As of early October 2026, the planned dog park at Damonte Ranch Park hasn't been canceled, and it isn't moving forward either. The city is closing out its original construction contract. It has also said it will neither finish the work nor remove it until the Damonte Ranch Architectural/Landscape Committee completes a review that was skipped the first time. City Council approved the project, and neighbors have taken it to court. Even so, the next real decision belongs to the community's own design review committee, and the story of how it got there explains the fence posts you walk past on Steamboat Parkway.
What Council Approved in July
On July 22, 2026, the Reno City Council awarded Facilities Management, Inc. a contract of up to $208,360 for a dog park at Damonte Ranch Park, 1950 Steamboat Parkway, in Ward 6. The city's summary said the park "currently lacks designated amenities for dog owners." It also said the lack of a fenced area had raised safety concerns, including dogs running into the street or getting in the way of other park users.
The design called for separate areas for large and small dogs, concrete walking paths, a water fountain, shaded benches and an agility course. Funding came from Residential Construction Tax money for District 4 as part of the FY26 Capital Improvement Plan. Work was set to start in late summer 2026 and finish by fall 2026.
Ward 6 Councilmember Brandi Anderson supported the project at that meeting and pointed to the wetlands path next to the park. "It intersects with this really incredible walking trail around the wetlands, which you never know who's going to be coming up on a bike with an animal," she told News 4. She described seniors on the path who may not want to deal with a dog running full speed after a ball, and she called the dog park "well overdue."
That is the safety case for the project, and none of what came after has answered it either way.
How September Unfolded
The fall calendar went like this, according to local reporting and court filings:
- Late summer. Construction began on part of the park's open lawn. Jeff Hurlbert, whose home borders the park, told News 4 that neighbors first learned of the dog park "after some of these folks were already going into the ground."
- Saturday, September 5. Neighbors gathered 142 petition signatures at the park in a few hours. The petition asked the city to stop construction, keep the open lawn and move the dog park somewhere else. According to a court filing, a resident says they have seen no work on the project since that date.
- September 11. News 4 reported on the pushback. A resident said their family moved to Damonte Ranch in 2011.
- September 17. The Damonte Ranch Architectural/Landscape Committee sent a letter requiring changes before the project could continue.
- September 21. News 4 reported a lawsuit asking for a temporary restraining order and an injunction to stop construction. The suit also seeks records on public outreach and on how the location was chosen.
- September 28. Parks & Recreation Director Nathan Ullyot told residents in writing that the city was closing out the existing contract while the committee's review continues.
Neighbors raised more than one concern. Along with the signatures, the group received dozens of emails about losing open park space and sledding hills, parking spilling onto nearby residential streets, how close the site is to homes and the children's area, and how the project was approved.
The Step That Got Skipped
That last question, how the project was approved, turned out to matter most. In his September 28 response, as published by the residents' group Preserve Damonte Ranch Park, Ullyot explained the gap directly:
"A permit being pulled for this project would have triggered a notification from our planning department to ensure we reviewed the plans with the ALC. That initial permit was not pulled as part of this park improvement and that led to the ALC step being missed."
A city park in a master-planned community still goes through that community's architectural and landscape review. The permit was supposed to trigger that review. With no permit, the plans never reached the committee, and the project went from a Council vote straight to construction. The committee reviewed the plans only after posts were already in the ground.
The wording here comes from the residents' group that published it, which says openly that it represents residents organizing to keep the park as it is.
What the Committee Asked For
The committee's September 17 letter, filed with the lawsuit, did not reject the dog park outright. It required two specific changes before work could continue: a different fence standard and a relocated entrance.
Those are design conditions, and they shape the possible outcomes. A project that meets the committee's fence standard and moves its entrance could still be built at this park. A project that can't meet them, or a city that decides the changes aren't worth making, would point somewhere else. Ullyot's email says the city is "not moving forward with either removal or final installation while the ALC process is pending."
The money spent so far stays spent either way. Ullyot wrote that the city has processed an initial payment for mobilization and installing the waterline and will pay the contractor for completed work. The fencing and posts are still in place.
Why the Committee Matters More Than Council or Court Right Now
Neither of the other two decision-makers has a decision on the public record.
Council hasn't taken the project back up. The dog park was not an action item on the September 23 Council agenda, and it doesn't appear on the published agenda for the October 7 meeting. As of News 4's September 24 update, the request for a restraining order was still waiting for court review. The same update reported that the city intended to finish the project. Four days later, the director's email described closing out the contract and holding all final work. Those two accounts reflect a change over time rather than a contradiction.
That leaves the committee's review as the only active process. What follows is still open. The residents' group notes that the city hasn't said whether a revised or replacement project would need a new contract or more Council action, or what it would cost. No new opening date has been announced. The fall 2026 completion date in the July council summary should be read as a forecast that has since been overtaken.
The problem the project was meant to solve also remains. Off-leash dogs and the wetlands trail still share the same ground at Damonte Ranch Park, which is the conflict Councilmember Anderson described in July. Whatever the committee decides, that conflict stays until a fenced area exists, here or somewhere else.
Where Dogs Can Run in the Meantime
The City of Reno lists a designated dog park at Cyan Park, 2121 Long Meadow Drive, and it is the alternative neighbors named. Hurlbert put it at "about 1.2 miles as the crow flies" from Damonte Ranch Park. The City of Reno's dogs and dog parks page says its designated dog park areas are fenced for off-leash use. Its general rules require dogs to be leashed when entering and leaving, handlers to keep their dogs in view and under supervision, and owners to clean up after their pets. The city page doesn't list Cyan-specific hours or a full amenity list, so check before planning a long visit.
For updates, watch Council agendas on the city's PrimeGov portal for a new contract or project item, and watch News 4 for any ruling on the restraining order request. The committee's next response to the city will matter most, because it determines whether the posts on Steamboat Parkway become a finished fence or get pulled out.
A park project behind your fence line raises practical questions about access, parking and what comes next on your street. If you're thinking about a sale or a purchase near Damonte Ranch Park while this gets settled, Kirsch Real Estate Team can take you through what's documented so far and how it bears on your timing. Request a private consultation whenever you're ready.
This article is general information, not legal, tax or financial advice. Consult a qualified professional about your situation.
