need the last word on this. Watch your own bobber.
 
You are taking this far too personally and pretty much calling the guy a liar, you don't need the last word on this. Watch your own bobber.
I have been through this with him many times before. I am not taking it personally at all. I just like to make sure people understand how things like this work. Just because something passes inspection doesn't mean it meets code.

I also am not calling him a liar. Just pointing out inconsistencies in his argument.
 
You’re the moderator bholler. It’s hardly a fair discussion.

I’ve been very consistent with why I think all of the important people and actual experts approved my installation. Plus, I’m not worried about changing your mind. You’re allowed to have your interpretation too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hoytman and bholler
You’re the moderator bholler. It’s hardly a fair discussion.

I’ve been very consistent with why I think all of the important people and actual experts approved my installation. Plus, I’m not worried about changing your mind. You’re allowed to have your interpretation too.
What isn't fair? And yes after I informed you of the code you have been consistent. You started out saying the code didn't exist.
 
What isn't fair? And yes after I informed you of the code you have been consistent. You started out saying the code didn't exist.

whatever boss. I’m not trying to change your mind. Please leave me alone.
 
So....what was this thread about to begin with?
 
@valuman have you been following this thread?
 
  • Like
Reactions: valuman
@valuman have you been following this thread?
Yes, and I'm trying to glean something helpful from it, which is what I remember this BB being all about...
 
I'm trying to glean something helpful from it, which is what I remember this BB being all about...
Just look at how much you've gleaned from this thread alone, regarding how to tip-toe around the code. ==c
 
Status
Not open for further replies.