The planning committee had deferred making a decision on a proposed new campsite in Jurby pending a site visit.
Applicant Andrew Brew submitted an application (24/91030/B) to create a campsite at a family smallholding on Summerhill Road for 15 pitched tents, 10 motor homes and three shepherd huts.
The plans also include shower and toilet facilities, a reception office and parking.
Maximum occupancy would be for around 80 people.
The planning committee this week deferred a decision pending a site visit which will take place on January 9. The application will then be considered at the next committee meeting.
Part of the site has been used by the Isle of Man Motorcaravan Club for the parking of motorhomes.
But neighbours complained that this should not be used to justify giving planning consent to a new campsite proposal.
One Summerhill Road resident said in their submission to the committee: ‘The land remains agricultural and is not zoned for development.’
Neighbours also raised concerns about increased traffic, noise and disturbance from the proposed campsite.
A small area of the site falls within a safeguarding zone around Jurby airfield on which no development is permitted to protect its future use for a potential runway extension.
It is also not zoned for development in the new Area Plan for the North and West.
But Visit Isle of Man said it fully supports the application as part of its drive to see the development of 500 new units of ‘distinctive, contemporary and eco-friendly’ non-serviced accommodation over the next 10 years.
In a statement submitted as part of the application, planning consultant Sarah Corlett said the proposal would allow the agricultural holding to diversify by providing a small-scale tourism facility in an environmentally sensitive way.
Planning officer Hamish Laird recommended approval, saying that the proposals complied with strategic plans.
He noted that while there is a presumption against development here, the principle of a tourism scheme on the site was considered acceptable. He pointed out that the proposed use would not prevent the re-use of the land for agricultural purposes.