You can reduce the workload by a good deal if You use a well thought out nav setup and have the other pilot (if available) reset the navaids as required.
For example if You put VNY on NAV 1, showing track 255 on the HSI and additionally the same VOR on a RMI needle (if available) You have the first two legs to VNY and IPIHO covered. NAV 2 could show LAX track 323.
When You are established on LAX 323, depending on the onward route, switching NAV1 to VTU track 046 or GMN track 322 makes sense. And so on.
Fixes like SLABB, LANGE and BOGET are not only defined via crossing radials from other stations but also via DME fixes from the station You are tracking to/from, so I would not really bother adding workload by having them doubly defined using Nav2, especially on such a rather complicated departure.
As to Your second question: LOWI/Innsbruck has several very interesting approaches and missed approach/balked landing procedures. I recommend the KTI approach with a balked landing, engine failure shuttle procedure and climbout to RTT.
Last edited by Tu.114; 23rd December 2013 at 07:35.