The short answer is that it creates friction, and how much depends almost entirely on how you disclose and structure it.
Here is what LP scrutiny looks like in this setup. The worry is not that you manage the property. The worry is that a struggling deal quietly pays you management fees while investor returns erode. Experienced LPs have seen that movie. So they look for two things: a market-rate fee and a clear conflict-of-interest disclosure in the PPM (the private placement memorandum, the legal document that governs the deal and your relationship with investors).
If your management fee is, say, 8% of collected rents on a building generating $20,000 a month, that is $1,600 going to you regardless of whether the deal is performing. An LP who is not seeing preferred returns yet will notice that. The structure that tends to reduce friction is either a fee that is slightly below market (so you are not extracting above what a third party would charge) or a provision that subordinates the management fee to the LP preferred return during underperformance. You are a licensed professional away from deciding which of those fits your jurisdiction and structure, so run both options past your securities attorney.
The thing worth knowing before you raise capital: Wrocław is a Polish market, and depending on where your LPs are domiciled, you may be working across two or three regulatory regimes at once. That is not a reason to stop, but it is a reason to get counsel in both jurisdictions early, before the PPM is drafted, not after.
On the "Bold" side, vertical integration on management is a real advantage if you can execute it. The economics are real. The friction is manageable with the right disclosures.
What does your LP pool look like right now, local investors, diaspora, or a broader international group? That changes which disclosures matter most.