Analysis please

Can continue with Na3 unless the pawn push on the other end fails

What Krone said..

You have to put the comments about your moves and your plans on your moves and not on black's moves other wise no analysis is possible.How will someone comment on your comments?

On move 10 for example 

"A little unsure of what to do, I make this move to prepare for the possibility of making a queenside attack. I don't end up doing this at first, for reasons I'll explain a few moves down."

You made that comment on 10th black's move reffering to your move and your plans and I don't know about which move you are talking about.Your previous move (10.c5) or your next move (11.b4)?

yes, what is it??

 Well... I already apologized for this in the post. But once I realized the error it was too late.

 How does Na3 help? His king just come threaten me, then I have to move the knight, then he can advance the pawn. Is how it seems to me right now.

 Don't know what you're saying.

Okay, I found a way to fix the placement of the comments in the original post.

I didnt look all too deeply into the game but 53.Nf7 was a very strange move. In the endgame its important to know what your trying to get at. In this case his his pieces are all on the queenside which means your h-pawn has very nice prospects. After 53.h4 you might already be winning, as its not easy for him to stop you. If he goes Kd7 (intending to stop you with his royalty) you can change plans again as the only situation where his king is good on d7 is if he intends to stop your h-pawn.

There are probably some other options, maybe even some that are better than 53.h4 but the bottom line is you need a plan(even if only short term) in such an ending. Giving a check in two moves (and improving your oponents king while doing so) is definitely not the idea.

P.S.: after 36. Qa4 you might actually have a winning position. For example 36. .. Rb4 37.Qa3 you are a solid pawn up.

With Nf7, I believe I was anticipating a pawn push by my opponent on the g file, which would have stopped my h pawn. I was preparing for the possibility of saccing the knight to get the h-pawn past. I also vaguely recall having some kind of idea that I could let him take the two pawns with his king while I rampaged against his other pawns with my knight.

As mentioned in the annotations, I stupidly simply didn't even think about his a pawn in all of this. I'd thought of it as not a threat because of my b pawn, and when my b pawn disappeared, I forgot to revise my opinion of his a pawn.

I see now, though, that I could simply have started pushing h4.

"is it playble to move the pawn up to 4 instead? Thereby being able to put the knight on the seemingly more active c3?"

I don't think 6. c4 is much good, as you've already moved your KB. 6...dxc 7. Bxc4 loses you a tempo. If you want to play c4 and develop the knight to c3, do it while the KB is still at home, then recapture and develop with tempo (or have your opponent cramp his own development with ...c6 or ...e6 to defend the d-pawn).

I like playing the London system as white, but I've started playing 2. c4 against 1...d5, which puts pressure on black straightaway, and as you mentioned allows an early Nc3.

I think 6.c4 should be fine,  I dont think its a good idea for black to release tension exchanging, so you dont have to wory about tempos. On the other hand c3+Nbd2 is completely fine as well. Simply two different setups :). I probably would have gone for e4 instead of c4 afterwards though, but I dont know the nuances of the line well enough that I could claim it to be anything other than taste.