Marilyn Monroe’s Los Angeles home is saved from demolition after court upholds historic landmark protection
A Los Angeles court has upheld historic landmark protections for Marilyn Monroe’s only owned home in Brentwood, blocking owners’ demolition plans. Judge James C. Chalfant’s Sept. 2, 2025 order leaves intact protections that prevent demolition without city approval.
Key takeaways
- Judge denies challenge: On Sept. 2, 2025, Judge James C. Chalfant denied the owners’ challenge, keeping landmark protections in place.
- Historic designation: Los Angeles City Council unanimously designated the house a Historical‑Cultural Monument on June 26, 2024.
- Property details: The single‑story hacienda at 12305 Fifth Helena Drive, built in 1929, is the only home Monroe ever owned.
- Owners purchased in 2023: Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank bought the property in July 2023 for $8.35 million and had sought demolition to expand.
Key information — Marilyn Monroe Los Angeles home saved
Property: 12305 Fifth Helena Drive, Brentwood, Los Angeles — built in 1929; one‑story hacienda and the only home Marilyn Monroe ever owned. Sources reporting this include The Marilyn Report, Elle Decor, and Bloomberg.
Landmark protection: The Los Angeles City Council unanimously designated the house a Historical‑Cultural Monument on June 26, 2024, as documented by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (SavingPlaces).
Owners and purchase: Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank bought the property in July 2023 for $8.35 million and own the adjacent lot; they sought to combine parcels and expand their residence (The Marilyn Report, Elle Decor).
Legal ruling: On Sept. 2, 2025, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant denied the owners’ challenge and left the landmark protections in place. The order was brief and included no detailed written explanation (The Marilyn Report, Elle Decor, Bloomberg).
Background and significance
The single‑story house at 12305 Fifth Helena Drive is the only home Marilyn Monroe ever owned. She purchased it in February 1962 for $77,500 and lived there for about six months before her death at age 36. That history has made the property a cultural touchstone for fans and scholars of Hollywood history and a rare Los Angeles site directly tied to a woman’s story (The Marilyn Report, Elle Decor, Bloomberg).
Preservation advocates argued the site deserved protection for its architecture and because Los Angeles has relatively few historic sites linked to women. Supporters noted the house’s symbolic role in telling a fuller history of the city’s cultural life and the film industry’s past (SavingPlaces).
The demolition bid and property owners’ case
After the July 2023 sale for $8.35 million, the owners obtained a demolition permit in September 2023 and planned to remove Monroe’s house to expand into the combined parcel (The Marilyn Report, Elle Decor).
The owners challenged the historic designation in court, arguing renovations since Monroe’s era diminished the property’s historic value and that the landmark status unfairly limited property rights — a common tension between private renovation goals and public historic preservation (SavingPlaces, The Marilyn Report).
How the landmark designation happened
The issued demolition permit sparked immediate public reaction. Preservation groups, city officials and fans mobilized to stop the demolition. Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park led efforts to declare the house a Historical‑Cultural Monument; the council voted unanimously on June 26, 2024 to list the property (SavingPlaces, Elle Decor).
Advocates pointed to hundreds of emails, calls and letters that pressured officials to act. While some argued the city should have moved sooner, council members said the designation was the strongest available legal step to halt the permit (SavingPlaces, The Marilyn Report).
The court ruling and its limits
On Sept. 2, 2025, Judge James C. Chalfant issued a brief order denying the owners’ challenge and leaving protections that prevent demolition or major alteration without city approval. The order did not include a detailed written opinion, according to reporting (The Marilyn Report, Elle Decor, Bloomberg).
Legal experts note: a brief order can reflect a firm decision while leaving fuller analysis for a later stage or appeal; owners may still seek further review, but the immediate effect is protection of the house.
Public reaction and preservationist perspective
Preservation groups celebrated the ruling as a win for cultural history and for recognizing women’s places in public memory. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Conservancy and national preservation voices emphasized the urgency of protecting sites tied to women’s stories (SavingPlaces, Old Hollywood Tour).
Critics and some real estate experts said the episode showed limits of current protections and the need for earlier city engagement to identify at‑risk properties and reduce last‑minute legal battles (The Marilyn Report, Bloomberg).
Current status of the property
The house remains standing and is secured by high fences and trees that keep the site private and largely inaccessible to the public. For now it remains a symbolic shrine for fans and scholars; any major exterior changes or demolition will require city review under the landmark rules (The Marilyn Report, Old Hollywood Tour).
Implications for Sonoma, California
Economic impact: Sonoma’s tourism — built on heritage and storytelling — may see spillover benefits from renewed statewide interest in celebrity and cultural tourism; local businesses and the tourism bureau could develop special programming tied to film and literary connections.
Political consequences: The ruling highlights tensions between property rights and preservation familiar to Sonoma County; local leaders might study Los Angeles’ rapid designation process as a case study for balancing protections with private investment.
Social effects: Advocacy success in Los Angeles underscores the value of civic engagement. Sonoma community groups focused on women’s heritage and arts may feel encouraged to press for local landmark protections earlier in the review process.
Practical applications: Homeowners and buyers in Sonoma should note legal tools used in Los Angeles: early communication with planners, transparent renovation plans and knowledge of designation procedures can reduce costly disputes. Local officials may review notification and designation processes to avoid last‑minute crises.
Sources and further reading
- The Marilyn Report: Los Angeles judge blocks demolition of Marilyn’s last home
- Elle Decor: Marilyn Monroe’s Los Angeles house saved
- Bloomberg: Marilyn Monroe’s last home survives in L.A. fight over demolition
- National Trust for Historic Preservation (SavingPlaces): Saving the Marilyn Monroe house in Los Angeles
- Old Hollywood Tour blog: Saving Marilyn Monroe’s house — it’s complicated
Readers in Sonoma interested in local preservation rules can consult Sonoma County planning resources and local historical societies for guidance on landmark processes and community engagement.
