Hi,
I think it should looked the other way around. in a identical only-2-copy system, the local should have as many recent snapshots as you can, and the remote should be as frequent replication as possible + any other required sanpshots for retention. as an example:
Snap Local (Mainly RTO) Remote (RPO and extra RTO)
Hourly 168 (7 days) 48 (2 days)
Daily 60 (2 months) 120 (4 months)
Monthly 24 (2 years) 84 (7 years)
Total 252 252
Now for the "why?": Remember that you only need the remote in case of physical/RAID/AGGR-level-logical-damage to the local storage which likely to be noticed immediately (and anyway the mirroring and the snapshot ageing will likely to stop working).
As for the local, this will be the fastest (RTO) way to restore in case of an application/vol-level-logical-damage, hence you will want here as many snapshots you can to choose from to find the one closest to the corruption. Something like: 168 hourly, 60 daily, and 24 monthly.
So going back to the remote, here you want the shortest period from the last replication (RPO) possible on that system. Now after covering the RPO requirement (e.g the replication itself)- I'll put there all the rest of the snapshots (to maximum RTO) that I didn't have space for on the local system. e.g if I'm required 7 years of backups (which many industries now default to, but very unlikely to ever be used) - so that's 84 monthly snapshots (preferable snap per month, not a year - as the deletion process for yearly snapshot can be hard on the system). Some 48 hourly ones (just in the very unlikely case where low-level-logical damage did ended-up causing file/vol-level-logical damage as well) then fill the rest of the 252~ snapshots (always leaving some spare to manual and snapmirror base snapshots) with 120 daily ones.
Gidi