• Massachusetts 511 (Conditions and Traffic Cameras)
  

This 2003 photo shows the southbound Sumner Tunnel (MA 1A) at the East Boston portal. Traffic bound for I-93 southbound uses the left lane, while I-93 northbound traffic uses the right lane. (Photo by Jim K. Georges.)

Construction started:     
Opened to traffic:     
Number of tubes:     
Number of traffic lanes:     
Length between portals:
Length under water:       
Operating headroom of tunnel:     
Diameter of tunnel:     
Maximum depth, mean high water to roadway:
Number of fans (original configuration):   
Cost of original structure:     

March 30, 1931
June 30, 1934
1 tube
2 lanes (southbound)
5,650 feet (1,722 meters)
1,500 feet (457.2 meters)
12 feet, 6 inches (3.8 meters)
31 feet (9.4 meters)
90 feet (27.4 meters)
28 fans
$16,000,000 (including approaches)

Passenger car EZ-Pass toll (southbound):
Passenger car pay-by-plate toll (southbound):

$1.50
$2.05

• Toll schedule for all vehicles
  

Hazmat and height restrictions apply.

SUMNER, EAST BOSTON, AND THE FERRIES: The Sumner name has a long history in Massachusetts, as Increase Sumner (1746-1799) served as a justice on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and later as the commonwealth's fifth governor from 1797 until his death in 1799. His son, William H. Sumner (1780-1861), inherited a large portion of Noddle's Island, the largest island of the five islands that originally comprised East Boston, upon his mother's death. The younger Sumner formed the East Boston Company in 1833 to develop the former pasture land into a neighborhood, and in just two years, the taxable property on the island had jumped more than thirteenfold.

The first ferries began operating between Boston and East Boston in 1835. The East Boston Company was instrumental in the establishment and operation of two ferry lines that connected East Boston with the mainland:

• North Ferry: Connected Battery Wharf (Commercial Street) in Boston with Border Street in East Boston.
  

Work began on the East Boston Tunnel, which was the first underwater rail tunnel in North America, on May 5, 1900. The plans called for the tunnel to accommodate subway trains as it was to connect to the Cambridge Elevated Line (now the Red Line), but plans to run subway trains through the tunnel were dropped in 1903. The East Boston Tunnel was completed on December 30, 1904, and by that time, Bates had been elected as the 41st governor of Massachusetts.

On its first day of operation, the cross-harbor streetcar line collected 32,000 fares. The new cross-harbor link promised a commute from East Boston to Boston's Scollay Square in just seven minutes, compared with the 45 minutes it took by ferry - if it were running and not delayed by weather or harbor congestion.

The streetcar line was converted to heavy rail subway in 1924, connecting to the rest of Boston's subway system. The East Boston Tunnel remains in operation today as part of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's (MBTA) Blue Line.

As early as 1920, officials planned an innovative vehicular tunnel underneath Boston Harbor. Shown in this illustration is an early twin-tube design. (Illustration from Massachusetts Department of Transportation archives-Massachusetts Division of Metropolitan Planning.)

PLANNING FOR THE AUTOMOBILE AGE: By the end of World War I, however, Boston faced a new challenge. The East Boston Tunnel had solved the problem of moving people across Boston Harbor, but it did little to accommodate the rapidly growing numbers of automobiles and trucks entering the city. In 1919, the State Senate passed a bill providing for the study for a fixed vehicular link - either a bridge or a tunnel - under Boston Harbor.

The first tunnel proposal appeared in 1920 as a "teaming tunnel" that featured a dual-tube design, with each tube accommodating two lanes of vehicular traffic in each direction. The early tunnel design appeared to incorporate a design developed by Clifford Holland, the chief engineer of the tunnel that eventually bore his name in New York. Holland's design featured a revolutionary two-duct system - a system that utilized one duct to draw in fresh air, and the other to suck out exhaust air - that was adopted eventually by vehicular tunnels worldwide. To facilitate the exchange of clean and dirty air, the team developed a system of ventilator fans and airshafts to circulate clear air throughout the length of the tunnel. Helical approaches to the tunnel were planned to the local street networks in Boston and East Boston. The twin-tube tunnel was estimated to cost $10.7 million.

