Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

New plans for the old Winchester factory

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by ZeSpectre, Mar 6, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ZeSpectre

    ZeSpectre Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    5,503
    Location:
    Deep in the valley
    My BIL just did a walkthrough of the old Winchester factory. He's sending me some miscl. "crap" he found laying around while he inspected the buildings. When I get the "crap" I'll photograph anything interesting and post it.


    New uses eyed for Winchester site
     
  2. RoadkingLarry

    RoadkingLarry Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    NE Oklahoma
    Thats a real shame.
     
  3. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,096
    The language in this report is so managed as to promote the project that it is easy to miss what they are saying.

    Interesting way to put it when you take over a part of a town in order to convert it into something new. Both up beat and just business as usual theme. So the old area and buildings have good bones, that should make development cheap, especialy since they will be built out of better materials than many modern buildings.

    This appears to be one of the sneakiest lines in there, meant to be appealing to the largest number of people. So they are making a housing project, for business purposes, but the market audience is the "middle class" which just so happens to be the widest demographic in the nation.
    This appears to be saying they want the support they get for making a housing project for the poor, but they want to do whatever they want with the place and market it to the widest customer base afterwards.

    Sounds like a great find.

    Excellent find, not just a great building, but the previous owners have to do much of the expensive work.

    So the prior owners are "on the hook" to clean it up, yet you are taking the credit for it being cleaned up? Taking credit for other people's work, and making them pay for it financialy, and then taking credit for the end result sounds like common practice the way they put it.
    That is not to say they don't play a role, just that they seem to be a bit too ready to assume all credit like it is all coming out of thier pocket and they are doing the community a service.
    Essentialy they can just take over some old places, force the old occupants to pay for much of the work to "bring it up to standard", make some minor improvements themselves and then make a profit using it or selling it for new purposes.

    They make it sound like a big job to clean up, like they will be doing a lot of work, and at the same time explain they won't have to pay for or be responsible for very much of that work because the old owners are "on the hook" for it.

    So they want to use even more tax dollars by qualifying for tax breaks to "preserve this historical site", even though it is not being preserved, but is in fact being converted into a housing project, and never intended to be used for the very historical purpose for which it exists. Or to even be reminiscent of that purpose.

    I can hear the media coverage now.
    Any criminal problems, especialy gun related at this housing project can be mentioned in context with it being a gun factory in the past.
    The evil gun spirits will be a part of it all of course.



    So out of this article I get that they want to make a housing project. They want the support and tax breaks for making a housing project, and to be commended for doing a great thing in the same way as if they were making new homes for the poor, but they want to then be allowed to charge the going rate for them (because they are for the middle class of course :rolleyes: .)
    They also want to qualify for additional tax exemptions by saying it has historical value and that the historical value is being preserved.
    Does any of this seem at least partialy dishonest?

    It will at least probably be one of the most well built and structuraly solid apartment complexes around. At least the building itself. Who knows the quality of the dividing walls, services or appliances added by the the developer.
     
  4. ColinthePilot

    ColinthePilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,029
    Location:
    I don't even know anymore
    This sounds cool. I worked near a similar project in Baltimore a few years ago. Some big old abandoned factory was converted to nice apartments and studios. It was probably one of the most interesting pools I ever cleaned.
     
  5. ZeSpectre

    ZeSpectre Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    5,503
    Location:
    Deep in the valley
    Zoogster
    All I know (from what the BIL said) is that local folks are happy because right now the plant is a GIGANTIC chancre on the community. Ugly, falling apart, frequently a site of squatters, drug parties, etc. and full of all kinds of "wonderful" hazardous materials that the locals would -really- like to see cleaned up because various elements squat in or troop through that place and spread contaminants around.

    As for who's responsible for what vs taking credit. From the photos I've seen it looks like Olin has a lot of work to do for the contamination, but then that development company is going to have a lot more work to do to raise it from a commercial/industrial standard to one acceptable for housing.

    As I understand it, someone comes in and does something now, or eventually the whole thing would decay to the point of requiring demolition (with even more expense).

    But more on topic for THR, my real point was I may have some neat stuff to post online soon :) And even more cool, some lucky folks may get a chance to live INSIDE that piece of history (and I think that's pretty darn neat).
     
  6. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,096
    That is great, I did not mean for the post to seem so negative of the project. I imagine the community will be quite happy to fix up an abandoned place, and even put it to good use.

    Most communities wants to get rid of the local teenager, or other seedy individual handgout used for recreation or parties outside the watchful eye of the community. It is a free place outside of the eye of authority which individuals can use to do things they otherwise would not be able to afford to or in some cases legaly do. By cleaning it up, and then pricing the new creation out of reach of undesirables it can essentialy remove that from the neighborhood.
    A great thing as a community. Probably not so favored by the local kids who cant go party there anymore and now will need to find a new place for thier unsupervised freedom.

    That they can also make a profit, and provide for a use of an existing building rather than being forced to destroy it and start from scratch is just icing on the cake.

    I just thought the way it was presented seemed underhanded.
    What they are doing is just normal business, making smart profitable business decisions, and gaining the support of the local community.

    Making it sound like they were doing the community a favor in more ways than one without knowing how the community viewed the area, and also trying to secure financial privilidges not in context with its intended use is what threw me off.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page