Proposal: allow ambient property declarations to override accessors as well

Currently, this pattern gives an error, but arguably shouldn't:

class B {
  get p() { return B.s } // inferred p: {}
  static get s() { return {} }
}
class C extends B {
  declare readonly p: { x: 1 }
}

Expected behavior:

No error, and C.p: { x: 1 } (but is still an accessor for emit and checking purposes). That is, this should be legal:

class D extends C {
  get p() { return { x: 1 } as const }
}

Actual behavior:

Error, and C.p is a property, not an accessor.

Start by reproducing the class examples in the issue and compare the current diagnostic with the expected behavior. The change is complete when the ambient declaration can override the inherited accessor without an error, C.p has the declared type, and D can still declare the accessor shown.