I think there's a key concept you're missing keivh. - overlap is NOT a bad thing.
Those sites you've marked share NO tiles (and in the process isolate a bunch of tiles) and this is a bad thing because practically we will not have the happy to work the full BFC until the game is looong decided (200T at least) meaning that for 90% of the game huge swathes of the empire will go unworked.
You mention a "crappy location" erm WTH? I'm not marking out cities because we HAVE to settle them, I'm marking out cities that will contribute fast (hence the overlap, to explain why the steal of the floodplain is positive id first point out that our city will be at the happy cap, with no need to grow. Whereas the second city will want to grow fast, so rather then waiting 5t for it to have a floodplain improved, we can start growth T1).
Sorry to be harsh, but by trying to eliminate overlap you've created a very inefficient dot map.
Lets start with the city 1. Not only does it have to wait 5t to improve the floodplain, but it also has no hills first ring, meaning it'll have to spend 40t on a monument, or wait for religions.
Gold site: firstly it orphans a bunch of tiles (yes only desert/plains but they're all 3/02 ipost CoL/ KotE.
Secondly 8FP is way, WAY to much food. At 5f, that's a 26 food surplus at size 8. That's NOT a good thing as we could split it up into 4 cities and actually make them viable to work missing/happy constrained tiles.
Too tired to do the rest, but just a general word about aristogratiansim - it favors ICS as it means new cities and otherwise non-viable sites can easily find food, while paying for themselves instantly through TR/aristo farm.tiles.
Finally on teching, myst does NOT pay for itself as it is plus 50% GOLD not COMMERCE. Moreover it not worth the turn of anarchy if were switching to aristo so soon.
Exploration also needs to go before CoL.
Sorry if this sounds critical BTW
