RALEIGH — Wake County commissioners batted down, at least temporarily, a proposal to ease rules on property owners in the Little River Reservoir watershed, telling county manager David Cooke there had not been enough public feedback on the plan.

Cooke’s recommendation to commissioners came after a meeting in July in which residents in and around the watershed complained that the rules then on the table had been prepared without sufficient input from the public.

Those rules would limit development to no more than one home per three acres. They would also confine commercial development to specific areas and they would prevent property owners from tapping on to water lines fed by the new reservoir.

Cooke told commissioners the new recommendations were for information only, but Commissioner Kenn

Gardner said he wanted to give residents time to weigh in on the new rules.

Cooke’s recommendation would reduce the lot size required for homes from three acres to two. It would keep in place other restrictions, including those which prevent nearby residents from accessing the water supply.

The proposed rules are part of what is called an interlocal agreement that Raleigh officials have asked all local governments to sign off on.

So far, most of the affected municipalities — Wendell, Zebulon, Raleigh and Wake Forest — have approved the stricter set of measures.

Only Rolesville rejected the rules, saying they were too strict.

Raleigh public utilities officials say they need all the local governments to approve the rules to make it easier to win federal permits to construct the reservoir.

Cooke said his latest recommendations take several factors into account.

“The last time we were here, there was a room full of people and the general perception was they didn’t want this,” Cooke said.

He also said some current restrictions already in place would achieve some of the same goals the harsher rules are intended to accomplish.

“The idea that we were putting in new protections is unfair. They were enhanced protections. We could ultimately be required to put in even stronger protections,” Cooke said.

Cooke asked commissioners to vote on the proposal at the board’s Sept. 15 meeting. He said affected property owners would be notified of the meeting by letter. But Gardner asked for more time to collect comments from the public.

“We voted to send this back to the staff and to the planning board to get public comment,” Gardner said. “It looks like this is something we sort of tried to set in motion. ... If we’re doing nothing, then doing nothing more slowly doesn’t hurt anything,” Gardner said.