The Chelsea Gardens Coomungie urban release area was debated during the last ordinary meeting of council on June 8.

Spokesperson for the Chelsea Coomungie Objectors Group Alan Hunt said the recent floodwaters in Moss Vale proved the area should not be developed.

"It appears that Whytes Creek has burst its banks on both sides of the railway viaduct and Lackey Road, causing water to enter a number of shops in that area," he said.

"[When considering a development] hydraulic engineers use established 'run-off coefficients' to better calculate the 'peak discharge' from a site.

"A run-off coefficient is how much water is expected to be recovered. If I had one litre of water and poured it onto a sloping metal roof, I am likely to recover my litre of water or close to it, so the run-off coefficient of the roof is therefore 1.0.

"Unimproved land has a coefficient of between 0.1 and 0.3 ... The established coefficient of 'suburban land', including buildings, roads, paths, patios, hardstand areas, etc., is between 0.3 and 0.75.

"Any development of this current rural land will only exacerbate the water flows into Whytes Creek and make township flooding a more regular occurrence."

A motion was voted upon at the council meeting on whether to continue to advise the Department of Planning and Environment that council continued not to support the Planning Proposal to rezone the Chelsea Gardens Coomungie urban release area to R2 Low Density Residential, which would apply a minimum lot size of 450 square metres.

Councillor Ian Scandrett said the recent rains proved the area should not be developed.

"We have a flood issue here," he said.

"Maybe somebody on high made those storms on the weekend to send the message that this [development] is not appropriate, an Act of God perhaps.

"The infrastructure can't handle what we've got now, let alone the Woolworths in the street, and if this goes ahead I think we'll be looking at floodwaters at the steps of the chamber.

"The 'green between' was put forward to contain the towns ... and Moss Vale is arguably contained by that policy."

Councillor Duncan Gair said he thought the shire should be allowed to grow.

"Mr Hunt has raised a valid point about run-off, and I want a study of run-off to be done," he said.

"This land is not likely to be developed if it does get the tick.

"It may not be our decision [to release the land], and if it's not our decision, then hopefully we would be allowed more input [on development if we say yes].

"It is, in my opinion, long-term better management for the shire, it will allow for the future development of Moss Vale.

"Remember, everybody in this room has moved into the shire. Why? Because there has been land made available for you to buy a house, build a farm or develop a business."

A report from council said 90 submissions were received regarding the Planning Proposal, with 13 in support of the proposal and 77 objections.

The report said that council placed a very high value on the goals and priorities of its community. The Wingecarribee community generally did not support green field developments where there was no clearly identifiable need for it.

It continued that the Moss Vale community did not support the Chelsea Gardens/Coomungie urban release area for the same reason.

The motion was carried, supported by Councillors Ian Scandrett, Juliet Arkwright, Jim Clark, John Uliana, Holly Campbell and Larry Whipper.

Councillors Garry Turland, Duncan Gair and Graham McLaughlin voted against the motion.

A previous attempt by council to remove the site from the Urban Release Area map was refused by the Department of Planning and Environment in 2010.