With the criteria you have put forward, for me the choice is the Dall-Kirkham.
I too do most of my observing from home ad most of it is also the Moon and planets. At home I also have other scopes, including refractors, Newts & dobs. but only a few of these I use from home and only as a grab'n'go, occassionally. The scope I mostly use from home is a 9" Mak, and previous to this scope it was other Maks and SCT's.
And from home, this Mak is no slouch on DSO's. Globular clusters and planetary nebulae are cannon fodder for this scope. Out at a dark site, this scope is very, very good. With a 3100mm focal length it is very similar to the 3000mm you have calculated for your DK - if anyone brings up a narrow FOV then they have no idea what they are talking about. If a 3° TFOV is what they want/expect/demand that is fine but the reality is there are few objects that require more than a 1° TFOV to view in in the one FOV. So you can't fit the whole of M31 in the eyepiece? So bloody what??? Does this mean you are not allowed to view M31? So does this mean that these people all have scope with a focal length no longer than 800mm?
If you do build a DK or even a CC (Cassical Cassegrain), I strongly suggest you put a lot of thought into the quality of the baffling. This includes the control of reflections coming off the secondary's baffle, the junction of the primary and the baffle tube, and the design of the primary's baffle tube. THIS is what will provide you with the best level of contrast (along with the quality of the final polish of the optics). My 9" Mak has outstanding contrast and even this scope is out done in contrast when I compared it to a 250 Mewlon, a VMC260L Vixen and an APM-Wirth 10" Mak. These scopes may all be different in their design, but there has been a lot of thought and excellent design in the baffling. I have never seen any other scopes with as good contrast as these three scopes. Oh, and so you know, I did a side-by-side comparison between my 9" Mak and my friend's 10" Mak - same eyepiece and same diagonal used in both. Both scope have the same outstanding Intes optics. The difference in contrast was quite stark and entirely from the design of the baffles. Remember, my 9" Mak has good contrast, but this 10" is something else.
Below are two sets of sketches I have done of planetary nebulae and GC's. Each was from a series of PN and GC sketching marathons I did from my home in Sydney in the last 12 months. I've included them do demonstrate the excellent capability of a Cassergrain that is well made on DSO's under light polluted skies. Of course I also used an Oiii filter with the PN's, but neat with the GC's. I used white soft pastel, charcoal and white gel ink on A3 size black paper for both sets. And yes, I sketch on to black paper at the eyepiece.