Credit where credit is due! Give kudos or accept as solution whenever you can.
I thought your objective was to grade from the top down to a relative elevation = -5'. Why do you need a separate bottom surface? All you need to do is add an infill after grading down at -5'.
Well that was before they wanted the bottom to grade to the outfall. My objective is now to create the bottom surface with a set elevation at the outfall then grade out a half percent in all directions. Once that is complete the I must grade the top down at 3.5:1 to hit this newly created bottom surface. Thing is it's not showing up as an option in my target surfaces. I have included a pic of the bottom surface and what I have as a outfall area. What you will not see is the top of bank grading down yet.
Ok, I think it would be better to just add flowlines to get the bottom to drain.
Make surde it is in a different grading group. You may not be able to see the "target" surface, because it is being created by the grading group you are using. That is another reason to keep them in different sites.
If that still doesn't work, don't have it create the surface automatically add the grading to a different surface.
Attached is an example drawing with the pond bottom surface and the pond top.
In this case graded at 2% using a feature line at the outfall and a grading object set to 250' @ 2%. The top of the pond is then graded down to the pond bottom surface.
In both cases the resultant feature lines are added manually to the surfaces (Pond Bottom and Proposed) There are also two sites.
Nice I'll try that out and see what kind of result I get. As you may have seen from my last image there is a "wall" where the outfall structure will be placed. I have that to contend with as well.
Access a broad range of knowledge to help get the most out of your products and services.