So I’ve, again, calibrated my screen with the Spyder 4. This time I set the white point to what the device itself measured rather than 5000-6000k and got something I like. I do feel that perhaps it is a bit …light? I will upload two images here. They seem just right, somewhere in the lighter side of mid tones; but I fear the details are actually dark and my screen is just making them look okay. Pls help 
And here’s the PP3 if anyone cares. Feel free to use if you like 
ND7_8583-2.jpg.out.pp3 (9.2 KB)
Location: Opera square in the city of Timisoara, Romania. [Google Maps]
@stefan.chirila whitepoint sets the warmth of “white” (and yes a lower temperature [blue] does appear brighter than a warmer temperature [orange]), but it sounds like you’re having an issue not with the whitepoint but with the white level (measured in cd/m2)? Typically 120 cd/m2 is used even if your monitor can go brighter.
The JPEG photo looks nice on my calibrated + profiled screen in a color-managed viewer. The histogram shows that it’s underexposed by 0.3 stops. Looks like you intentionally clipped and lifted the shadows for a washed-film look. The people in the lower photo are too dark, but if the subject of the photos are the buildings, then they look great.
Thanks for reviewing. Yes I chose to keep the extreme highlights a little lower to preserve the tones in the evening sky a little more without needing to do any kind of HDR.
Preventing clipping is one thing, and “doing HDR”, i.e. tone-mapping, is another. You can safely bump the exposure by +0.3 without clipping anything - without losing any details or colors.
