Which of the following is NOT a reason for termination or unenforceability of a covenant?

The answer is rooted in the principles of real property law and the enforcement of restrictive covenants. Public opposition, while it may indicate disfavor for a covenant, does not serve as a legal ground for its termination or unenforceability. In contrast, changed circumstances are legitimate reasons for modifying or nullifying a covenant since such changes can affect the original intent and applicability of the covenant.

Abandonment refers to the situation where a covenant has not been enforced over time, suggesting that the parties have no intention to uphold it, potentially leading to unenforceability. Waiver occurs when a party knowingly relinquishes the right to enforce the covenant, which can also render it unenforceable.

Therefore, while public opinion may impact the perception of a covenant, it lacks the legal weight necessary to terminate or render it unenforceable in the context of property law.