One throw too far
Your meter-main was designed to use a set of smaller sub-main disconnects instead of a single main disconnecting means, in accordance with NEC 230.71:
230.71 Maximum Number of Disconnects.
(A) General. The service disconnecting means for each
service permitted by 230.2, or for each set of service-entrance conductors permitted by 230.40, Exception No.1,
3, 4, or 5, shall consist of not more than six switches or sets
of circuit breakers, or a combination of not more than six
switches and sets of circuit breakers, mounted in a single
enclosure, in a group of separate enclosures, or in or on a
switchboard or in switchgear. There shall be not more than
six sets of disconnects per service grouped in any one location.
For the purpose of this section, disconnecting means
installed as part of listed equipment and used solely for the
following shall not be considered a service disconnecting
means:
(1) Power monitoring equipment
(2) Surge-protective device(s)
(3) Control circuit of the ground-fault protection system
(4) Power-operable service disconnecting means
(B) Single-Pole Units. Two or three single-pole switches
or breakers, capable of individual operation, shall be permitted on multiwire circuits, one pole for each ungrounded
conductor, as one multipole disconnect, provided they are
equipped with identified handle ties or a master handle to
disconnect all conductors of the service with no more than
six operations of the hand.
However, the pair of single pole breakers in the lower-right that the inspector complained about means that you need 7 breaker throws to turn all the power off, which is one too many.
Evict the aliens!
Furthermore, the culprit breakers are a violation by themselves as they are GE THQLs, which are not listed to go in an Eaton BR panel. At this point, you might as well get a BR220 from the nearest supplier and have it slapped in in place of the culprits, killing two violations with one fix.
And yes, a two pole breaker can feed two completely separate 110V circuits
There is nothing in the NEC that prohibits a two pole breaker from feeding two independent branch circuits from the opposite legs it provides.
The NEC's clearance requirements are for the safety of people working on equipment once it is installed.
With that being said the NEC width requirement is a minimum of 30", and the door swing if there is one minimum is 90 degrees. However your panel does not have to sit in the center of the 30" it can be moved from side to side.
Reading you question I can't determine whether you panel is against the block wall and the wall depth change is 6" and runs the other direction at that same depth at least 30" or there is just a recess that the panel fits in and it is recessed in an area less than 30". So with the first situation the panel is fine and with the latter, it needs to be brought out to meet clearance.
Also I don't know if you are speaking about a horizontal recess and the panel is mounted below the block wall. Most AHJ will allow 8" before they consider overhead being an interference.
Hope this helps
Best Answer
The law says remarkably little.
You can download Approved Document P: electrical safety, dwellings
It says things like
and
(my emphasis)
and
Note that "should" is not "must". In practice, a DIYer or self-employed electrician would not have the resources to use another standard.
BS 7671 is a publication of the IET & BSI and can be purchased from the BSI for £85.
I'm not an electrician so I haven't purchased a copy, I'm reasonably sure that it permits consumer units in rooms containing a toilet and washbasin. BS 7671 is stricter about what goes in rooms containing a bath or shower.
The builder probably located it there because it was convenient (probably utility owned meter on other side of wall) and cheaper than putting it somewhere more sensible.
Note that the IET say
So adding new circuits is not sufficient justification by itself for relocating a consumer unit.