A response to a Freedom of Information request indicates that the City Ark/Golf Hotel on the controversial Citywest Asylum campus does not have the proper planning permissions and other requirements that are a condition for the granting of a contract from the Department of Integration to accommodate asylum seekers – despite providing asylum services since 2022.
Although the State has bought the Citywest Hotel and Convention Centre, the former owners of the Citywest Campus continue to own the City Ark Hotel also known as the Golf Hotel.
According to a 2025 inspection report by the International Protection Procurement Services (IPPS) City Ark had 783 residents accommodated in 294 rooms.
Which means that apart from the €148.2 million which Alva Glen/Tetrarch/Cape Wrath collected from the sale of another hotel on campus and the convention centre, they will continue to earn more than an estimated €20 million a year from the accommodation of persons seeking International Protection in the Ark/Golf Hotel. (The current average nightly rate paid is €71.)
In addition, as the payments for the last three months of 2025 show, Cape Wrath, the entity which cashes the cheques, received more than €22 million which would indicate that they continued to be paid for not only the City Ark/Golf Hotel but for the Citywest Hotel and the Convention Centre even though these have been in State ownership since June.
The contacts between the Department of Justice and Tetrarch regarding the Ark Hotel began within days of the June decision to buy the other parts of their Citywest portfolio.
An email from Tetrarch refers to one from the Department dated June 18, 2025. Cabinet approval for the purchase of the Citywest Hotel and Convention Centre was given the day before, on June 17.
So, Michael McElligott and his directors were not letting the grass grow under their feet. Tetrarch refers to ongoing contacts with the Department “to discuss formalising the accommodation at the Golf Hotel with the view to putting a single governing contract in place instead of the individual contracts /arrangements that currently exist and also solving for the catering arrangements which we accept need to be addressed.”
Which might be taken to imply that even though the Ark/Golf Hotel was not part of the sale that this might perhaps be something that will be under consideration in the near future. It was recently reported that the Department has put €40 million aside for new acquisitions so we shall watch that space.
In the meantime, the Ark/Golf needed a ‘single governing’ contract with the Department in order to continue to rake in the millions referred to above. You would imagine that this was already in place, but it would appear not.
That is quite evident from the exchanges between Tetrarch and the Department where it emerges that the Golf/Ark Hotel has never had a Section 5 exemption to be used as asylum accommodation. That is made crystal clear from Tetrarch’s response to a detailed application form that was sent to them from the Department.
The document is described as a template in the FOI release and one can only assume that the stricter requirements came on foot of objections from residents and business owners, probing by the likes of myself and others, and not least the findings of the Comptroller and Auditor General who had found a whole range of discrepancies in the awarding and management of IPAS contracts.
Among the requirements (presumably now sought of all applicants for accommodation contracts) are:
The Appendices require proof of ‘good character,’ as in lack of criminal convictions, and intriguingly that the contractor “declare that none of the notifying parties has been in receipt of any foreign financial contributions within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2022/2560.”
In its reply, which they admitted to “gaps in our proposal,” Tetrarch supplied no details on ownership, fire certification, commencement date (they have been accommodating asylum seekers for almost four years), sewage facilities, communication with local authority and community, or the rate to be charged.
They did partly complete the section on catering but only to confirm that “the facility [is] located within reasonable walking distance (circa 2km) from a supermarket/grocery for the purchase of food”. Which is just as well because when we visited the site there were no kitchen facilities, and we were told that residents were provided with food vouchers for local supermarkets.
The most interesting part of the response is where Tetrarch states that it does not have any planning permission as set out in the Departmental application form.
When asked to “Outline clearly the planning use under Class 20F or Class 14H (above) that permits the use of this building for accommodating international protection applicants,” the response is “TBC.” To be confirmed.
When asked “Has this property been granted full planning permission by the relevant local authority for use as International Protection accommodation?” The response is that “The property currently has planning for an apart hotel.”
That would be a no then.
And to boot, the reply to the question “Has a Section 5 application for use of exemption/notification been made to the relevant planning authority?” – The answer “No.”
This confirms what Councillor Linda de Courcy and a local resident had been told by South Dublin County Council last July.
SDCC had told the Saggart resident in response to her FOI that ““Section 5 ‘Exempted Development’ declarations are not mandatory under the Planning and Development Act, 2000. No application has been submitted to this Planning Authority regarding any change of use on the Citywest Hotel site since its recent acquisition.”
Not only would it appear that the Council planners were in error – as confirmed by the Departmental emails – since the declaration is mandatory, but it seems to me that they were relying on what Tetrarch themselves believe, or at least state that they believe: that because they have permission to operate as an apart/hotel that they do not need any exemption or permission to operate as an asylum accommodation centre.
That is not true.
In an email dated August 22, Tetrarch admitted that “We do not have an approved Section 5 from the local council as our clear guidance from our planning consultants Tom Philips & Associates is that the units within the Goft (sic) Hotel building are currently used to provide temporary accommodation to Persons Seeking International Protection.”
They claimed that this in itself entitled them to an exemption even though they had never sought one from SDCC.
This was a restatement of their terse message sent at the end of July, to the effect that “As The Ark already has planning permission to be a Hotel, it does not need a Section 5.”
The Department has told them several times, and it is explicitly outlined in the application form, that “A Section 5 application for use of exemption/notification must be made to planning authority”
I understand from very reliable sources that while a much more promiscuous regime may have been in place up to now, that the pressures from residents, business owners, the likes of myself and a small number of local councillors – not to mention the damning findings of the Comptroller and Auditor General – that stricter criteria are now required. I also understand that this has been approved at the highest level within the Department of Justice.
As things stand then, the entire asylum hub at Citywest effectively has no proper authorisation. If that is the case, then it ought to be subject to an enforcement order from South Dublin County Council. Show me otherwise …