We had the distinct pleasure to interview award winning designer Xiyao Wang about their original and creative Mix Use Towers design work. Xiyao Wang is an award-winning architectural designer, that makes our world a better place with their original mix use towers works.
Xiyao Wang ("XW") answered Design Interview ("DI") questions about their award-winning work Urban Symbiosis Mix Use Towers. Interview questions prepared by Frank Scott.
XW : The core principle behind Urban Symbiosis is to foster a mutually beneficial relationship between architecture, nature, and urban life—an ecosystem where built and organic environments don’t just coexist, but actively support and enhance one another. The idea was inspired by biological symbiosis—relationships in nature where different organisms live in close, often interdependent proximity. I was fascinated by how such models of coexistence can be transposed into urban design, especially in rapidly urbanizing cities where the clash between natural and artificial systems is often stark. My aim was to shift the paradigm from separation and domination to integration and reciprocity, embedding ideas of environmental stewardship and collective well-being into the very bones of the project.
XW : The central focus was to dissolve the boundaries between infrastructure, landscape, and public life. I wanted to create a spatial narrative where technology, community, and ecology are interwoven seamlessly. More than just designing a functional piece of urban fabric, I wanted Urban Symbiosis to provoke a deeper reflection on how cities are structured, how we live within them, and how architecture can become a regenerative force rather than a consumptive one. I was also intent on ensuring that this design would remain adaptable—able to change with time, seasons, and urban needs—without losing its essence. My hope was that the project would serve as a catalyst for dialogue on future urbanism and help people emotionally reconnect with their environment.
XW : The recognition of this project has opened new avenues for further development. I am currently in discussions with several municipalities and private developers interested in adapting Urban Symbiosis to their local contexts. The design is modular by intention, so we plan to tailor it to different scales and climates, whether it’s in a dense megacity or a growing secondary city. I also envision the project being part of a broader research initiative—a platform that continuously evolves by integrating feedback from users, ecological data, and new technological innovations. Eventually, I’d like to publish a monograph that details its evolution, theoretical framework, and implementation, serving both as a case study and a manifesto for regenerative urban design.
XW : The conceptual phase took several months of intensive work, but the seeds of Urban Symbiosis were planted years earlier through various research initiatives and previous design explorations. I would say the full design development spanned over nine months, including iterative modeling, environmental simulations, and stakeholder engagement. A significant portion of time was dedicated to testing different material systems and structural configurations to ensure that the design was not only beautiful and meaningful but also feasible and sustainable. Every detail, from the planting systems to the photovoltaic skins and water management networks, went through multiple iterations before reaching its final state.
XW : This design was not initially commissioned—it was born out of a deep personal drive to explore a future-forward urban typology. The inspiration came during a period of intense reflection on the disconnect between many contemporary urban developments and the pressing environmental and social crises we face today. I was witnessing how so many projects were driven by capital efficiency and aesthetic tokenism, and I wanted to push back against that with a design that would embody purpose, vision, and responsibility. After developing the core idea, I decided to submit it to several competitions and research exhibitions to test its resonance with broader audiences and institutions. The positive response has been incredibly validating.
XW : At this stage, the design remains in the development and promotion phase, but several partnerships are in progress. Given the complexity of the project and its custom infrastructure, I am leaning toward collaborating with specialized urban development firms and public agencies rather than selling or licensing the rights outright. My intention is to remain deeply involved in any built version, from adaptation to realization, to ensure the integrity of the design philosophy is maintained. We are also exploring forming a dedicated design and research consortium to steward Urban Symbiosis through its next stages of life, which may include multiple iterations across different cities worldwide.
XW : I was drawn to this typology because it addresses one of the most urgent dilemmas of our time: how to reconcile urban expansion with ecological collapse. This type of work allows architecture to go beyond form and become a system—a living infrastructure that performs, adapts, and evolves. I’ve always been fascinated by the potential for architecture to act as both a cultural artifact and an environmental agent. With Urban Symbiosis, I had the opportunity to experiment with this dual identity in a highly expressive and scalable way. It wasn’t just about solving a problem; it was about reimagining the possibilities of urban life.
