The place is basically a natural reserve. The hill is very beautiful and sculptural – looking at the pictures, one might think it’s a huge mountain. But in reality, the hill is small, and even a three-story building in front of it will be noticeable. The site is very delicate; if you place a “suitcase” there, the hill will disappear. So, we tried in every way to “dismantle” the building to avoid competing with the hill. Not completely, of course; harsh “deconstruction” would be inappropriate in this case – but we wanted to move away from traditional architecture and create “not quite a building”, but something that looks like it broke off from the hill. We divided the volume into two arcs: one, of lesser height, forms Lenin Square, and the other curves along the base of the hill. This creates a foreground and background: the wings recede into the depth and do not compete with the natural backdrop.

On the roof, we proposed terraces on the bay side and a staircase with an amphitheater to “animate” the building, turning it into a public space that is essentially a continuation of Lenin Square. There is a specific natural and landscape context here: first, the city is located on hills, and people are used to stairs; second, the climate is harsh, often windy and cold, but when the sun comes out, people flock to the square to “catch” it and warm up. We observed how this happens in Lenin Square now, and our terraces and stairs are largely designed to provide additional space for such outings.

In short, we believe the view from the bay side, where the building descends in steps, is the most successful.