Plan

My personal preference is to have the crossover to the yard past the yard lead itself.  I find it way more flexible that confining ALL trains to operating out of two tracks.  In addition I put a RH crossover where your is to allow the yard engine to make a rear end set out or fill a train on the main.  I would add a parallel track to the lead for a caboose track.

Here is my yard throat, very similar arrangement.  Note I have the LH crossover down by the water tank, which allows a NWD train to depart out of the class tracks.  There is a RH crossover by the bobber caboose in the yard.  Next to the lead I have a caboose track (and scale track, which would be your roundhouse lead).

I had basically the same footprint in a narrower room.  3 ft aisles get tight with a couple adult males in them.  I also started with a duck under/lift out to the room and it was one of the things I made sure I got rid of when I redesigned the layout.  Don't really see an alternative with what you want to do.

There needs to be track shift where you have the tracks in the wall/backdrop down the center peninsula.  Minor detail.

You have 2 sidings on one side of the yard and one on the other, not a big deal, but it does make one half the railroad have a slightly lower capacity, but you aren't going to have more than a couple trains out there on the layout at one time.

Having staging under the main yard is also a risk.  You always have the operators running the subway, crouched over watching their trains in staging (where's the train, have I acquired it, is it moving, is the lead lined properly, have I cleared the track, etc) right where the yard operator is trying to work.  At the most crowded place on the railroad, the yard, you have people hunched over, giving themselves a larger "footprint" than somebody standing up.  If there was a way to put staging under an area with minimal switching or at least have the switching area over the middle of the yard and nothing above either staging yard end, you will end up with fewer operator conflicts.

Having said all that, you pretty much have maximized your space for the size of the room.

Thanks for the info and

Thanks for the info and suggestions I have drawn on the layout a lot and did not realize I had left it out of balance as you stated. Fresh eyes help. Also I have not had much experience operating a layout (nearest club is 35 miles away and it is hard to get hobby time to get there). I will look into re arranging the yard to improve operating.

As for the staging I am a solo operator and have been for years - not many people interested in model railroading where I live. I am trying to figure out away to add led's to show siding alignment of the switches.

Turnouts

Great plan and excellent space for a great layout.  I would suggest #6 turnouts since you have space and good minimum raius all around.

I would think a G shaped

I would think a G shaped space layout would be a better use of said space. But each to their own

Something along this style. But your layout your rules etc

https://www.bobstrackplans.com/single-post/2017/05/28/Dennis-Mahaffeys-Midwestern-RR

https://www.bobstrackplans.com/single-post/2013/05/27/Laurent-Siliprandis-Cascade-and-Columbia-River-RR

Phil

benchwork?

A lot of the benchwork seems needlessly wide. I'd narrow it where possible to decrease the area requiring scenery and details. Cost and effort per square foot adds up .....DaveB

Main yard and staging yard @Dave Husman

For a single operator layout, would someone really need that much staging? Just asking.

Also, you talked about clearances. What about the mechanicals beneath the layout for turnout control (assuming he's not doing topside hand throws?  If a person is using something like the Tortoise it may, depending on the framework for the main level, stick below the framework at 3.25 inches.

Asking questions to learn, just like everyone else.

Thanks

Staging

I don't see that having more staging is a bad thing.  Classic "rule" is figure out how much staging you need, then double it.

A staged train can be run anytime you want, which is an advantage for a single operator who wants to railfan also.

If looked like staging was at level 0 and kinda looked like the yard was at level 8ish, so I was assuming roughly 8 inches between levels which is about the minimum.  If Torti are on the upper lead it would still have several inches above staging assuming the benchwork is thinnish, 1-1.5". 

The problem is that the staging yard will have minimum clearance so will NOT be fiddle type yard.  My previous layout had that type of low vertical clearance staging and it was one of the things I chose to change on my next layout iteration.  Not that its "wrong", I just found that type of staging less handy for my purposes.  I have a lot of open top equipment and changing loads to empties in a hidden staging was cumbersome.  Having said that, this staging is double ended (mine was on a reverse loop), so a loaded and an empty coal train could be staging and one wouldn't necessarily need to swap loads out of the cars between sessions, loads orbit clockwise, empties counterclockwise.

My current layout uses more or less visible or easier access staging, so not a problem.

While the "open grid" benchwork* has advantages if you want the layout to be portable, and  3 of the previous 4 layouts used that design, my previous and current layouts have gone away from that  and use knee braces off the wall with risers for benchwork.  Much more open, giving easier access from the front.  Not that open grid is 'wrong", It just no longer meets my needs.

* Open Grid:  benchwork that has a rectangular frame (typically 1x4's) with a table top or road supported on risers above it.

