Abstract
The geometry of building corners affects pedestrian acoustic conditions, but its design relevance depends on the functions of adjacent urban space. This study investigates how controlled acoustic and perceptual comparisons can inform preliminary sustainability-oriented decisions without predicting real-site exposure. Five corner types were simulated in a street canyon 10 m wide and 12 m high, using a stationary source screened by the corner. Forty adults compared auralized stimuli in paired listening trials. Additional existing analyses examined source-position sensitivity and one-third-octave stimulus spectra. At the sidewalk receiver, a 5 m chamfer increased the A-weighted sound-strength indicator by 6.72 dB relative to the right-angled reference under the screened-source condition and was judged louder and more annoying. Rounded and projecting-bay variants also increased the energetic indicator but were perceived as less loud and less annoying; spectral differences were observed without establishing their causal contribution. Comparisons with an alternative source position showed that the effect of chamfering can reverse. Three Poznań intersections illustrate design questions rather than site-specific acoustic validation. The contribution is a function-sensitive preliminary decision sequence linking acoustic shielding, perception, and pedestrian accessibility, subject to case-specific verification.