Opportunity or Stupidity

Opportunity or Stupidity

My wife's parents are wanting to give us their house near Pascagoula Mississippi. Since I'm looking to retire in 10 years or so it looks like a great way to prepare for the future.

On the property there is a nicely finished 20x40 building complete with separate electric panel and A/C. Thus this presents a challenge - do I continue building current layout in a 12x22 space, or do I expand the space to 20 x 30 and move the layout and rbuild so it is movable.

My thoughts are this could make sense as I can then rent a truck and move the layout to the new house when I retire and not have to start over when I'm older and probably less able.

So as titled, opportunity or stupidity. I can build the new area and move most of what I have already done to it a section at a time. Configuring it as I go to make it fit the new space in a manner easy to move later.

Advantages:
1. More space
2. Can add Alpine Tunnel and Platte Canyon
3. Can address aisle space limitations
4. Can add depth to current scenes
5. Can fix "problem" areas as I go
6. The new area would have easier access and could be made to allow visitors

Disadvantages:
1. Cost - new space would cost more
2. Build time for new space
3. Move and reconfiguration time
4. Probably lost $ as when we move it would probably not add much to house value.

Talking my wonderful wife into it is doable - it will cost me.

With 10+ years before I can retire it seems a decent solution.

Here are some very rough plans of what I think the new arrangement would look like:


Deck 1 made up of existing sections. Allows Denver to be greatly enlarged and provide a place to staging in a recreation of the Denver Yards. One oddity is a lift-out would be required to ensure access to Denver for construction and any maintenance. Argo area larger for the smelter and support town. The Clear Creek Canyon would be longer if needed. Platte Canyon and long run to Como available. Due to lentgh it would allow 3% or lower grade and curves could be upped to 20".


Deck 2 based on existing work. Would allow Idaho Springs and Black Hawk to be larger. Would include Como and run up to deck 3 including Alpine Tunnel Romley, etc.


Deck 3 would be only partial and would allow top of mountain over Tunnel, Pitkin, and Gunnison.

So thoughts? Opportunity or Stupidity? Lots of work - my goal is this to be my last layout and serve me for the rest of my life.

Feedback appreciated - Cameron