Hi Ignacio! Great question! I've struggled with this for a long time, how to explain it in a clear way and also make it work the best way possible. Like you said you could maximize the footprint area, the problem is that it could shoot past the 1000 m2. We're aiming for a specific number, the sweet spot of 1000 (or between 950 - 1050). Your definition is not broken, it works like it supposed to. I know it gives you a value of 2.0199, it's because the area of that footprint is 647m2, so below the 800m2 lower limit (1000-200). The thing is that you could increase the multiplication factor, 0.02, to a higher amount lets say 0.04. This will result in an lower limit of 600m2 (1000-400). The problem is that your normalized value, before 2.0199, will be lower, but between the 0-1 range. This lower value means that it will affect Galapagos less. And like I mentioned, the area of the footprints is crucial to get right. The results can work, even though only one or two buildings have some nice views. The opposite is not true, so all buildings with excellent views, but having areas that are to low or to high, this is unacceptable. I hope it makes a bit more sense, I would say play around with the numbers, the factors and run some tests and see what works best. Unfortunately it's not exact science, it's a bit of trial and error to see precisely what effects Galapagos. The good thing is, you have a clear understanding of how the normalization process works. Good luck and let me know if you have further doubts, Saludos! Arie