Throughout the early 1920s, however, momentum had shifted in favor of a bridge, which was advocated most forcefully by former Boston mayor and US Congressman John F. ("Honey Fitz") Fitzgerald. Prominent engineer Frederick H. Dechant specifically advocated for a suspension bridge rather than a cantilever span at the site.

SHOULD IT BE A BRIDGE OR A TUNNEL? In 1925, the Massachusetts Division of Metropolitan Planning commissioned civil engineer Rudolph (Ralph) Modjeski, who at the time was overseeing construction of the Benjamin Franklin Bridge (I-676 and US 30) in Philadelphia, and consulting architect Paul Philippe Cret, to design a fixed crossing of Boston Harbor. The following January, Modjeski and Cret published their findings in the state planning division's annual report. The proposed design featured a main span of 1,550 feet (472.4 meters), an end-to-end distance including approaches of 6,240 feet (1,902.0 meters), and a vertical clearance above mean high water of 135 feet (41.1 meters).

The roadways, which were to accommodate four lanes of vehicular traffic with flanking sidewalks, were to approach the main span at a grade of 5%. The Boston bridge approach was to begin at the corner of Hanover Street and Cross Street (today's Central Artery / I-93), while the East Boston bridge approach was to begin at Meridian Street and Central Square (near the site of today's Central Square Park). According to Modjeski and Cret, as reported in The Boston Globe:

"The site appeals to us as the best possible site for a bridge because it crosses the harbor at its narrowest point and because there is sufficient room for the approaches at either end without the necessity of taking or damaging an excessive amount of real estate. Also a bridge at that location is on the natural axis of travel and in a line with the chief arteries leading to the North Shore."

However, the state's planning division saw things differently and favored construction of a tunnel, citing that its advantages outweighed those of a bridge. Henry I. Harriman, the chairman of the planning board, stated as follows:

"Initially, the cost of the tunnel is much less� The grades are shorter, the total lift is less, and the roadway is protected from ice and sleet in bad weather and the destruction of taxable real estate is much less."

At the time, the cost of a single-tube tunnel was estimated at $9 million, below the $16 million cost projection for the suspension bridge. Although the board saw the eventuality of needing a second tube, it estimated that a single tube could carry five million vehicles per year (or about 14,000 vehicles per day), and that a second tube would be necessary before 1940. The board did not recommend any specific financial plan, but appeared to favor the use of tolls to prevent any additional burden to taxpayers.

Harriman led a delegation of Boston planning and transportation officials to Pittsburgh as guests of the Westinghouse Electric Company to visit the operations of the twin-tube Liberty Tunnel south of Downtown Pittsburgh. Opened in 1924, the Liberty Tunnel measures 5,889 feet (1,795 meters) in length, and was one of the first tunnels built specifically for vehicular use in the United States. Interestingly, the tunnel did not have a ventilation system when it opened. After a 1924 incident during a Pittsburgh transit strike led to 33 people being overcome by fumes, construction proceeded on a ventilation system comprised of four 200-foot (61-meter) vertical shafts to continuously pump fresh air into the tubes. (This ventilation system was completed in 1928.) The Pittsburgh visit reinforced the growing belief among Boston planners that large-scale vehicular tunnels could safely and efficiently accommodate urban traffic, provided adequate ventilation systems were incorporated into the design.

In 1925, the Massachusetts Division of Metropolitan Planning commissioned Rudolphe Modjeski and Paul Philippe Cret to design a fixed crossing of Boston Harbor. They designed a suspension bridge similar in design to Philadelphia's Benjamin Franklin Bridge. (Illustrations from Massachusetts Department of Transportation archives-Massachusetts Division of Metropolitan Planning.)

"A DARING REQUEST": Support for the tunnel gained momentum throughout 1926. James E. Maguire, the editor of the East Boston Free Press, vehemently opposed those in the Massachusetts General Court who favored a bridge:

"Not in many years has there been such a daring request made to the Legislature as that submitted by several individuals that they be permitted to incorporate themselves for the purpose of building a toll suspension bridge between Boston and East Boston. The scheme is utterly subversive of the public inter

The toll suspension bridge would land so far inland as to destroy a considerable amount of property. It would be a blight on the island for all time like the elevated (train) structure through Charlestown. That community may have been willing to die for the lovely hamlets of shade trees and sunlight beyond. However, East Boston has no desire to give up the ghost for the benefit for Swampscott and Devereaux and other beauty spots of the North Shore."

