1 · POSITION
Patrice Boissonnas approaches golf architecture through the recovery of character. His shared restorations at La Mer and Les Pins reconnect two Côte d’Opale destinations with earlier designs. The proposed LHL subject is the architect who helps a historic sporting landscape remain worth travelling to experience. [4, 6, 7]
2 · A CORPORATE BEGINNING
Infinite Variety Golf Design’s biography records an earlier marketing career with L’Oréal and Louis Vuitton. That experience precedes Boissonnas’s professional work in golf architecture and should not be confused with a commission from either company. [1]
3 · ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY
In his signed introduction to Golf Club Atlas on 14 March 2012, Boissonnas reported earning a master’s degree in the History of Architecture at the Sorbonne. This is a self-reported educational qualification, not evidence of a building-architecture licence. [2]
4 · A CHANGING INTEREST
The same introduction describes a shift from concentrating on scores to observing the aesthetic and strategic qualities of courses. Watching how other golfers handled a hole became part of his interest in design. [2]
5 · MEETING FRANK PONT
Boissonnas recalled meeting Pont the previous summer through Adam Lawrence. The practice biography dates their partnership to 2011. The introduction linked two people who had entered golf architecture after corporate careers. [1, 2]
6 · THE FIRST SHARED BRIEFS
By March 2012, Boissonnas publicly identified La Mer at Le Touquet and Les Pins at Hardelot as shared mandates with Pont. These named commissions provide a firmer starting point than an undated general description of his portfolio. [2]
7 · A FRENCH PRACTICE CONTEXT
The team biography places Boissonnas within Infinite Variety Golf Design’s French work. It connects his interests with classic courses including Saint-Germain, Chantilly, Morfontaine and Fontainebleau. Admiration for a course is not itself a restoration credit. [1]
8 · WRITING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE
That biography also records responsibility for the architecture section of Le Journal du Golf. It establishes an editorial dimension to his work, although the undated page is not used to assert a current job title in September 2026. [1]
9 · GOLF AS AN EXPERIENCE
A July 2015 GolfStars profile presents enjoyment as central to his outlook: golf engages both body and mind and can be played across generations. This is a statement of purpose, not a measured claim about participation outcomes. [3]
10 · LANDSCAPE AND ECOLOGY
The same profile describes his ambition to work sympathetically with nature. This entry records that aspiration without treating it as an environmental audit of La Mer, Les Pins or any other course. [3]
11 · A SHARED DESIGN LANGUAGE
Infinite Variety’s published philosophy connects natural character with strategic variety. In this master it supplies the context of the practice in which Boissonnas worked, rather than a text attributed to him alone. [10]
12 · CHOICES WITHIN A HOLE
The practice principles encourage different lines of play and the temptation to attempt a more demanding shot. The aim is to make a golfer consider consequences, with a less severe route available to the less accomplished player. [10]
13 · VARIATION WITHOUT A FORMULA
The philosophy asks holes, greens and details to differ. Applied to restoration, the editorial lesson is to recover the particular character of a site instead of imposing a uniform visual signature on every commission. [10]
14 · READING THE ARCHIVE
The practice’s restoration method begins with plans, photographs and the history of the course. These materials help distinguish inherited design from later change before an intervention is proposed. [11]
15 · RECOVERING PLAYING SPACE
Its services statement identifies lost mowing areas as a frequent opportunity. Green edges, surrounds and fairway width can influence strategy even when the visible centre of a hole seems little changed. [11]
16 · FROM PLAN TO GROUND
The same method places architects, greenkeepers, shapers and contractors in close contact during construction. It provides a useful framework for understanding why the named collaborators at Les Pins matter to the finished work. [11]
17 · LA MER
La Mer is the clearest hospitality anchor for this entry. The venue’s own restoration leaflet records its opening in 1931, wartime damage and later changes to the arrangement of holes. [6]
18 · A MORE COMPLEX HISTORY
The leaflet dates abandonment of four holes to the 1963 reopening, when management of the courses was simplified. It also records a 1992 reinstatement that lacked adequate historical documentation. The history therefore extends beyond a single wartime loss. [6]
19 · EVIDENCE FOUND IN 2011
According to the operator, aerial photographs from 1934 were discovered in 2011 and used with a 1931 surveyor’s drawing. Boissonnas and Pont are named together as the architects who used this evidence for restoration. [6]
20 · REOPENING IN STAGES
The operator dates the reopening of the thirteenth hole to 2014 and the fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth to summer 2015. The sequence separates individual playing milestones from the later completion report. [6]
21 · COMPLETION REPORTED IN 2017
Sean Dudley’s report of 26 June 2017 describes the La Mer restoration as completed and credits both architects. It provides a contemporary published account of the work, rather than a forecast of a future opening. [7]
22 · THE FIFTEENTH RECOVERED
In that report, Boissonnas discusses the return of the original dogleg-right par-five fifteenth. The restoration recovered a sequence of decisions across the ground, as well as the position of a hole on a map. [7]
23 · A DOWNHILL PAR THREE
He also describes returning the sixteenth to its original setting, restoring a downhill par three. A change of site can alter the entire experience of an approach even when the nominal par stays the same. [7]
24 · RESPONSIBILITY TO AN EARLIER DESIGN
