## 3 Results and Discussion
### Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Climatic Zone** & **Test** & **Statistic/Effect Size (\(\epsilon^{2}\))** & **Interpretation** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Wind Corridor} & SCS 1 & & 0.410 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.474 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.247 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.307 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 45.18 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 2682.29/0.017 & Significant difference/small effect size \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Altitude} & SCS 1 & & 0.234 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.283 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.273 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.253 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 7222.40 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 17,651.84/0.110 & Significant difference/large effect size \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{NDVI} & SCS 1 & & 0.087 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.114 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.102 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.149 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 4474.45 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 19,123.54/0.120 & Significant difference/large effect size \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{NDWI} & SCS 1 & & 0.164 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.203 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.216 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.435 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 20,270.05 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 39,668.31/0.248 & Significant difference/large effect size \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Buildings on Both Sides} & SCS 1 & & 0.288 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.306 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.312 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.301 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 15.94 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 143.78/0.001 & Significant difference/small effect size \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{SVF} & SCS 1 & & 0.129 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.104 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.095 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.080 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 30.27 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 1107.81/0.007 & Significant difference/small effect size \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Distance to the Sea} & SCS 1 & & 0.374 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.253 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.250 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.331 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 2760.22 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 13,493.10/0.084 & Significant difference/medium \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Coastal} & SCS 1 & & 0.444 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 2 & Kolmogorov–Smirnov (D) & 0.475 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 3 & & 0.348 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & SCS 4 & & 0.375 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Levene (F) median value & 2179.68 & \\ \cline{2-5}  & All & Kruskal–Wallis (\(\chi^{2}\)) & 14,462.28/0.090 & Significant difference/medium \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: all results showed \(p<0.003\) and FPR \(<5\%\), indicating strong evidence against the null hypothesis. Full statistical details are discussed in the text.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Summary of statistical test results for the urban parameters: normality, homoscedasticity, and intergroup differences by SCS zone. The Holm post hoc test (Table 4) confirmed that all urban parameters analyzed (Wind Corridor, Altitude, NDVI, NDWI, SVF, Distance to the Sea, and Coastal) showed statistically significant differences (\(p<0.003\); FPR \(<5\%\)) between all pairs of CSC climate zones. The only exceptions were the following:  
Buildings on Both Sides, which showed no significant difference between CSC 2 and CSC 3 (\(p=0.16\)). The SVF, where no significant difference was found between CSC 1 and CSC 2 (\(p=0.60\)).