Or regressive, depending on the nature and effect of the change.
Or is it "Move fast and bankrupt stuff".
IDK.
In the article, it's not blanket regulation - it's increasing-the-housing-supply regulation.
Increasing the supply lowers prices which means individual's property value goes down - very anti-conservative.
An oversimplification of conservative values is to keep the status quo or increase the current value. Do nothing to lower that value.
Your confusion is understandable and to be expected.
"Conservative" in the United States has been co-opted by pro business narratives to mean the opposite of what it means by definition.
In your example, "laissez faire treatment of (anything)" is by definition, a liberal policy. Regulation, rules, guidelines - these are impulses in the conservative direction.
21st century politics in the United States has this nomenclature backwards.
Gun rights are another example of this. The United States has extremely liberal gun policies and the second amendment is almost off the charts in terms of liberalism. And yet we refer to it as "conservative" - and we refer to gun control and gun regulation, etc., as "liberal" policies.
Further, if one looks at the voting records of Calforina Republicans on zoning reform, they tend to not support it at a state level. It's most Democrats who are voting for these changes.
Housing is weird politically, it breaks a bunch of typical political assumptions.
Political ideology, about markets or reducing racial equality, are overridden by the housing preferences.