I'm a materials engineer, off the top of my head, the first thing that comes to mind when you mention access to improved metallurgy is lighter, stronger materials and the impact that would have on construction. That could have lead to larger, taller buildings, stronger city walls etc. Then then probably would be flow on effects since stronger walls means need improved artillery to siege a city etc.
But I think the article did a good job of highlighting that technology developments occur out of local circumstances and requirements. I am no history scholar but I understand the Roman empire was expansive, space wasn't necessarily a constraint so there probably wasn't a huge demand to build larger and taller buildings it would have likely been easier to expand cities outwards rather than upwards.
There was a good documentary series I watched years ago called "Engineering an Empire" they had an episode about the technology of Carthage (Rome's great rival), the series pointed out the city of Carthage had large multi-story buildings shared by several families, kind of pseduo-apartment buildings from what the documentary explained there was much more constraints on space in Carthage as it was very desirable to live inside the city walls this led to the development of this type of construction style. Because of these tall buildings there were more advances in things like plumbing, which was different to what the Romans had at the time. The show also pointed out that Carthage placed more emphasis on Naval power so they had relatively sophisticated harbor design, shipbuilding industries etc.
The Roman housing blocks (which a quick search tells me are called 'insulae') were several stories high, up to perhaps nine stories, although the higher stories would have been extremely undesirable (and almost certainly poor quality), so it's not like Rome itself lacked large multi-story buildings.
The Romans tried to build tall buildings, but they kept falling down, and a decree eventually stopped further attempts. They lacked the engineering knowledge and mathematics necessary, not the desire. Similar story with ship sizes. I think the book "Structures: Or Why Things Don't Fall Down" covers some of it...
The pantheon is a fairly tall building. I doubt the problem was the lack of engineering. Rather that those tall residential buildings were not built by wealthy emperors with access to engineers but built organically, often by the inhabitants themselves and more akin to a vertical favela.
But I think the article did a good job of highlighting that technology developments occur out of local circumstances and requirements. I am no history scholar but I understand the Roman empire was expansive, space wasn't necessarily a constraint so there probably wasn't a huge demand to build larger and taller buildings it would have likely been easier to expand cities outwards rather than upwards.
There was a good documentary series I watched years ago called "Engineering an Empire" they had an episode about the technology of Carthage (Rome's great rival), the series pointed out the city of Carthage had large multi-story buildings shared by several families, kind of pseduo-apartment buildings from what the documentary explained there was much more constraints on space in Carthage as it was very desirable to live inside the city walls this led to the development of this type of construction style. Because of these tall buildings there were more advances in things like plumbing, which was different to what the Romans had at the time. The show also pointed out that Carthage placed more emphasis on Naval power so they had relatively sophisticated harbor design, shipbuilding industries etc.