Taking his fight to the Massachusetts State House, Maguire turned to the concerns of Bostonians:

"The landing of the bridge on the Boston side has not received sufficient attention. It is only the truth to say that a bridge cannot be located anywhere on the mainland without interfering with the elevated (train) structure on Atlantic Avenue.

The bill (for the bridge) is not honestly or fairly worded. Its language is vague and ambiguous. As reported by the Metropolitan Affairs Committee, it met the sharp criticism of Commission of Public Works William F. Williams, who insisted that the Commonwealth be protected in compensation when the property is disturbed or taken. The city of Boston is not so safeguarded. Its property and streets are taken without compensation."

COALESCING TOWARDS A TUNNEL: Eventually, support coalesced toward a tunnel and its financing through tolls. In 1928, after an extended debate, the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed a bill calling for construction of the East Boston Traffic Tunnel at a cost of $10 million. The bill also called for the creation of a tunnel district, specifying that the tunnel would charge tolls to cover construction, operating, and finance costs, as well as the appointment of three commissioners to be appointed by the Governor. The bill later passed the Senate and was signed into law by Governor Frank Allen on April 1, 1929.

Concerns remained about street widening near the planned approaches, which alone was estimated at $6 million and was separate from the tunnel construction cost. The most vigorous opposition came from merchants in the Haymarket Square area in Boston, who feared the loss of business from property takings and construction, though the takings proceeded.

Upon his return to his third non-consecutive term as mayor of Boston in 1930, Mayor James Curley, in one of his first official acts, supported a competing plan by Everett E. Stone, a board member of the Massachusetts Public Utilities Commission, to restart planning for a four-lane suspension bridge along the proposed route of the tunnel. Besides the already existing bill authorizing the tunnel passed a year earlier, one key obstacle to this plan was the 155-foot (47.2-meter) vertical clearance at mid-span required by the US War Department. By March 1930, even Mayor Curley backed away from bridge plans, instead asking the Boston Transit Commission and Metropolitan and City Planning Commissions to finalize plans so that tunnel construction could begin.

These photos of the Sumner Tunnel under construction show the latter stages of tunnel shield construction in June 1932 (LEFT PHOTO: "Shield at Boston vent shaft," UASC-130-216a) and the breakthrough in July 1932 (RIGHT PHOTO: "Bulkhead broken through in section B tunnel," UASC-130-2461). (Photos from the University of Massachusetts-Boston Digital Collections, Joseph P. Healey Library, www.umb.edu.)

BUILDING THE TUNNEL: The ceremonial groundbreaking for the East Boston Traffic Tunnel took place on March 30, 1931. Actual excavation began soon afterward from both the Boston and East Boston sides, with crews driving toward the middle of Boston Harbor.

The tunnel was built using the tunneling shield method in which a cylindrical protective shield was used to bore under Boston Harbor while shielding workers from collapse and water ingress. The shield measured 31 feet, 7 inches (9.6 meters) in diameter and weighed more than 400 tons (362.9 metric tons). This method, which was utilized for the 4,850-foot (1,478-meter) main tunnel section between the portal transitions, involved incrementally jacking the shield forward as spoil and sediment were removed from the face of the shield. The shield was automatically propelled, had hydraulic rams that supported the heading during excavation, and had sliding steel bulkheads at the heading to support loose material. The Boston and East Boston landside approaches to the tunnel were built using a more traditional cut-and-cover method.

The heading, or working section of the shield at the mouth of the tunnel, was comprised of horizontal and vertical bracing of heavy built-up steel members. This bracing divided the working section of the shield into convenient working chambers. The floors of these chambers consisted of heavy steel plates that were riveted onto table or face jacks. These jacks could be moved forward, bringing the working platforms with them. At the same time, these jacks acted as rams supporting the face of the excavation. There were 10 of these moving platforms and ram jacks, and when each section was done, the platforms and ram jacks were moved by the maximum distance of 2.5 feet (0.76 meter) to the next section.

