An appeal against a council's refusal of plans for an underground house in a south of Scotland fishing village has been rejected.
Dumfries and Galloway Council (DGC) turned down the proposals in the Isle of Whithorn on the grounds that they would "not relate well to the character of the existing village".
That decision was taken on appeal to the Scottish government with a supporting statement arguing it had been designed to have the "least impact possible".
However, a reporter concluded the "significant harm" to the character of the area outweighed any benefits in terms of tackling a regionwide housing emergency and reducing carbon emissions.
Earlier this year, the council refused the plans when it concluded that the house would "not integrate well into the existing settlement while respecting its historic pattern and layout".
The local authority also had concerns about its impact on the special architectural character and appearance of the village.
In addition, it said the house would be served by a "substandard private access road" which could have an impact on safety.
It further found that it had not been demonstrated that it would contribute to the economy of the coastal community.
Get in touch
What stories would you like BBC News to cover from the south of Scotland?
That decision was taken to appeal with a supporting statement from David Fallas planning consultancy arguing that the property would be located where there was already a "marked and obvious depression in the contours" of the landscape.
"It is the aim of the proposal to secure the provision of a dwelling on the plot that is of high design quality and merit in a way that has a minimal visible impact upon its setting and that of its immediate locality and wider conservation area," it said.
"It is contended this plot is seen as part of a wider area characterised by varied built residential forms and structures, and not in isolation as a distinct area of 'undeveloped' coastal plane."
It said the proposals would deliver an "imaginative solution" that would "significantly mitigate" any adverse impact.
He said it would have the benefit of providing additional accommodation at a time of housing emergency as well as offering employment during its construction.
He concluded, though, that those benefits would be outweighed by its "significant harm" to the character and appearance of the area.