City staff and outside consultants presented results of a multi‑year study of Orchard Heritage Park and the Sunnyvale Heritage Park Museum at a Nov. 4 study session, laying out options for how the 10‑acre orchard might be operated and whether the museum should be allowed to expand into portions of the orchard.

The study team—led by Page & Turnbull with economic analysis from Economic Planning Systems—told the council the orchard is about 10 acres of Blenheim apricot trees and estimated “about 500 trees in those 10 acres,” said arborist John Luffingwell. Consultants described three operating models: the current private‑farmer model in which the city pays utilities and debris removal while the farmer keeps revenue; an outside‑vendor model in which the city contracts for orchard operations while specifying public‑access and programming requirements and retaining some fruit revenue; and a fully city‑run model in which the city hires staff and buys equipment to manage the orchard directly.

Why it matters: the options have different implications for public access, the kinds of orchard practices used (irrigation and sprays), and ongoing budget commitments. The consultants estimated the one‑time capital need for a storage and operations facility at roughly $2 million to $3 million (they presented a high‑end $3,000,000 figure) and showed a 10‑year cost comparison that included ongoing operations: roughly $3.65 million (Model 1), $5.65 million (Model 2) and $8 million (Model 3). Annual ongoing costs presented were about $100,000 for the private‑farmer base case (Model 1); with a contractor and added oversight Model 2 produced a higher annual gross cost and an estimated net annual cost of about $265,000; Model 3 carried higher personnel and equipment costs with a gross annual estimate near $525,000 and an estimated net near $425,000 after assumed revenue offsets.

On orchard health and practices, Luffingwell told council the orchard is managed conventionally with flood irrigation and fungicide applications. He said converting to drip irrigation would likely require more maintenance but could reduce water use significantly—consultants gave a rough savings estimate of 40–60 percent in water use for drip versus flood in some circumstances. He also explained that certified organic status requires a multi‑year conversion and has associated costs, and that “organic” in practice can include allowable organic sprays; the transcript notes that many residents prefer minimizing fungicide spraying because the orchard is in a residential neighborhood.

Consultants summarized public engagement: an initial set of interviews (12 people), a public meeting in February, a community input group in August, an online survey (75 responses), and a second public meeting in September. Facilitator Sophie Carrillo Mandel said one major finding was that “the desires of those supporting the orchard and the museum have not been mutually exclusive,” and that stakeholders expressed shared interest in preserving heritage, expanding programming and minimizing certain sprays.

Museum expansion: Page & Turnbull presented three hypothetical museum expansion boundaries ranging from conservative to more expansive footprints; consultants emphasized that any expansion would require future council approvals and could be staged over many years. The consultants noted that some scenarios would bring the museum footprint closer to the Bianchi Barn and existing fire lane, which raised operational and code questions.

Council questions and direction: council members asked for more detail on drip irrigation lifecycle costs, the condition and feasibility of using the existing Bianchi Barn versus building new storage, tree replacement schedules, and more precise per‑acre contract numbers (consultants noted regional per‑acre contract variability and used a working assumption of about $20,000 per acre when modeling contractor costs). Multiple council members said they preferred an outside‑vendor model (Model 2) that would allow public programming and education while not placing farming operations squarely inside city human resources; several council members also urged staff to explore nonprofit partners or Master Gardener volunteer support as part of future procurement options.

Public comment: museum representatives and long‑time residents spoke in favor of reserving space for museum expansion (several voiced a preference for the largest boundary, option C, for long‑term planning) while emphasizing that expansion would be staged and would not immediately remove large numbers of trees. Museum representatives said greater access for school groups and integrated museum‑orchard education are priorities.

What the council decided: no policy or budget decisions were made tonight; councilors directed staff to return with follow‑up information requested during Q&A (including a lifecycle cost comparison for irrigation conversion, a structural assessment of existing storage/barn facilities, more precise cost estimates by model and options to engage nonprofits or contractors). Staff will bring refined cost, operations and scope options back to council for future action.

Ending note: the study session is an early touchpoint; council members repeatedly emphasized they want to preserve both the orchard’s heritage and the museum’s educational role while seeking an operating model that reduces city operational risk and preserves public access.