XW : Definitely. I found great inspiration in the works of Louis Kahn and Daniel Libeskind—not necessarily in their aesthetic choices, but in their philosophical depth and the way they embedded meaning into structure. Kahn’s pursuit of timelessness and spatial purity gave me the courage to let parts of Urban Symbiosis be quiet and monumental. Meanwhile, Libeskind’s emotive geometries and his ability to embed narratives of memory into architecture pushed me to think about the experiential dimension of the project—how it could speak to people on both a visceral and intellectual level.
XW : This design targets forward-thinking municipalities, progressive developers, and institutions who see the built environment as a tool for social and ecological advancement—not just profit. It’s especially suited for contexts where cities are grappling with densification, climate adaptation, and the need for public space reactivation. On a human level, the target users are the urban dwellers—families, workers, youth, and elders—who deserve to live in environments that uplift their daily experiences. Urban Symbiosis is for those who want to live in a city that breathes with them, responds to their needs, and fosters a collective sense of ownership and care.
XW : What distinguishes Urban Symbiosis is its holistic ambition. Many projects today claim sustainability or biophilic integration, but they often treat those aspects as add-ons rather than the core structure. In Urban Symbiosis, the ecological systems, human-scale design, and technological interventions are not separate entities—they are deeply interdependent. Another key differentiation is the level of adaptability built into the system. It’s not a static piece of architecture but a dynamic organism, capable of evolving over time. Lastly, the emotional resonance—the way the form evokes curiosity, contemplation, and connection—is a result of very deliberate compositional and spatial decisions that I believe elevate it beyond mere functionalism.
XW : The name Urban Symbiosis emerged naturally from the conceptual underpinnings of the design. I was exploring ways to frame a new kind of relationship between urbanism and ecology—not as oppositional forces but as co-evolving systems. The term “symbiosis” comes from biology, referring to interactions between different organisms that live in close proximity, often benefiting one another. Applying this term to the urban scale was a deliberate provocation: Can architecture move beyond coexistence with nature to a point of active reciprocity? By titling the project Urban Symbiosis, I wanted to embed that question into the identity of the work itself. It’s both a descriptor and a thesis statement—a call to rethink how cities live with their ecosystems.
XW : The project was developed using a combination of parametric modeling tools and environmental analysis software. Rhinoceros 3D with Grasshopper was essential for developing the modular system of the structure and testing different morphological iterations. We used Ladybug and Honeybee to evaluate environmental performance, including solar exposure, daylighting, and thermal comfort. For the landscape and hydrology systems, we simulated water flow patterns and plant growth behavior to inform spatial strategies. Adobe Creative Suite was used for visualization and storytelling, while physical study models also played a crucial role in conceptual testing. The tools were not just technical aids—they were collaborators in the design process, helping to visualize complexity and push the boundaries of what the project could become.
XW : One of the most distinctive aspects of Urban Symbiosis is how it merges ecological infrastructure with architectural form, allowing them to become indistinguishable. The structure is not merely a container for greenery or a building with decorative plantings—it is a living framework that supports water collection, air purification, and biodiversity. The vertical fins, for example, are not just shading devices; they are embedded with ventilation systems and bioskins that support climbing vegetation and filter urban particulates. The public spaces are layered into the system like organs in a body, making the entire project function as a responsive, integrated organism. This level of synergy—between system, structure, and society—is rare in urban architecture, and I believe it’s what gives the
XW : While I led the concept and design direction, Urban Symbiosis was made possible through a collaborative process involving experts in ecology, environmental engineering, and digital fabrication. I worked closely with landscape architects to integrate native plant systems and ensure ecological resilience. Engineers helped me refine the structural system to balance openness with load-bearing efficiency. I also collaborated with sustainability consultants to analyze how the design could meet or exceed green building standards. These collaborations were not one-off consultations but ongoing dialogues, often leading to significant shifts in design strategy. The interdisciplinary exchange was essential—not only for technical validation but for enriching the project with knowledge beyond architecture alone.
