## 3 Results and Discussion
### Comparative Analysis of the Investigated Scenarios
#### 3.2.3 Integrated Evaluation of Traffic Flows, Air Quality, and Thermal Comfort  
This subsection provides an integrated assessment of the simulated effects of the two mitigation strategies on both air quality and outdoor thermal comfort. The analysis, based on data from eight strategically selected receptors, enables a direct comparison of the spatial and environmental performance of the Baseline, Scenario 1, and Scenario 2 configurations. Receptors were placed in areas characterized by diverse morphological and functional conditions, including zones with high pedestrian density, vehicular traffic exposure, and variable vegetation cover. The comparative results, detailed in Tables 12 and 13, show that Scenario 1, which implements a 50% reduction in vehicular traffic along with moderate greening interventions, achieves more substantial and consistent improvements than Scenario 2, which features a 30% traffic reduction combined with extensive urban greening and material-based interventions such as photocatalytic pavements and permeable surfaces. From a quantitative perspective, PM\({}_{2.5}\) concentrations decreased by an average of 0.081 ug/m\({}^{3}\) (\(-\)7.5%) in Scenario 1, compared to a reduction of 0.040 ug/m\({}^{3}\) (\(-\)3.7%) in Scenario 2. Similarly, PM\({}_{10}\) dropped by 0.043 ug/m\({}^{3}\) (\(-\)4.2%) in Scenario 1 versus only 0.009 ug/m\({}^{3}\) (\(-\)0.9%) in Scenario 2. For thermal comfort indicators, Scenario 1 yielded an average decrease of 1.43 \({}^{\circ}\)C in MRT (\(-\)2.6%) and 1.36 \({}^{\circ}\)C in UTCI (\(-\)4.8%), while Scenario 2 resulted in reductions of 1.06 \({}^{\circ}\)C (\(-\)1.9%) for MRT and 1.19 \({}^{\circ}\)C (\(-\)4.2%) for UTCI. The integrated analysis highlights the strong synergy between reduced traffic volumes and improved microclimatic conditions. Receptors located near main roads and hard surfaces--particularly receptors 3, 4, and 5--recorded the highest reductions in both pollutant concentrations and UTCI values. For instance, at receptor 4, PM\({}_{2.5}\) decreased by 0.150 ug/m\({}^{3}\) (\(-\)11.5%), and UTCI improved by 0.38 \({}^{\circ}\)C (\(-\)1.2%) in Scenario 1. At receptor 5, the UTCI dropped by 1.12 \({}^{\circ}\)C (\(-\)3.8%) and MRT by 2.52 \({}^{\circ}\)C (\(-\)4.5%). While the more ambitious greening strategy adopted in Scenario 2 produced some localized improvements, particularly in receptor 7 (UTCI \(-\)1.96 \({}^{\circ}\)C, \(-\)7.1%), it was not sufficient to match the overall effectiveness of Scenario 1, which directly addressed the primary source of pollution and thermal load through aggressive traffic mitigation. Overall, the results support the conclusion that traffic reduction is the dominant factor influencing both air quality and thermal comfort. Vegetation and sustainable materials play a crucial complementary role by enhancing shading, lowering surface temperatures, and capturing pollutants. However, their effectiveness is maximized only when combined with a significant decrease in vehicular flows. Importantly, these findings are in line with the initial expectations formulated during the design phase of the scenarios. It was hypothesized that a more ambitious traffic reduction (Scenario 1) would outperform a strategy relying more heavily on greening and materials (Scenario 2), even if the latter involved broader spatial interventions. The results confirmed this assumption, demonstrating that Scenario 1 consistently led to greater environmental improvements across all key indicators. The persistence of thermal stress and pollution hotspots in some receptors, despite mitigation efforts, underscores the need for a more targeted spatial distribution of greening and reflective materials, especially in less ventilated or highly impervious areas. These findings are consistent with recent studies [89; 90; 91] that emphasize the importance of integrating mobility policies with urban microclimate interventions.