An example of uniqueness as a spurious differentiator
One of the points I make from time to time is that every place is unique, but few places are exceptional because the reality is that the underlying characteristics from place to place are in fact similar so that it is possible to compare different places despite their uniqueness.
Obviously, this is the case for cities, commercial districts, neighborhoods, transportation systems, museums, libraries, and other types of facilities, which is why I bring it up, despite the militant expression of uniqueness as a way to justify not applying rigorous frameworks and analysis to particular situations.
The ability to compare is the basis for planning to begin with, let alone consulting.
Anyway, a good example of spurious uniqueness is expressed in an article on nutrition in today's Washington Post, "Everyone is unique, and so are diet needs." Of course, every person is unique. But we are all humans, and for the most part, dietary needs aren't all that variable, even if preferences
So eat more fruits, vegetables, and grains, and less in the way of animal products and processed foods, exercise, don't use tobacco products, and don't engage in risky behaviors and you'll probably be ok, regardless of the particulars of your chosen diet.
Reading Jane Brody's Good Food Book will provide the average, unexceptional, but unique human being with most of the information and knowledge that they need for healthy eating.
Urban Design Compendium is great for practical recommendations about physical design and Jan Gehl's Cities for People on why we should develop urban form in particular ways that favor people, placemaking, and sustainable transportation.
But there are many others.