If I may quote from Mr Goughs email ( sorry I can't give it to you!!! )
"You will see from the application that it was based on the school being re-built and expanded on the current proposed site ( post code ME9 8DX )"

As far as I know, the proposed site doesn't have a postcode, as it is without property. I believe that end of Tunstall are ME10 postcodes

Mr Gough, as I am sure would be the first to confirm, he has only signed off on "educational needs". That is why AMONGST the various documents on KCC/SW/0025/2014 is a site notice (or you can go and look at the proposed site, which states that the development is not contained within the local plan and why KCC is pushing it as hard as they can, because it's an uphill struggle

That is why there are TWO PROCESSES. Educational Need - & - Planning
I would respectfully suggest if you don't believe me, contact Mr Gough on roger.gough@kent.gov.uk and ask, like I did , it's also covered under a FOI request

Then, I suggest you check the full proposal with Marissa White, or, you can do exactly like I have done, and go straight to the Targeted Basic Needs Funds website, which will tell you, ITS PROJECT SPECIFIC, AND CANT BE TRANSFERED

#308: - 305 & 307 Funding

If I may quote from Mr Goughs email ( sorry I can't give it to you!!! )
"You will see from the application that it was based on the school being re-built and expanded on the current proposed site ( post code ME9 8DX )"

That is in contradiction to other statements made my Mr Gough, and without "proof" as in showing the actual response from him, could be deemed as inadmissable and just works on a page.