XW : Technology in Urban Symbiosis is not merely a support mechanism—it is a design language and a vital agent of transformation. From parametric geometry that optimizes light and airflow to integrated environmental systems that collect and reuse water, technology acts as a bridge between architectural intention and environmental intelligence. I’m particularly interested in how technology can be used not just to make things “smarter,” but to make them more alive—more responsive, adaptive, and symbiotic. The embedded systems in this project allow the building to monitor environmental conditions and respond accordingly, whether that means opening louvered skins, channeling rainwater to planters, or adjusting lighting levels based on human presence. It’s a vision of urban architecture where technology doesn’t distance us from nature, but brings us closer to it.
XW : Absolutely—data played a foundational role in shaping the design. We conducted site-specific climate analysis, pedestrian movement studies, and biodiversity impact assessments. Using tools like ClimateStudio and GIS mapping, we assessed sun paths, prevailing winds, and microclimate behaviors to determine the optimal orientation and form of the structures. Research into local flora and fauna helped us design habitat-supportive green zones within the architectural system. We also looked into precedents from urban ecology—such as green corridors, eco-bridges, and biophilic design frameworks—and synthesized them into a new, scalable typology. This combination of empirical data and contextual research allowed the design to be both visionary and grounded in real-world performance.
XW : One major challenge was balancing formal ambition with ecological functionality. It’s one thing to imagine a green architectural vision, and another to make it work structurally, economically, and environmentally. There were tensions between the lightweight porous form I envisioned and the need to support complex infrastructural systems. Another difficulty was visualizing the long-term evolution of the space—how it would age, grow, and change with seasons and human use. We developed phasing strategies and growth maps, but the unpredictability of natural systems required a more flexible mindset than traditional architecture. Finally, communicating the complexity of the design to stakeholders—who may not be used to thinking in systemic or regenerative terms—was a challenge that required careful storytelling and visualization.
XW : I believe that architecture is not just about building—it’s also about building discourse. Submitting Urban Symbiosis to an international competition was a way to test its relevance beyond local or academic contexts. I wanted to see how the idea would resonate with a global audience of designers, critics, and institutions. Awards like the A’ Design Award provide a platform not only for recognition but for dialogue and peer review. It was also a strategic step: by entering the project into a visible, credible platform, I hoped to attract potential collaborators, sponsors, or city partners who could help bring the vision to life. In that sense, the submission was as much about idea propagation as it was about professional development.
XW : Designing Urban Symbiosis deepened my understanding of the interconnectedness between systems—natural, urban, and human. I learned to relinquish a certain degree of control in order to allow the design to be truly ecological and adaptive. It also challenged me to become more fluent in technical disciplines beyond architecture: from hydrology to botany to environmental systems engineering. Perhaps most importantly, it taught me the value of patience and persistence. Many of the ideas took time to mature and required multiple iterations before they found their proper expression. On a personal level, the project reaffirmed my belief that architecture can—and must—be a force for positive transformation, not only in form but in the ethics and futures it proposes.
XW : What I’d like to emphasize, perhaps more than anything, is that Urban Symbiosis is not a singular project—it’s a framework. It’s meant to evolve with each iteration, responding to different cities, climates, and communities. I see it as part of a larger cultural shift, where architecture reclaims its role as a civic agent and a planetary citizen. The challenges we face today—climate change, urban inequality, ecological collapse—require design that is bold, systemic, and deeply empathetic. Urban Symbiosis is my contribution to that conversation. And I hope that through this recognition, it can inspire others to build not just structures, but relationships—between people, places, and the planet.
