## 1 Introduction  
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) ([[https://www.oecd.org/fr/env/indicateurs-modelisation-perspectives/](https://www.oecd.org/fr/env/indicateurs-modelisation-perspectives/)]([https://www.oecd.org/fr/env/indicateurs-modelisation-perspectives/](https://www.oecd.org/fr/env/indicateurs-modelisation-perspectives/)), accessed on 5 May 2023) predicts that over 70% of the world's population will reside in cities by 2050. However, given that space is finite and bounded and because driving is a significant contributor to global warming, urban expansion is reaching its limits. In this context, cities must choose alternative development paths, particularly in the housing sector, to boost density and promote the growth of new ecological neighborhoods. A dense habitat, however, runs against the generally held notion of private residence and is by no means favored by inhabitants. Furthermore, from the standpoint of communal housing, especially social housing, density frequently corresponds with a poor impression of the environment, as it fosters a closeness that makes intimacy difficult while imposing exterior restrictions. Thus, one of the main issues facing modern urban architecture is to suggest changes that would improve communal living conditions in collective housing, thereby lessening its poor reputation [1; 2; 3]. From different studies, it is apparent that residents would abandon the dream of the single-family home with a garden if collective housing were to provide expansions to the exterior, allowing beautiful attractive uses, for example, deep balconies, covered terraces, patios, indoor courtyards, and shared gardens [4]. In order to create more aesthetically pleasing communal living while satisfying demands for thermal, visual, olfactory, and acoustic comfort, optimal housing criteria need to be reassessed and new standards need to be introduced. Related to the above, the European Union's member states are presently using the instruments required to address the issues with sound environments on an agglomerational scale while developing mapping strategies and related action plans. These tools have the privilege of using mapping and presenting regional quantitative criteria to ensure the reproducibility of studies, offering a common European standard for comparing different neighborhoods and cities. These strategic sound environment maps include action plans to reduce the sound levels of major noise sources and set limits in specific areas affected by severe nuisance. Therefore, despite the creation of tactical noise maps and the selection of a single quantifiable indication, these maps are unable to identify all the sound sources that are present around us in daily life [5]. In order to better meet the expectations of citizens, it is necessary to approach urban development projects by quantitatively measuring noise as well as by integrating the quality of the sound environment. For more than 20 years, from the first environmental labels to the more recent eco-districts (on which our research is based) [4; 6], many operations have proposed new models of living in which thick facade devices (balconies, loggias, terraces, corridors) offer answers to this complex equation between density, intimacy, and sociability, as depicted in Figure 1.  
The balconies of new constructions are places rich in sensory practices that provide users with this feeling of well-being. In the field of sensation, the perceptive dimension of sound is typically less directly worked on by architects as a means of design in comparison to the visual field [7]. This lack of concern for the sound environment in most architectural projects is certainly explained by its non-determinable and evolving character in space and time. In fact, sound travels in all directions through materials, which makes it much harder to channel and direct compared to light.