What a strangely narrow view of carbon impact. The status quo of exurban sprawl has a carbon impact, too, and it's much higher than new dense housing near job centers.

If the goal is to further reduce carbon, we should be trying to expand, not "limit the carbon impact expected to come as a result of a fast-paced expansion of available housing" in Mountain View, because that impact is negative!

If I recall correctly there was another article on the same subject in the Daily Post, as recent as Saturday. It said amongst other facts that in ten years Mountain View will have the same or higher population density as Oakland. That should scare people. I leave it for readers to figure out why it could be a disaster.

Is this a joke?
The usual practice is to raze apartment buildings, clear cut the trees and put as many row houses that can fit the lot.

Massive expansion already has been approved. Neither the article nor the link identifies who is on this so-called "task force." It sounds like an after-the-fact propaganda campaign
Is Vladimir Putin an official member?