ENOUGH is enough, say Church Hill residents concerned about the rash of mobile telephone masts in their area.

And one angry couple are even calling for a reduction in their council tax as a result.

Vodafone has applied to Redditch Council to install yet another mast off Paper Mill Drive - the fifth in the area.

It is also looking at putting in three more in Webheath, Headless Cross and Smallwood.

Some residents say that apart from creating an eyesore, they still fear possible health risks despite reports claiming the masts are safe.

Jon Dempsey, of Chelmarsh Close, near the proposed site, said: "It's getting ridiculous now.

"This is smack bang in the middle of a highly populated residential area, despite the fact two spots close to the Abbey Hotel and golf course were rejected by Vodafone as they were deemed 'too residential'."

Mr Dempsey said he and his neighbours were not convinced potential health risks from long-term exposure to mast radiation had been disproved.

He said property prices would undoubtedly be affected because of the masts and has written to the council calling for a reduction in the rateable value of his home should the latest scheme be allowed.

He urged others to do the same but said few of his neighbours had been officially notified by the authorities about the application.

But the council's senior planning officer, Kevin Jones, said all letters of objection to telephone masts were taken seriously and a decision on the latest application had yet to be made.

But he added: "The weight that can be given to objections on purely health grounds is significantly reduced if the telecommunications equipment to be installed complies with the public exposure guidelines set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection."

The latest application will be assessed by officers alone and not by councillors on the planning committee because of the time limits involved, said Mr Jones.

He said if the council failed to issue a decision within the prescribed time limit set by Government, the applicant had the right to go ahead regardless of any decision by the council.