I hope that this matter will now be put to rest. In the Bnei Brak newspaper known for its Chazon Ish leaning, Arba Kanfos (April 30, 2008 p. 21; see below), they published an article from Rav Nissim Karelitz shlita where he states emphatically that the Chazon Ish’s chiddush can be relied on l’chatchilah, and that the reason why Jabotinsky Road was not included in the eruv was because it was parutz merubeh al haomed and therefore did not meet the Chazon Ish’s requirement. This follows what Rav Karelitz clearly states in his sefer Chut Shani (vol. 2, p. 281) that the Chazon Ish only had an issue with Jabotinsky Road because it was not within the boundaries of the city. However, through the Chazon Ish’s chiddush, streets in the city proper would normally be considered encompassed by mechitzos. [Additionally, it is apparent from one of the letters to Rav Chaim Kanievsky shlita published in the kuntres The Eruv Hamehudar in NW London (p. 38) that he maintains that the Chazon Ish’s chiddush can be used l’chatchilah, as well.]
The only issue that the Chazon Ish himself wrote about was that almost every time he inspected the eruv after Shabbos it was either broken or ripped. Therefore, he maintained that the eruv was considered be’chezkas pasul every Shabbos (Teshuvos V’Ksavim, siman 85; see the copy of this ksav yad in Orchos Rabbeinu, vol. 1 p. 170). He was therefore uneasy about people utilizing the eruv. However, since modern construction materials can withstand extreme weather conditions, they are b’chezkas kayama. There is no doubt then that the Chazon Ish would allow an eruv utilizing his chiddush and allow carrying in it today l’chatchilah.
An article published in the Bnei Brak newspaper Arba Kanfos (April 30, 2008 p. 21) which cites Rav Nissen Karelitz shlita who maintains that the Chazon Ish’s chiddush can be relied on l’chatchilah, and that the reason why Jabotinsky Road was not included in the eruv was because it was parutz merubeh al haomed.