That depends on what you want, I’d say.
If you want a separate system (with its own DB and webinterface) to monitor your second location, then go for a second standalone server.
If you want to monitor the second location but be able to see all hosts in one interface, then you go for the distributed (or even HA) option.
Distributed would mean you install a satellite in the second location and connect it to the master in the first location. This then can monitor everything in the second location and communicate with the master.
Setting up a HA cluster would mean that both servers in loc1 and loc2 are in the same zone inside the monitoring configuration. This way they split the checks between them and you you have checks in loc2 that are monitored by the server in loc1.
If one of the monitoring servers goes down the checks will be shifted to the other server and you still have a working monitoring system.
Drawback is that you need a network connection between loc1 and loc2 and open some ports.
As you are using the Director you can’t simply copy files.
But the Director offers Configuration Baskets to export and import configuration objects.
Create a basket, add your desired obejcts to it, create a snapshot for the basktet, download the .json-file.
Upload the basket into the second server, restore the snapshot and you are good to go.
This is only necessary for the approach where you install two separate servers. With the distributed/HA approach the config is synced to the nodes automatically.