Scary! I'd say we must work at the same place, but this pretty describes large software development efforts everywhere.
Particularly the "framework" bit - this sort of thing is a particular pet hate of mine. Why do people do this kind of thing continually when it almost never works? Why not just solve the direct problem instead? I have seen it over and over again. People seem to miss the obvious point that solving the class of problem is always going to be an order of magnitude (at least) more difficult that solving an instance of the problem - and you need an appropriately large budget to do it. The final nail in the coffin for the "let's build a framework while we're at it" lunacy is that the "framework" often ends up providing a solution to something that didn't even need doing in the first place - it's just something someone thought might be useful early on. I can't count the number of times we've ripped the bloated, buggy, badly designed, unusable "framework" out of a system and it's then become reliable, simpler, smaller, more efficient, and more extensible and flexible (those two points are often the reasoning for the "framework" in the first place, so it's ironic how that works out).
Sigh. "Frameworks" - it's my anti-pattern of the year. Or maybe decade, or even career. That's not to say it can't be done, it can of course, but only with lots of time, money, careful thought, planning and exactly the right people - certainly not as an off-hand skunkworks inside some other project with no clear purpose or direct problem to solve.