Welcome aboard, Joe! I like your plan! It's a well-executed, double-tracked twice-around. The minimum radius of 9.75R may limit your choices of rolling stock and locomotives (and therefore, maybe era too), but as long as you are aware of and happy with that, it's good. The generous easements will help operationally, but not appearance wise. But beware that eased or not, sharp curves also amplify grades (more specifically, the effort required to pull a train up them,) due to slippage causing combined loss of traction on the locos, with increased drag on the railcars. But hey, I like a nice, four-engine consist myself! The front (and left-end) industries have facing point switches, assuming the trains just pulled out of the upper level yards/industries. So there needs to be a nearby place for locos to cross over and run around to the other end of their train, to push the railcars into the front/left sidings. You could convert the switch/crossing at lower left to a crossover followed by the switch to the lower industry, and add another crossover (pair of switches) further left, or even in the left end of the double track. Or you could add the first crossover after (left of) the existing switch and crossing. Given the limited space for industry at upper left, I would simplify that to a single track industry to get more room for the industry itself. Sometimes less is more. But I REALLY like the option to replace the two bridges with at-grade crossings, thus simplifying terrain and grade construction. It might be a good idea to "prototype" your layout with crossings & no grades, making it simpler to experiment with changes before grades are added to the eventual layout. I'm doing a similar thing with my Unitrack layout, using elevated Viaduct trackage, before I commit to the eventual terrain. I can also harvest the Unitrack ground-level tracks from the viaducts for the final layout. Be sure to start a layout thread for your layout, so you can keep us abreast of your progress!