ENCINITAS - Public speakers and planning commissioners alike poked holes Thursday in an environmental impact report analyzing the consequences of the planned Beacon's Beach Access Project.

During two hours of debate, speakers and commissioners criticized the report for failing to offer a detailed examination of alternatives to a planned sea wall.

"My concern is, we're looking at one alternative and not looking at others," Commissioner Tom McCabe said.

The report, which remains in draft form, concludes that in protecting the bluff, the planned 450-foot-long wall would contribute to beach erosion.

Beacon's is a popular surfing beach at the foot of Leucadia Boulevard. The city's Parks and Recreation Department has proposed building the sea wall; installing a shower; regrading, planting and irrigating the 85-foot-tall bluff face; building a trail; and redesigning the parking lot along Neptune Avenue above the beach - five to 10 feet farther east than the existing one that hangs at the edge of the fragile bluff top.

John Frenken, parks and beach superintendent, told commissioners that the project would protect a trail that was closed for one month in 2001 and again in 2005 because of landslides.

A Neptune Avenue resident who lives just south of Beacon's, John Wigmore, told commissioners that the planned sea wall could accelerate erosion of the unprotected bluff in front of his home.

"The city seeks to protect Beacon's at the expense of serious damage, if not destruction, of adjoining properties," Wigmore said.

He noted that the environmental study offers an alternative access plan - a stairway - that does not call for a sea wall.

Frenken warned that if an unprotected bluff were to collapse, any stairway would collapse along with it.

That's what happened during the 1982-83 winter, when a huge bluff failure wiped out a stairway, said Charles Marvin, a longtime Neptune resident.

Speaking on behalf of the Leucadia 101 MainStreet Association, Marvin said the project had the group's support because it would improve beach access. He suggested adding restrooms to plans and complained that as proposed, the project would result in a loss of parking.

Environmental attorney Todd Cardiff of the Surfrider Foundation told commissioners that sand replenishment in an isolated area doesn't really work, and that introducing too much sand could cover the reef and add to the seawater's turbidity.

The city must offer some kind of access to the beach during a planned, nine-month construction period, Cardiff said.

Sea wall opponents argue that receding bluffs are part of a natural, eastward migration of the shoreline, and that by arresting that migration, beaches become narrower. The environmental report suggests sand replenishment as compensation.

To certify the report, commissioners would need to agree that public safety and benefits would override possible environmental damage.

The report is posted on the city's Web site and copies are available at City Hall and at the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Library. Written comments, which are due by Nov. 23, will receive responses in a subsequent draft of the report.

- Contact staff writer Adam Kaye at (760) 943-2312 or akaye@nctimes.com.