The number of homes being targeted appears too high. An initial high-level observation is that ~48 000 new homes on top of ~124 000 that exist today, a huge increase of nearly 40%, is unquestionably character changing. And not in a positive way.

2041 is a long time away and we have seen how monumentally working habits have shifted in the last 18 months during the pandemic. Working from home, or at the very least hybrid working, is now widely accepted. This trend has been irreversible kicked into gear and there is no returning to the world pre-2020. As such, whilst still offering some value, the absolute requirement to have housing located adjacent (or at least in relatively close proximity) to job locations is starting to diminish. Devon and Cornwall have seen major spikes in demand from those working in urban locations (e.g. London) that are now expecting to work from home for several days per week (or full time). The same logic will apply in the Cambridge area for many jobs, meaning that there is unlikely to be a requirement for substantially more homes than previously forecast by 2041, and there may even be a reduced requirement. This is despite a more rapidly growing forecast of local jobs (which may or may not be correct).
Hence some demand for housing can actually be satisfied by sites outside of Greater Cambridge (and potentially a long way afield) without significant detrimental impact on the environment (or at least substantially less than has been modelled).
That being said, for those not seeking to work from home (at least part time), housing in close proximity to jobs remains important. Hence there will of course be a significant demand for future housing, though this may largely be met by the previous forecast of approximately 37 000 new homes by 2041. In this context, SCDC’s aims and objectives for locating housing serving local jobs in the areas where those jobs will arise is valid. This points very clearly to any future additional sites beyond those identified in the First Proposals needing to focus on the area south of Cambridge. New settlements remain the best overall method for achieving new housing (see my response on policy S/DS).
With regard to the First Proposals, notwithstanding my comments on whether the number of homes being targeted may be too high, and a general future aim to focus further development on the areas south of Cambridge, the specific sites identified to meet the targeted number of homes do appear to be largely sensible. SCDC has correctly focused on large sites within the Cambridge city limits and on new settlements, with only very limited development within villages. Whilst the level of development within villages is still too high, the efforts to minimise this are recognised. In relation to Green Belt land in particular, it is of vital importance that an even greater reluctance to release this land for development is adhered to in the future. The exceptional circumstances cited to this point for some sites are debateable as to how exceptional they really are – and this is a slippery slope that is best avoided altogether.