Programming & switch lights

Great layout Kraydune! 

Forget CVs! Use JMRI! Free download and it is simple to program your locos. My layout is 16 X 22, very similar to yours. I use tortoise switch machines and wire red/green dwarfs to them. Also mount on fascia a dual led of red/green indicating switch position. Bought them from Wehonest on eBay. They work great. I used an old PC power supply of 14VDC to power them all (24). The led’s were pretty bright, so I used 1/4 watt 5,000 ohm resistors to dim them. You can get all that stuff on eBay from China really cheap! I always get them in 2-3 weeks. My 5 amp Digitrax DCS 100 can power two locos on the line plus my switcher in the yard and four others parked with sound on. never had a problem. Modeling transition era Southern Pacific with 3 steamers and 4 diesels all with tsunami sound. JMRI also can do op sessions for you, making up pick up and drop offs for cars at your industries and , of course train manifests. Enjoy! Scotchman.

A lot of the benchwork seems

The outside area's are ok, but the center island, i would agree, narrow the benchwork except for the end were the turn back is.  I'd make that slightly wider so the minimum radius can be bumped up to 28 inches.  IMO, 26 is still a bit tight if longer equipment is to be run; it's always best practice to use the largest radius possible.

And like another suggested, go with minimum #6 turnouts, at least on main areas, yard tracks and staging.  Again, it's better to have capacity for rolling stock that balks at sharp curves.

I expect to mainly be a single operator and I am planning a large capacity for staging.  Why?  I have a lot of trains and want most of them on the rails, not in boxes or on a shelf.  

I agree.  I went with a G format for my planned layout.  Here is the old school scale drawing (minimum radius 32", minimum turnouts #6)

Staging...

Agree about over-building staging capacity. With my latest layout I have intentionally done the same thing. My layout is still quite a ways away from having the needed equipment to operate fully, but I can already see that it was a GOOD decision.

Andre

staging under yard...

...is a bad idea! especially with minimum clearance. if you have a problem with a turnout in the staging yard you are in deep doodoo!

I would suggest putting a stub ended yard under the center section connected by a wye. With this you could eliminate the 2 reversing loops giving you more scenic/industry. If you build the Wye with large radius equilateral  (Y) turnouts and 3 foot curves you should have little problems reversing trains out of the yard.

Just my 2 cents!

Something like this. excuse my crude mod to your drawing!

Staging under yard

Staging under a yard isn’t ideal.  But long runs of hidden track is also not ideal, and the location under the yard in the original plan seems to minimize hidden track runs.  The other problems could be addresses other ways - people jams could be mitigated a bit with cameras at the two staging throats with displays positioned where you want the people running trains into and out of staging to be.  For access the whole staging yard could be put on drawer slides to pull out for easy access.  I’ve seen several articles on that approach over the years, I don’t have any references handy but it’s clearly doable.

Or another effective strategy is just don’t worry about it.  A little swearing every once in a while at an access problem may be less hassle than making a drawer, and people do tend to be pretty good at sorting out people jams if they happen.

One Person

Actually the bigger question is, is this a good design for one person?  Is a single main track with sidings a good plan for one person?  

Would a single track branch with shorter runarounds at switching areas where the operator just runs one train  and does local switching be better?

Would a double track line with switching areas off a siding or lead be better?  The lone operator can fire up one or two trains orbiting on each main and then switch at the yard or a switching area watching the trains on the main orbit by.

Is the design operable by one person?

"Is the design operable by

and is it build-able by one person in a reasonable time and maintain-able so as to not become a time sink? Personally I wouldn't want so many tracks of trains to keep clean ,  free of spider webs,and dust. I'd probably just use the big on scene yard as staging and move any more equipment on and off the layout as needed......DaveB

Time

Time constraints and what is "reasonable" are very subjective. 

It varies depending on whether you value the journey or the destination.  If a person is very relaxed about construction they could be happy with decades to build the layout, if they are very intense and gotta have it now, it could take them a few years.

It also varies wildly depending on construction methods.  If someone is building TOMA, it could take them 5-10-15 years before they have "full" operation.  If they are OK with conventional construction and can operate with minimal scenery they can be in full operation in a year or two and then take 5-10-15 years to finish the layout.

My last couple layouts have had handlaid track, but I have put in all the roadbed and laid flex track and commercial switches  along the mains and passing sidings to get operation underway, then come back at a slower pace and handlaid stretches at a time, removing the commercial track as I went.  I was never out of operation for more than a month or two.

Thanks everyone for the input

Thanks everyone for the input and and info. I am looking over the suggestions and working with drawing something up using the G shape also.