As the shield progressed at an average rate of 17 feet (5.2 meters) per day over a period of 15 months, it placed a steel lining, comprised of steel rings that support the weight of the tunnel, behind it. A concrete lining, placed inside the steel lining designed independently of the steel lining, provided watertight reinforcement against the marine environment. Compressed air was used in the working chamber to counteract hydrostatic pressure from the overlying water, providing an additional layer of protection in conjunction with the shield. This use of compressed air was a standard practice for underwater tunnel construction at the time.

A conveyor belt system was designed to remove the spoil and sediment from shield through the completed sections of tunnel to the surface. Once above ground, the spoil and sediment were transported on temporary structures placed 15 feet, 9 inches (4.8 meters) above street level so the material could be loaded onto hopper trucks, which carried the material away from the construction site.

The tunnel's transverse ventilation system represented one of the earliest large-scale engineering solutions for managing automobile exhaust in an underwater vehicular tunnel. The spaces below the roadway and above the ceiling slabs formed ventilation ducts, the lower duct supplying fresh air and the upper duct drawing out exhaust air, which was the opposite of the original 1920 tunnel design. At each ventilation shaft, two buildings with mechanical equipment - one at North Street in the North End of Boston, the other near the East Boston portal -were built to draw out exhaust air and force in fresh air. Each ventilation building had 14 ventilation fans capable of distributing 1.2 million cubic feet (34,000 cubic meters) of fresh air per minute. A temporary electric power plant was also built in East Boston to supply power for the shield, tools, and compressed air.

THE SANDHOGS: A concrete bulkhead was built 500 feet (152 meters) ahead of the East Boston ventilation shaft to hold the pressure in the working chamber. One air lock was used to allow 50 workers, or "sandhogs," to enter the high-pressure chamber, another into which materials were brought, and a third for ventilation. There was also an emergency lock to be used in the event of an emergency.

Because relatively few Americans had seen compressed-air tunnel construction firsthand, contemporary newspapers often explained the process in detail. The Boston Globe described the physiological effects on workers as follows:

"When (the worker) undergoes pressure, nitrogen in his system is dissolved in his blood. If he is brought out from under pressure slowly, the nitrogen is given up in the ordinary way, through the lungs. But if the pressure is brought up quickly, it's just like opening a bottle of pop: the blood will release the bubbles of oxygen just as the pop froths up carbonic acid gas.

The bubbles make themselves felt in joints and tissues, the most usual result being a severe pain in the knee joints. Where high pressures are used, as in deep sea diving, the decompression is a long and slow process. Under a mere 16 pounds, it is only a matter of minutes - five for visitors, three for workmen who are impatient to get off shift.

In the East Boston tunnel, only four cases of severe "bends," as these pains have been called, have been reported. Three of them were just plain drunk. As a matter of precaution, in case they really had bends, the three men were recompressed, and then slowly decompressed. But they were still drunk."

Despite the inherent hazards of compressed-air tunneling beneath Boston Harbor, contemporary accounts do not document any construction-related fatalities during the project, a noteworthy safety record for an undertaking of this scale and complexity.

Even before the breakthrough, work proceeded on the concrete tubing inside the inside tubing as the tunnel took shape. (PHOTO: "General interior view of section B, traffic tunnel," UASC-130-1871). (Photo from the University of Massachusetts-Boston Digital Collections, Joseph P. Healey Library, www.umb.edu.)

"The municipal airport at East Boston has been handicapped by the fact that so much time was lost getting to and from the airport that the special advantage of airplane speed for transportation has been hampered. From the Boston end to the tube it will be possible to reach the airport in five minutes." - The Boston Globe, in the June 30, 1934 edition, the opening day for the Sumner Tunnel

BREAKING THROUGH BELOW, AND WIDENING ABOVE: In July 1932, the tunneling shield cleared out the last of the spoil and sediment underneath Boston Harbor. Before the ceremonial breakthrough, a partition of planking was built, braced, and shored up, and in the rectangular section of the tunnel near the Boston portal, a speaker's stand was built.

