Dulux Study Tour 2026

Dulux Study Tour - Days 7 and 8

By Sharaan Muruvan

From Singapore’s dense, planted urbanism to Paris’s architectural layers, the journey of the 2026 Dulux Study Tour so far has shown how cities express their values. Public life, architecture and care reveal those values.

Vienna revealed itself more quietly.

As we cycled through the city, the architecture demonstrated a concern for civic systems, not just singular moments of spectacle. Streets, trams, trains, footpaths, cars and public spaces moved in a measured rhythm. It felt composed. The city is organised around the belief that urban life is shared, and housing is one of the clearest expressions of that belief.

Here, housing is not treated as a residual outcome of development or a separate social question. It sits close to the centre of Vienna’s identity. A long-standing system supports this, in which municipal and subsidised co-operative housing form a significant part of the city’s residential fabric. Access is shaped by residency, income and eligibility requirements. Yet, the broader intent is clear: housing is understood as part of the public good.

What made this powerful was the way that intent had been translated into spatial decisions. Ground planes, courtyards, gardens and shared open spaces were not leftover areas; they were central. These spaces created thresholds between private and collective life. They became places for people to pause, gather, play, rest, and move through daily routines. For me, architecture feels most meaningful here, not as an object, but as a framework for people, relationships and everyday life.

Across the city, this idea repeated at different scales. Alt Erlaa gave it a monumental scale. Designed by Harry Glück, Franz Requat, Thomas Reinthaller and Kurt Hlaweniczka, the complex contains over 3,000 apartments and accommodates around 9,000 residents. But scale is only part of the story: the project’s terraced form, planted balconies, rooftop pools, shared facilities and everyday services challenge the assumption that high-density housing must come at the expense of generosity. Here, density is a lived urban environment.

At Sonnwendviertel Ost, beside Helmut-Zilk-Park and Vienna Hauptbahnhof, the lesson shifted from residential complex to urban quarter. The broader Sonnwendviertel neighbourhood has around 5,500 apartments for more than 13,000 residents. It is supported by parkland, pedestrian movement, community facilities, local services and proximity to transport. The ground plane is treated as civic fabric – a connective tissue between homes, landscape and public life.

Biotope City, a complex whose masterplan was led by the late Viennese architect Harry Glück alongside Rüdiger Lainer and Partner, based on the principles of urban planner Helga Fassbinder, brought this thinking into a contemporary ecological frame. Developed on the former Coca-Cola site at Wienerberg, the precinct includes close to 1,000 apartments, including subsidised apartments and Vienna’s SMART housing typology – compact, lower-cost homes designed to reduce upfront tenant contributions while maintaining liveability. Here, landscape is infrastructure, mediating climate, and fostering biodiversity and daily life.

Together, these projects revealed a continuity in Vienna’s housing culture: collective housing should do more than accommodate people; it should support everyday life. For someone working in multi-residential architecture in Australia, this was one of the most resonant lessons. Our housing conversations often begin with supply, feasibility and yield. These are necessary realities, but Vienna expands the frame. Housing is not only a question of numbers, but of the civic life those homes support.

The conversations within our study tour group have sharpened this understanding. Between practice and project visits, while moving through streets, courtyards and housing precincts, different observations surfaced around planning details, material decisions, social questions and moments of generosity. These exchanges shifted the tour from a sequence of buildings into a shared reflection on architecture’s public role.

Vienna’s lesson is not that Australia should replicate its model. Local conditions, histories and governance structures differ. Instead, Vienna demonstrates the value of treating housing, landscape and public life as interconnected civic responsibilities. Its quiet power lies in making care feel structurally embedded in the systems and spaces that support enduring urban life. For Australian multi-residential architecture, this means looking beyond numbers and asking how design can cultivate a more collective, generous and supportive public realm.