It's quite possible to enforce anti-growth NIMBYism without municipal zoning. Houston has no zoning, and yet is completely sprawling and full of contractually agreed development restrictions, which are not zoning and do not involve a government but produce the same effect.
Say you're buying a nice suburban house in Houston. It has no zoning, so you're worried your neighbors might sometime in the future replace their house with a loud bar, or a factory, or subdivide it into rental housing. An enterprising subdivision developer realizes they can get more money if they can assure you that none of these things will happen. So when they're building the subdivision, they don't just sell you the property unrestricted. Instead, they draw up a set of rules governing future use of the property, and they require anyone who buys a house in the subdivision to sign a contract agreement to be bound by them. Now they can promise you that your neighbor won't build a factory on their land, because the subdivision rules don't permit it, and your neighbor has signed a contract agreeing to the rules.
The rules you agree to typically along the lines of what you'd normally get from suburban, Palo-Alto-style zoning regulations: you agree not to subdivide the property, not to redevelop it into anything other than a 1- or 2-story single-family house, not to build a structure on the property that doesn't meet certain design and land-occupation percentage requirements, not to operate an industrial or commercial facility on the property, in some cases not to rent it to tenants, etc., etc.
In short, the market demands and produces zoning.