Once the steel and concrete linings were completed, work began on bringing the tunnel to its final form. The two-lane roadway was paved with approximately 850,000 granite blocks. Lights were installed at 15-foot (4.6-meter) intervals and recessed into the angle formed by the ceiling and walls. Traffic signals were also installed to regulate vehicle flow.

Meanwhile, work began in March 1933 on widening the approach streets leading to the tunnel. On the Boston side, North Street was widened to 100 feet (30.5 meters), while Cross Street was widened to 90 feet (27.4 meters). Two pedestrian underpasses were also built at Haymarket Square. On the East Boston side, a new 100-foot (30.5-meter)-wide state highway was constructed, forming the predecessor of the East Boston Expressway built two decades later. According to the Boston Globe, 90 properties in Boston and 52 properties in East Boston were condemned for the expanded approaches.

IT ALMOST WASN'T NAMED AFTER SUMNER: During the early stages of tunnel construction in 1931, the Boston City Council petitioned Mayor Curley to consider naming the tunnel after General Clarence R. Edwards, commander of the Massachusetts-based 26th Infantry Division during World War I. The proposal did not gain much traction.

THE TUNNEL OPENS: On June 30, 1934, after more than 15 years of planning and construction, the East Boston Traffic Tunnel was finally opened to traffic. Mayor Frederick Mansfield dedicated the tunnel in honor of William H. Sumner, whose East Boston Company had laid the foundation for the neighborhood a century earlier. The tunnel had an initial toll of $0.25 for passenger cars and up to $2.50 for trucks, and gasoline was offered to stranded motorists at $1.00 per gallon. During the first hour of operation alone, the tunnel saw 800 vehicles, and in the first 24 hours, it saw 13,000 vehicles. Engineers estimated daily steady-state capacity at 23,000 vehicles per day.

This undated photo -- most likely from the mid-to-late 1930s -- shows the Boston portal of the Sumner Tunnel. (Photo from the Boston Public Library archives, www.bpl.org.)

This undated photo -- most likely from the 1940s -- shows the East Boston toll plaza of the Sumner Tunnel. As early as 1945, planners saw the need for a parallel tunnel alongside the Sumner Tunnel, a plan realized with the opening of the Callahan Tunnel in 1961. (Photo from the Boston Public Library archives, www.bpl.org.)

WHY BOSTON NEEDED ANOTHER HARBOR TUNNEL: In April 1945, during the waning days of World War II, engineers began exploring a potential second harbor tunnel alongside the existing Sumner Tunnel. The tunnel was running at its 23,000 vehicle-per-day capacity - and slightly over peak capacity during the summer - prior to the start of World War II. Engineers projected the volumes in the Sumner Tunnel would reach 30,000 per day immediately after the war and 45,000 per day before 1965, with traffic to and from Logan Airport comprising nearly 20% of the tunnel's total traffic.

In addition to building a second harbor tube, engineers also recommended building the following routes through East Boston:

• A six-lane tunnel from the Sumner Tunnel (and parallel tunnel) approach northeast towards McClellan Highway. This was the genesis of what was to eventually become the elevated East Boston Expressway (former Route C1, now MA 1A), which was the first controlled-access freeway within Boston city limits.
  

This 2001 photo shows the East Boston portal of the Sumner Tunnel. Note that the directional signs for I-93 and Storrow Drive shown in the top photo had yet to be posted, as the new directional ramps to northbound I-93 and westbound Storrow Drive were two years away from completion in this photo. (Photo by Steve Anderson.)

BRINGING THE TUNNEL INTO THE NEXT CENTURY: On March 29, 2003, the Sumner Tunnel's Boston exit approach was reconfigured as part of the $15 billion "Big Dig" project, which relocated I-93 from the elevated Central Artery to the underground Tip O'Neill Tunnel and constructed the four-lane, twin-tube Ted Williams Tunnel (I-90). The project also created new underground connections from the Sumner Tunnel to northbound I-93, Storrow Drive, and Leverett Circle.

