I-880 to CA-238 connector

[DTComposer]

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_29500986/union-city-fremont-east-west-connector-back-track

Project description from Alameda County:
http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/Document/16770/MBB_1177.000_I880MissionBlvdEastWestConnector_MB5050_factsheet.pdf

The ROW between Paseo Padre Parkway and Mission Boulevard has been kept clear for this project. There's also cleared ROW between Paseo Padre and the Fremont/Decoto intersection; I wonder why they're not continuing the new roadway along that ROW.

Also, no mention of whether CA-84 would be moved onto this corridor. There's no mention of Caltrans involvement, so I'm assuming not, but it brings up a question kinda related to other recent threads about state highways on local streets, relinquishing routes piecemeal as local agencies take over maintenance, etc.:

If this corridor becomes the best and fastest connection between I-880 and CA-238 in the Union City/Niles area (or at least, better than the existing CA-84 corridor along Thornton/Peralta/Mowery), and is already the extension of CA-84 from the Dumbarton Bridge, why wouldn't you move the route designation, regardless of who maintains the roadway?

[TheStranger]

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_29500986/union-city-fremont-east-west-connector-back-track

Project description from Alameda County:
http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/Document/16770/MBB_1177.000_I880MissionBlvdEastWestConnector_MB5050_factsheet.pdf

The ROW between Paseo Padre Parkway and Mission Boulevard has been kept clear for this project. There's also cleared ROW between Paseo Padre and the Fremont/Decoto intersection; I wonder why they're not continuing the new roadway along that ROW.

I recall seeing something about this in one of the various municipal/Caltrans pages on the protracted Route 84 project, one which has dealt with opposition for at least 20 years and counting.

Also, no mention of whether CA-84 would be moved onto this corridor. There's no mention of Caltrans involvement, so I'm assuming not, but it brings up a question kinda related to other recent threads about state highways on local streets, relinquishing routes piecemeal as local agencies take over maintenance, etc.:

If this corridor becomes the best and fastest connection between I-880 and CA-238 in the Union City/Niles area (or at least, better than the existing CA-84 corridor along Thornton/Peralta/Mowery), and is already the extension of CA-84 from the Dumbarton Bridge, why wouldn't you move the route designation, regardless of who maintains the roadway?

Route 84 being signed on the Bayfront Expressway segment - built by Caltrans for that matter - took many years even when it had already been completed by the mid-90s.  Never understood that (84 remained signed on Willow Road up until 2008 or so).

Even now, before this new connector, Route 84's Fremont alignment has never been the most logical: straighter would be using all of Mowry Avenue from 880 east, most direct would be to use Decoto and then Niles Boulevard to cut over to 238.  When I used to drive from Menlo Park out towards Livermore on my way to Sacramento some weekends, I never took 84 straight up through Fremont but did either the Decoto routing, or the mostly-freeway route of 880 south to Auto Mall Parkway east to 680 north before rejoining 84 in Sunol.