Maybe that's why so many people fly the cross country circuits we all hate so much
Non-OHJ related, Shoreham procedure (departing 20) is to climb straight ahead to 600ft minimum, then make a slight (20ish degree) right turn for noise abatement. You're then heading straight on to pretty much the coast (i.e. clear of the circuit), and turning onto your outbound track.
To me, in anything I've flown, 'normal' procedure is a Vy climb to (usually) circuit height, but 500agl at least (there's nothing aerobatic about it, simply a matter of spending minimum time in that awkward zone where options are minimal). At somewhere with a longer runway I'd flatten off at 500 to avoid the crosswind. What I was alluding to earlier 'being unsure of' is the 500ft turn (maxred et al). If remaining in the circuit, at (say) shoreham, I'd be turning somewhere between the tower and the numbers. That's definitely not going to be popular - so it seems the 500ft and turn concept is rather flawed. Certainly at shoreham the circuit would be more geographically defined.
What this whole thing does really highlight (for me at least) is the vastly differing expectations of aircraft performance in terms of both climb, and manoevuring (e.g. it would never occur to me to make a 5degree banked turn in any circumstance).
The other thought is - at (e.g) shoreham, operating under a controlled environment, with conflicting traffic crosswind, would you not expect a conditional takeoff clearance - e.g. "clear takeoff, not above XXX" Not attempting to lay any blame or critique, however, if being positively controlled it would seem logical to explicitly ensure the separation?