After the July 10, 2006 collapse of a section of suspended ceiling killed a passenger and injured a motorist on the connecting ramp from I-90 (Massachusetts Turnpike) westbound to I-93 (John F. Fitzgerald Expressway / Central Artery), Governor Mitt Romney ordered an audit of not only the Big Dig tunnels, of which the connecting ramp was a part, but also the Sumner and Callahan Tunnels. The audit, which was released in September 2006, showed that in the Sumner Tunnel, steel supports holding up a tiled drop ceiling running through most of the tunnel were rusting causing them to expand and contract, damaging about 30% of the concrete that forms the shell of the structure. Part of the tunnel ceiling was never fitted with drop tiles, exposing and rotting the original 1930s concrete. Because the tunnels were inspected regularly, the state deemed the tunnel safe to use until interim repairs were made in 2007. A more ambitious plan to address the tunnel infrastructure, however, had to wait.

A NEW AGENCY: In July 2009, Governor Deval Patrick signed the "Act Modernizing the Transportation Systems of the Commonwealth" into law. The Act, which became effective at the end of 2009, enabled the creation of a new Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT), which consolidated the operations of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (which operated the Sumner and Callahan Tunnels), the Massachusetts Port Authority (which operated the Tobin Bridge), the Massachusetts Department of Highways, and the Registry of Motor Vehicles into a single state agency.

REBUILDING THE SUMNER: In 2019, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) - which took over jurisdiction of the Sumner and Callahan Tunnels from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority when that agency was absorbed into MassDOT - released infrastructure needs assessment and congestion reports that marked a definitive turning point in the state's approach to fixing the Sumner Tunnel from minor and interim repairs to a comprehensive restoration project.

• INFRASTRUCTURE: The infrastructure report officially designated the Sumner Tunnel as MassDOT's highest priority infrastructure risk. Engineers declared the asset had finally reached the absolute end of its useful life, necessitating a reconstruction of the tunnel rather than minor fixes. Rigorous safety inspections found severe long-term wear, including decomposing concrete, heavily rusted structural reinforcement bars, cracking wall panels, and a worn road deck.
  

This 2019 MassDOT presentation shows the proposed improvements to the Sumner Tunnel that were implemented during the "Sumner Tunnel Centennial Restoration Project" in 2022-2024. (Illustration by Massachusetts Department of Transportation.)

LEFT: This 2023 photo shows removal of the original concrete from the crown of the Sumner Tunnel.(Photo by Massachusetts Department of Transportation.) RIGHT: This 2023 photo shows the transport of the concrete arches for the Sumner Tunnel's new ceiling by flatbed trucks. The arches were then hoisted into place by forklifts. (Photo by Delve Underground.)

