(a) a search on PPRuNe will come up with plenty of discussions on this sort of thing .. several for starters -
Thread A,
Thread B,
Thread C,
Thread D.
(b) routine considerations
(i) one doesn't want an aircraft stooging around at low level a long way from the airfield with a straight flight path .. consider that a critical twin with a reasonable split between V2 and clean can take up to 40-50 nm (track miles) to complete the takeoff OEI net flight path .. OK, the likely gross path will have you to 1500 ft earlier .. but, nonetheless, still a good distance out if the aircraft is at or near WAT-limited. Does this sound like the sort of situation you want to be in ? If the reference to 1700 ft is AARL, then I would suggest that that procedure is not well considered .. I would like to think that the general plan is to turn well before that sort of height (ie a long way out) in the event of a V1 failure.
(ii) usual story is for the operator to schedule a general procedure for runways not requiring a specific procedure. Typically this will seek to keep the aircraft within a reasonable distance of the departure aerodrome ... terrain knowledge, familiarity, aids, etc., etc. Common to see something like a turn at a standard height or distance. Keep in mind that such a procedure needs to be very simple so that it can become an SOP style of thing unless a specific procedure is required and scheduled
(iii) a runway might require a specific procedure if the terrain is critical, the airport is payload critical to the operator, there are unusual ATC considerations etc.
(iv) generally it is not feasible to wing an OEI departure .. the achieved gradients are too shallow for the pilot to make any real time sensible assessments if there exist obstacle problems .. hence the need for the sums to be done ahead of time
(v) following the SID generally may not be a good idea unless the ops engineers have done the sums .. third and fourth segments might prove an embarrassment.
(c) if the operator proposes to schedule something a little surprising for ATC then it would be entirely expected to see the operator provide appropriate SOP advice to the ATC unit concerned to avoid just that situation. One would presume that ATC then disseminates the information appropriately. Certainly I have never had other than a "thank you" from ATC when I have discussed with them a procedure which is a bit out of the ordinary ...