Residents and businesses seem to support a proposal for fewer vehicles in The Lanes (The Argus, May 23 and 24), so it’s a shame the motoring lobby is reported as suggesting it will be “unenforcable”.

Comments from the responsible end of the motoring lobby are always worth listening to, but playing the “unenforcable” card comes across as unduly negative: anybody with a mobile phone can take swift action these days to report anti-social driving behaviour, so will we really need wall-to-wall traffic wardens or yet more expensive cameras?

If a scheme generates benefits for local residents and businesses, and for shoppers and pedestrians generally, some of them might even be willing to help with solutions for tackling selfish motorists who refuse to observe traffic rules.

Of course, civic engagement of this sort to combat anti-social driving will require a big change of culture, not least to ensure people reporting violations are safe from harm and from reprisals in a city currently designed for the benefit of motor vehicles. And,ultimately, options such as cameras may need to be considered.

But proposals like the one for The Lanes, and the new 20mph zones set to be introduced across the city at long last, give us a real opportunity to challenge the assumption that pedestrians must always be the passive recipients of aggressive behaviour from a selfish minority of antisocial drivers.

When more and more pedestrians instead see themselves as an active part of protecting community assets – in this case, safer residential and shopping streets free from anti-social, law-breaking drivers – words like “unenforcable” might be heard less and less.

In short, we should see the challenge of enforcing traffic rules for what it is – a challenge to be overcome, not a spectre to be invoked whenever a scheme is proposed to make the city’s roads better for everyone.

Chris Murgatroyd, York Avenue, Hove