I'm a little put off by the fact that the boxes (are those the boxes where they give out free newspapers and whatnot?) on the right are tonally lost against the wall, but possibly there's nothing to be done. They strike me as a potential point of interest which has been completely subordinated.
More generally, there's no hierarchy of visual importance that I can make out. Everything seems about the same tonally and texturally, it's not clear what's more important or less. The only thing I can do, looking at this, is follow the path and perspective lines to the vanishing point, where there isn't anything.
I'm not sure why you're calling this High Contrast, either.
All that said, there are a lot of good elements in here. There's lots of nice textures and objects, and I do rather like the way the path turns off to the left. None of these good things are brought out and emphasized, though.
I looked at this last night and didn't feel like crushing your photo like a bug... lol...kidding... but amolitor echos my thoughts. The vanishing point leads my eye straight OUT of the photo. I barely see anything. I mean that sincerely. This shot has zero eye movement. It's in, and zoom...gone...nothing to hold the eye.
Why? Too short of a focal length...the tall palms look like sickly, dwarf tomato plants. This shot just screams "ultra-wide-angle lens in use on mundane scene!"
You have a foreground element, the walls. But the middle ground and background are boring. And the rapid drop-off in on-sensor size due to the short focal length of the lens compounds the lack of good, compelling subject matter. Everything looks far away and tiny.
The sign on the pole? Unreadable. The heavy burn-in on the top does little to help anything.