Having paid off the PPOR home loan completely and with redraw available to fund the development costs of a townhouse development (not securing the home loan), funds are being redrawn to fund the DA and BA process to build three townhouses to keep. Construction costs will also come from redraw. However, at some point in the future, one or more of the townhouses will possibly be sold, but in the interim, the properties will be rented. The cleanest solution would appear to be to have one loan for each property, and it would appear as though St George's loan product will allow this to be done. But is this really necessary? Having separate loans presumably would allow for the proceeds of the sale of one townhouse to pay out one loan, and the balance going into our pockets. We could still benefit of any negative gearing advantages on the remaining loans and townhouses. If we only had one consolidated loan for all of the townhouses, then we would need to somehow determine how much of the loan to pay down, since part of that loan which was used to develop the now sold townhouse, is no longer for income producing purposes. We couldn't pocket 100% of the sale proceeds without paying down at least some of the loan. But we'd want to keep the paid out amount to a minimum to benefit from any negative gearing that may exist. If the single loan approach is acceptable, how do we determine how much of that loan to payout with the sale of a townhouse? If maintaining a single loan is not ok, then maybe it would have been best to split at the start, and redraw equal amounts from each of the three loans to pay the DA/BA costs. However, that wasn't done, so maybe now the loan should be split into three, with each loan sharing one third of the current amount outstanding, and future costs to BA shared 1/3. Construction costs may not be 1/3, given different size of townhouse and land size. I imagine the ideal situation would be to try have the final loan balances proportional to the value of each townhouse at completion. Any suggestions?