High-Rise Rejected Based on Its Looks : Development: A building proposed for Wilshire Boulevard was rejected because commissioners found its design incompatible with Westwood’s condominium corridor.

In an admitted “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” vote, the Los Angeles Planning Commission has rejected the design of a Wilshire Boulevard high-rise condominium as incompatible with the neighborhood.

It was the first time the commissioners could remember a project being vetoed based on its looks.

The 3-2 vote of the commission Thursday upheld the view of the Westwood Design Review Board, which has twice said the futuristic-looking 109-unit, 22-story project proposed for 10733 Wilshire Blvd. does not fit into the condominium corridor in Westwood.

Arquitectonica, a noted San Francisco firm, designed the condo complex for developer Paul Amir, who said he has not decided whether to appeal the Planning Commission’s ruling to the City Council or return to the drawing board.

“What’s compatible? Tell me,” Amir said, defending the project design after the commission’s vote.

Amir’s query was on the minds of several commissioners, who expressed uneasiness at the subjective nature of their task, which came down to “personal taste and aesthetics,” according to Theodore Stein, commission vice president, who formed the majority with Commissioners William Christopher and Suzette Neiman. Commission President William Luddy and Commissioner Fernando Torres-Gil cast the two dissenting votes.

Two commissioners said they had gone out to Wilshire Boulevard--with the artist’s rendering of the proposed building in hand--to look over the neighborhood before reaching a decision. Neiman said she presented the rendering to her guests at a New Year’s Eve party. The comments ranged from “ghastly” to “daring.”

“It glares out at you,” testified an aide to City Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, Marlene Bronson, who urged the commission to reject the design.

The situation was unusual because the issue of compatibility only arises when there is a design review board whose mandate is to judge whether the project is in character with its surroundings. There are few such boards in the city, although it is an increasingly popular request as communities adopt new zoning guidelines in keeping with the slow-growth climate.

An ad hoc committee of the Planning Commission is attempting to come up with a workable definition of compatibility to avoid a beauty contest such as occurred Thursday with the Amir project.

“I’m not at all comfortable with the city approaching things of that nature on such a subjective fashion,” Luddy said after the meeting. “It’s like picking out a tie.”

After being turned down by the Westwood Design Review Board, the architect made modifications based on suggestions by the city Planning Department. The board rejected the design again by a 5-2 vote, but Planning Director Kenneth Topping overruled the citizen board, and the matter was appealed to the commission by two homeowner groups, Friends of Westwood and Holmby-Westwood Property Owners Assn.

In addition to their objections to the design of the condominiums as out of character, the homeowner activists view the issue as a fight to maintain a meaningful role for the fledgling design review board, which has advisory power only.

“This was a real test for design review,’ said Laura Lake, president of Friends of Westwood.

“The commission heard the community and supported the design review board,” said Yaroslavsky aide Bronson.

The architect of the project, Bernardo Fort-Brescia, however, questioned the test standards. Fort-Brescia said he could have designed a building that looked like the other Wilshire high-rises, but he noted that the commissioners made some disparaging remarks about those buildings as well. “Are they demanding the continuation of mediocrity?” he asked.

The developer’s wife and co-owner of the property, Herta Amir, said the criticism of the design was masking the homeowners true agenda. “A masterpiece could be presented to Friends of Westwood, and they would not approve it,” Herta Amir said. “They don’t want any development.”