I think it's a good example of a style I don't much like.
It reads as commentary on architecture and lifestyle, and a nicely ambiguous way. It's pretty strongly graphical, but for me it's more about the content and the actual things it is showing me than about the way the frame is organized. The frame is ok, but the "failings" in it serve the commentary: the frame is top-heavy, brutalist, a bit off-kilter and crude. Just like the buildings and lives it's talking about.
I might be overthinking it, but that's sort of the point of critique, innit?
To me it seems to be about the repetitiveness, bareness and lack of character in the building. The sky doesn't really contribute to this, so I think it would be better either to have re-framed it to the left to include more concrete and less sky (cropping the porch and chair would make it seem even more claustrophobic) or cropping on the right and bottom. I wouldn't care that much about losing the last two porches on the bottom, although I'd prefer the re-shoot with more concrete and with those porches.