**7. Conclusions**

Despite the complexity and limitations of the LCA method, this tool has proven to fit the needs of this study perfectly. Even as the majority of the LCA study at the building level has been focused on a very limited number of indicators and often only one parameter, we have been determined in studying more than ten indicators and eight scenarios. This wide range of studied parameters has allowed us to make several interesting observations. First is the need to broaden the environmental thinking on the urban scale. The predominance of the impacts due to mobility and waste management in the overall environmental assessment of the district attests to this. We have shown that these typical problems of urban development are to be treated as a priority, given their considerable influence on the LCA of an already energy performing neighbourhood. Thus, once these urban issues are taken into account, the parameters influencing the scale of the building become insignificant. This is the case with guidance, which, as we have observed, has very little impact on a neighbourhood LCA. Given the internal design parameters of the neighbourhood, it is noted that some are more environmentally impacting than others. The density or management of rainwater parameters need to be carefully studied and prioritized, as they have a strong impact on the neighborhood's environmental performance. We have shown that it is highly preferable to densify the neighbourhood vertically rather than horizontally and that rainwater harvesting systems are more efficient than permeable soils. The installation of photovoltaic panels proved to be mitigated from the point of view of sustainability. This study focused on a theme that seemed most urgent in this line of study. However, many other parameters remain to be studied in order to provide designers with the complete lines of conduct. Thus, this study remains open and will be completed at the scale of a great metropolis and a country.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, M.K.N. and S.R.; methodology, M.S.; software, M.S.; validation, M.K.N. and M.S.; formal analysis, M.K.N.; investigation, M.S.; resources, S.R.; data curation, M.S.; writing—Original draft preparation, M.K.N.; writing—Review and editing, M.K.N.; visualization, M.K.N.; supervision, S.R.; project administration, S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the AXA Company for their support of this study, as well as the LEMA laboratory team who helped conduct this study.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