Boissonnas’s comments convey the responsibility of interpreting a celebrated predecessor. The editorial significance lies in using evidence to recover specific qualities, with the modern architects’ credit remaining distinct from the original design. [7]
25 · LE TOUQUET AS A STAY
The resort brings La Mer together with La Forêt, the nine-hole Le Manoir course, Le Manoir Hôtel and dining. The restored course belongs to a destination where golf and an overnight visit can be planned together. [8]
26 · THE MEAL AFTER PLAY
The resort lists The Spoon and La Table du Manoir in its dining offer. Those venues complete the hospitality context of the proposed anchor without becoming part of Boissonnas’s architectural credit. [8]
27 · AN OPERATING DESTINATION
The operator provides booking routes for golf, rooms and tables. This supports the place’s current visitor function; it does not establish a particular availability, package entitlement or preferred-partner relationship. [8]
28 · LES PINS AT HARDELOT
Les Pins supplies the second substantial built example. Adam Lawrence’s report describes a pinewooded site on sandy coastal terrain and a restoration by Pont and Boissonnas of Tom Simpson’s work. [4]
29 · THE BUNKERS
The January 2015 report records more than sixty rebuilt bunkers, informed by Simpson’s drawings and surviving photographs. Their recovered irregular edges formed part of the project’s distinctive appearance. [4]
30 · THE FIFTH HOLE
Lawrence identifies the par-three fifth as a particularly marked transformation, involving tree removal and rebuilt hazards. His account links the two architects with the team from contractor John Greasley. [4]
31 · CONSTRUCTION CREDIT
The report credits the Greasley team with bunker rebuilding, green recapture and new dune work under the architects’ direction. The physical result therefore belongs to a documented collaboration, not an anonymous delivery process. [4]
32 · WORK CONTINUED
Hochstein Design records being brought in by Pont and Boissonnas for further work in autumn and winter 2015–2016. That dated account shows that refinement continued after the earlier published review. [5]
33 · TEXTURE AND DETAIL
Hochstein describes bunker edits, green expansion and edge texturing. Its account explains how excavation and handwork helped replace smooth forms with more varied surfaces consistent with the intended historical character. [5]
34 · THE FOURTEENTH GREEN
The shaping account describes alterations to the fourteenth, including extending and lowering part of the surface. It credits general manager Ken Strachan with proposing the replacement of part of a bunker by a short-grass fall-off. [5]
35 · A COLLABORATIVE DETAIL
That example is unusually useful because it identifies an operational voice within the design discussion. The documented suggestion came from Strachan, while Hochstein’s account records the shaping work; neither contribution should be absorbed into the architects’ names. [5]
36 · ARCHITECTURE AND TURF
Lawrence’s 2015 review praised the restoration but identified playing-condition issues that remained. The observation belongs to that review date. It is not presented as a diagnosis of Les Pins’ current turf. [4]
37 · HARDELOT TODAY
The operator presents Les Pins and Les Dunes as separate eighteen-hole courses and offers visitor golf. The shared restoration credit discussed here concerns Les Pins; it is not extended to Les Dunes. [9]
38 · BEYOND THE ROUND
Hardelot’s website also presents restaurants, events and nearby stay options. These give the course a visitor context while remaining separate services with their own operators and conditions. [9]
39 · A CULTURAL CONNECTION
In December 2013, Geoff Shackelford credited Boissonnas with enabling his visit to Morfontaine. His first-person report identifies Boissonnas as a former marketing executive working with Pont on French restorations. [12]
40 · MORFONTAINE’S PROPER PLACE
That visit demonstrates a connection within golf culture. It does not establish that Boissonnas designed or restored Morfontaine, and this master assigns him no such project credit on the strength of the visit. [12]
41 · TWO HISTORIC VOICES
La Mer and Les Pins connect Boissonnas’s work with Colt and Simpson respectively. The editorial comparison is between restoring distinct inherited designs, rather than producing two examples of a single modern house style.
42 · WHAT THE VISITOR ENCOUNTERS
The physical evidence is a returned hole, a wider putting surface, a reconstructed hazard or a reopened view. These are the changes through which a visitor can encounter architectural history during a round.
43 · AUTHORSHIP BOUNDARIES
The shared credits at La Mer and Les Pins remain explicit. Other projects listed by a partner or practice are not automatically assigned to Boissonnas. A common surname with an operator is also insufficient evidence of ownership or executive responsibility.
44 · PEOPLE TO CONNECT
Frank Pont is the direct architectural partner. Tom Simpson and Harry Colt belong to the history of the anchor courses. Adam Lawrence appears in Boissonnas’s account of meeting Pont; Ken Strachan and the construction teams belong to the Les Pins project record. [2, 4, 5, 6]
45 · CANDOUR
⚑ Sources differ on the date attached to Simpson’s Les Pins: the 2015 report gives 1931, while the current operator homepage gives 1934. This master leaves that historical date unresolved. The educational account is self-reported, and practice biographies are not treated as current employment confirmations. [2, 4, 9]
46 · EVIDENCE AND SCOPE
The strongest evidence concerns two restoration projects and their named collaborators. The record does not attempt an exhaustive current portfolio, calculate commercial gains from rankings or infer environmental results from statements of intent.
47 · ENDURING SUBJECT
Boissonnas’s contribution is the recovery of particular places. The card is strongest when it keeps history, modern judgement and construction craft visible together, allowing the restored course to retain both its earlier author and the people who brought it back into use.