Site planning and floor plan - Your assessment wanted

"Warm water circulation"

I don't find it decisive for winning the war. We have 2 floors with just over 170m² and no WWZ. The water is warm after a few seconds. However, the bathroom is directly above the HAR in our case. The kitchen is right next to it and the guest toilet is also nearby. So possibly just short pipe routes. My dad has over 200m² with 3 floors. He installed a WWZ after it really took quite a long time for the water to get warm. His pipes are all much longer.

We don’t have any either. Except for the kitchen, we also have relatively short pipe runs and it really only takes a few seconds. (about as long as when I switch from the handheld shower to the rain shower) It takes longer in the kitchen, but so far we haven’t missed it. If the bathroom were in that location, it would probably be different.

I have the impression that opinions differ massively on whether the pipe is necessary or not.

Advantage: you get warm water relatively quickly
Disadvantage: you have a pipe through which warm water is always circulating and therefore needs to be kept at temperature.
How high the costs for that are, no idea.

Disadvantage is you have a pipe through which warm water is always circulating and accordingly has to be kept at temperature. How high the costs are, no idea.

You can regulate something like that time-wise so that the hot water is always available when it is needed. And that is mainly in the morning and evening.

Such things can be scheduled so that the hot water is always available when it is needed. And that is mainly in the morning and evening.

Then the time of keeping warm is shortened.

The question "Warmwasserzirkulation" we already discussed here in the summer:

WWZ was offered to us very recently for an additional €750. You also need to calculate energy costs for maintaining the temperature. We decided against it.