The Garden City Movement was a 20th century urban planning concept that aimed to combine the best of city and country living in new towns. The movement's main ideas were:

1. Small, self-contained satellite communities. These communities would be surrounded by greenbelts for agriculture and other uses.
2. Proportionate areas of residences, industry, and agriculture. The communities would contain a balance of these three areas.
3. Improved living conditions. The movement aimed to improve living conditions in urban areas by incorporating nature into the design of cities. 
4. Balanced lifestyle. The movement sought to promote a balanced lifestyle by integrating nature, residential zones, and agricultural spaces.

The Garden City Movement was a response to the overcrowding and congestion that plagued urban life after the Industrial Revolution. The movement was first proposed by English town planner Ebenezer Howard in 1898. The Garden City Movement had a significant influence on suburban design and new town planning throughout the 20th century.

Gentrification is a process of neighborhood change that involves the influx of wealthier people into a poorer area, resulting in the displacement of the original residents.

Advocacy planning is a theory in urban planning that was formulated in the 1960s by Paul Davidoff and Linda Stone Davidoff. It is an inclusive planning theory where planners seek to represent the interests of various groups within society. Davidoff (1965) was an activist lawyer and planner who believed that advocacy planning was a necessary method for representing the low-income and minority groups who were not always on equal footing with the rich and powerful. The term socially conscious planning became known as equity planning. 

In planning, an exaction is a condition or financial obligation that a local zoning authority requires a developer to meet in order to get approval to develop land. Exactions are intended to help new development "pay for itself" and reduce the impact on existing public facilities.

It is something the local zoning authority requires a property owner to give to the community: dedication of public land, the construction or maintenance of public infrastructure, etc. 

A Z-score tells you how far away a specific data point is from the average (mean) of a set of data, measured in standard deviations.

Here’s a simple breakdown:

• Z-score = (Value - Mean) / Standard Deviation

What it means:

• If the Z-score is 0, the value is exactly at the average.
• If the Z-score is positive, the value is above the average.
• If the Z-score is negative, the value is below the average.
• A Z-score of 2 means the value is 2 standard deviations above the average.
• A Z-score of -1 means the value is 1 standard deviation below the average.

In Short:

The Z-score helps you understand where a value stands in relation to the average of a group.

1. Discrete (score, count). Integer only. Distinct, individually separate values.

2. Continuous (temperature, height). Continuous range of values. 

3. Nominal (1=Good, 2=Bad). Values represent labels or names. 

The Delphi Method is a structured approach used to gather expert opinions and achieve consensus on a particular issue or topic. It involves a series of iterative questionnaires (or rounds) sent to a panel of experts, with each round informed by the feedback from the previous one. The anonymity of responses helps reduce bias and encourages honest input.

Key Features:

• Anonymity: Experts share their views without identifying themselves.
• Iterative Rounds: Multiple rounds of questioning allow for refinement of opinions.
• Feedback: Participants receive summaries of group responses to reconsider their own views.
• Consensus Building: The aim is to converge on a common understanding or agreement.

Example:

Imagine a city planning department wants to develop a new public transportation system. They might use the Delphi Method as follows:

1. Select Experts: The city identifies a panel of transportation experts, urban planners, and community leaders.
2. Initial Questionnaire: They send out a questionnaire asking about potential transportation options, challenges, and community needs.
3. Summarize Responses: After collecting responses, the planners summarize the key points and trends.
4. Follow-Up: They share the summary with the experts and ask for a second round of feedback, encouraging experts to reconsider their previous answers in light of the group’s insights.
5. Repeat: This process is repeated for several rounds, refining ideas each time.
6. Final Outcome: After a few rounds, the city planners compile a set of recommendations based on the consensus reached by the experts, guiding the development of the transportation system.

This method helps ensure that the planning is informed by a wide range of expert opinions and reflects a balanced perspective.

Consensus Building and Collaborative Governance

Judith Innes is known for her work in the field of urban planning, particularly in relation to consensus building and collaborative governance. Her contributions highlight the importance of involving diverse stakeholders in decision-making processes to address complex urban challenges. Summary of her work:

1. Collaborative Planning: Innes advocates for a participatory approach to urban planning where a range of stakeholders (including citizens, experts, and policymakers) work together to find common ground. This is in contrast to traditional top-down planning, where decisions are made by a few elites without broader public input.

2. Deliberation and Dialogue: She emphasizes the importance of open, transparent communication in the consensus-building process. Through dialogue and deliberation, participants are able to better understand differing perspectives, which can lead to more equitable and effective solutions.

3. Mutual Understanding: Building consensus requires that all parties are willing to listen to one another and engage in good faith. The goal is not to impose one viewpoint, but to create shared meaning and understanding across different groups.

4. Social Learning: Consensus building is not just about reaching an agreement; it also involves a process of social learning, where participants expand their knowledge and change their perspectives. This can lead to more innovative and sustainable solutions.

5. Inclusive Decision-Making: Innes stresses that effective consensus building requires inclusive processes where marginalized or underrepresented groups are given a voice. This can help ensure that the solutions developed are more just and address the needs of all involved.

6. Multiple Methods: Innes suggests that a combination of techniques—such as facilitated workshops, community meetings, focus groups, and surveys—can be used to create conditions for successful consensus building. Different contexts may require different approaches.

7. Long-Term Commitment: Building consensus is a dynamic, ongoing process. Successful consensus building is not just about reaching an agreement in the short term but creating a culture of collaboration that can sustain positive relationships and cooperative action over time.

Applications of Consensus Building:

• Urban Planning and Development: Innes applied these principles to urban planning processes, where different stakeholders—such as city planners, community members, developers, and environmental advocates—need to work together to develop policies and plans for cities.

• Environmental Issues: Consensus building is often used in addressing environmental concerns, where stakeholders may have conflicting interests. Innes has shown how such processes can lead to more sustainable outcomes by finding common ground on issues like land use, climate change, and resource management.

• Public Policy and Governance: The approach is relevant for public policymaking, where decisions often affect many different groups, and achieving broad agreement can lead to more widely supported and effective policies.

Conclusion:

Judith Innes' work on consensus building provides a robust framework for understanding how to navigate complex, multi-stakeholder issues in urban planning and governance. Her focus on inclusive, collaborative processes helps create more democratic and sustainable solutions to the challenges faced by cities and communities.