SOURCES: "State Senate Votes Coal Price Inquiry: Passes Bill for Better Protection of Tenants, Favorable Action for East Boston Traffic Tunnel Investigation," The Boston Daily Globe (6/17/1919); "Recommends Four-Way Teaming Tunnel Between City Proper and East Boston, The Boston Daily Globe (1/30/1920); "No Opposition to East Boston Bridge," The Boston Daily Globe (2/02/1925); "Fitzgerald Favors Bridge or Tunnel," The Boston Daily Globe (11/10/1925); "Inspects Pittsburgh Vehicle Tunnels," The Boston Daily Globe (12/31/1925); "East Boston Bridge Proposed by the Metropolitan Planning Division," The Boston Daily Globe (1/20/1926); "For Tunnel to East Boston," The Boston Daily Globe (4/08/1926); "Fuller Studies Bridge Measure," The Boston Daily Globe (5/28/1926); "House Not To Hold Sessions Next Week," The Daily Boston Globe (5/19/2028); "New Harbor Tunnel Street Plan Opposed," The Boston Daily Globe (2/12/1929); "East Boston Tunnel Voted," The Daily Boston Globe (6/19/1929); "Mayor Believes Vehicular Tunnel Solves East Boston Traffic Problem," The Daily Boston Globe (6/23/1929); "Harriman Defends Traffic Tunnel Plan," The Daily Boston Globe (11/14/1929); "Mayor Turns to Harbor Bridge," The Daily Boston Globe (1/17/1930); "Curley Speeds Up Traffic Tube Plans," The Daily Boston Globe (3/28/1930); "Up Front in Tunnel Under Harbor, They're Pushing On, 17 Feet a Day" by Frank P. Sibley, The Daily Boston Globe (12/27/1931); "Traffic Tunnel Broken Through," The Daily Boston Globe (7/26/1932); "The New Highway to the North Shore," The Daily Boston Globe (8/14/1932); "Finished East Boston Tunnel Will Be Tube with Three Compartments," The Daily Boston Globe (11/19/1932); "Building Wreckers Preparing Haymarket Square for Approach to East Boston Traffic Tunnel," The Daily Boston Globe (11/19/1933); "Thesis: Construction Methods Used on the East Boston Traffic Tunnel Under Boston Harbor" by Jack Kalman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1933); "Traffic Tunnel To Open Today," The Daily Boston Globe (6/30/1934); "One Woman Gets 'Flat' in Tunnel," The Daily Boston Globe (7/01/1934); "Sumner Tunnel Reopens Friday After Repairs," The Boston Globe (6/10/1962); "Ask the Globe," The Boston Globe (5/06/1989); "Rehabilitation of the Sumner / Callahan Tunnels" by Henry A. Russell, Jr., Concrete Repair Bulletin (May-June 2002); "Tunnel Visions: Big Dig Tragedy Puts Onus on Boston's Old Reliables" by Mac Daniel and Ari Bloomekatz, The Boston Globe (7/16/2006); "Big Dig Report: Sumner, Callahan Tunnels Have Problems" by M.R.F. Buckley, WCVB-TV (9/26/2006); "Two Boston Tunnels Require Repairs" by Katie Zezima, The New York Times (9/27/2006); "First of 36 Weekend Closures of Boston's Sumner Tunnel Began Friday Night" by Lindsey Thorpe, WFXT-TV (6/10/2022); "A Late Christmas Gift for East Boston: The 1904 Opening of the East Boston Tunnel," Massachusetts Historical Society (December 2022); "Boston's Sumner Tunnel Renovation Kicks Into High Gear" by Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record (7/28/2023); "What's Going on in the Sumner Tunnel? Here's a Look at the Work Being Done During the Closure" by Penny Kmitt, WBZ-TV (7/08/2024); "Boston's Sumner Tunnel Reaches Substantial Completion Early" by Johanna Knapschaefer, Engineering News-Record (10/14/2024); Delve Underground; Howard Stein Hudson; Massachusetts Department of Transportation; Precast / Prestressed Concrete Institute; Versilis.

• MA 1A shield by Barry L. Camp.
  
• Lightposts by Millerbernd Manufacturing Company.
  

SUMNER TUNNEL LINKS:

• Sumner Tunnel Construction Photographs (1929-1933) (University of Massachusetts-Boston)
  
• Sumner Tunnel: "Construction Methods Used on the East Boston Traffic Tunnel Under Boston Harbor" (Jack R. Kalman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1933)
  
• Sumner Tunnel Restoration Project (Delve Underground)
  
• Sumner Tunnel Restoration Project (Engineering News-Record)
  
• Sumner Tunnel Restoration Project (Howard Stein Hudson)
  
• Sumner Tunnel Restoration Project (Precast / Prestressed Concrete Institute)
  
• Sumner Tunnel Restoration Project (Versilis)
  
• Rehabilitation of the Sumner / Callahan Tunnels (Concrete Repair Bulletin)
  
• "A Late Christmas Gift for East Boston: the 1904 Opening of the East Boston Tunnel" (Massachusetts Historical Society)
  
• MA 1A (Steve Alpert)
  

SUMNER TUNNEL CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS:

• Massachusetts 511 (Conditions and Traffic Cameras)
  

SUMNER TUNNEL VIDEO LINKS:

• Sumner Tunnel (MA 1A) (Dan Murphy)
  
• Sumner Tunnel (MA 1A) Reconstruction (Delve Underground)
  
• Sumner Tunnel (MA 1A) Reconstruction (WBZ-TV)
  
• Sumner and Callahan Tunnels (Boston Streets & Highways)
  

• East Boston Expressway (MA 1A)
  
• John F. Fitzgerald Expressway / Central Artery (I-93/US 1/MA 3)
  

Back to The Crossings of Metro Boston home page.

Site contents © by Steve Anderson. This is not an official site run by a government agency. Recommendations provided on this site are strictly those of the author and contributors, not of any government or corporate entity.