A320 pilot reported receiving terrain alerts while conducting an approach that was not authorized for night operations.

Narrative

Based on the ATIS into ZZZ we set up for the visual approach RWYXX backed up by the RNAVXX. RWYXY/XZ was closed. After receiving an ATIS update shortly before landing; the wind conditions changed from a crosswind to a three knots tailwind. RWYXX at ZZZ has an LDA of 6007 feet. With manual braking; the landing distance required was about five thousand feet. Not a lot of room to spare.We ended up requesting RWYXA; and we were cleared to expect the RNAVXA under visual conditions. We opted to land with a headwind and on a longer RWY as a safer option. Below 500 feet we received two GPWS caution terrain alerts while on the glide path. We decided to continue with the approach because no obstacles were visible. The PF reduced the rate of descent and adjusted the flight path accordingly.The touchdown was executed within the first 2000 feet; within the required distance. After debriefing the approach and analyzing the warnings we experienced; we found a note on the RNAVXA approach plate indicating that the procedure is not authorized at night. We missed that note because we were more focus on the tailwind and landing distance required while executing a visual approach.On the company pages we saw the note about potential GPWS terrain alerts on RWYXX but we weren't expecting any alerts on RWYXA. Adding the same note for RWYXA would be helpful.Also; even though it was our fault for missing that note prohibiting the RNAVXA approach during night operations; advertising it in a second place under company pages would be great.