B occ - why 8 toilets for 101 females?

[Yikes]

I note that the Calif plumbing code T-422.1 "minimum plumbing facilities" for B occupancies requires 4 toilets for 51-100 females, then jumps to 8 toilets for 101-200 females. I looked back in older versions of the code, and this is still true.

Why would the 101st female require 4 extra toilets for herself?

Actual table is:
1:1-15
2: 16-30
3: 31-50
4: 51-100
8: 101-200
11: 201-400
over 400 is 1 per add'l 150.

 

[ICE]

There is no answer to why with many of the occupant load numbers in the codes. It’s simply the result of a committee setting the number.

51 to 100 should be 7 with 101 to 200 being 10.

 

[mark handler]

Sexist Joke?
The more women there are, the more they need to powder their nose together?

My bad, Mea culpa...

 

[cda]

No no no

Why do you only need 8 holes for 199 people??

 

[Yikes]

My question is not why the numbers per se, but why did the committee go backwards in their trend?

1st toilet is for 15 people
2nd toilet 15 more people
3rd toilet is for 20 more people
4th toilet is for 50 more people... OK, I see a trend here... but wait:
5th, 6th, 7th and 8th toilet is for just 1 more person... up to 100 more persons???

 

[Sleepy]

My goodness, California sure is concerned about toilets. Potty parity, apparently.

 

[Yikes]

My goodness, California sure is concerned about toilets. Potty parity, apparently.

I initially thought this too, but it's not unique to California. It's in the 2015 Uniform Plumbing Code, and it's been that way for decades (I also found it in the 1997 UPC).